diff options
| author | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 05:17:21 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 05:17:21 -0700 |
| commit | e88488efe91e6048a836259c261c5b22545d03eb (patch) | |
| tree | 1645d4d0df80ff1d7ca5cb4d1ee7a09834c1d592 | |
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 3 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 1579-h.zip | bin | 0 -> 33228 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 1579-h/1579-h.htm | 2489 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 1579.txt | 1997 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 1579.zip | bin | 0 -> 31604 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/lysis10.txt | 1839 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/lysis10.zip | bin | 0 -> 30208 bytes |
9 files changed, 6341 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6833f05 --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +* text=auto +*.txt text +*.md text diff --git a/1579-h.zip b/1579-h.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..eaf29a8 --- /dev/null +++ b/1579-h.zip diff --git a/1579-h/1579-h.htm b/1579-h/1579-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..fb89312 --- /dev/null +++ b/1579-h/1579-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,2489 @@ +<?xml version="1.0" encoding="us-ascii"?> + +<!DOCTYPE html + PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd" > + +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en"> + <head> + <title> + Lysis, by Plato + </title> + <style type="text/css" xml:space="preserve"> + + body { margin:5%; background:#faebd0; text-align:justify} + P { text-indent: 1em; margin-top: .25em; margin-bottom: .25em; } + H1,H2,H3,H4,H5,H6 { text-align: center; margin-left: 15%; margin-right: 15%; } + hr { width: 50%; text-align: center;} + .foot { margin-left: 20%; margin-right: 20%; text-align: justify; text-indent: -3em; font-size: 90%; } + blockquote {font-size: 97%; font-style: italic; margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%;} + .mynote {background-color: #DDE; color: #000; padding: .5em; margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 95%;} + .toc { margin-left: 10%; margin-bottom: .75em;} + .toc2 { margin-left: 20%;} + div.fig { display:block; margin:0 auto; text-align:center; } + div.middle { margin-left: 20%; margin-right: 20%; text-align: justify; } + .figleft {float: left; margin-left: 0%; margin-right: 1%;} + .figright {float: right; margin-right: 0%; margin-left: 1%;} + .pagenum {display:inline; font-size: 70%; font-style:normal; + margin: 0; padding: 0; position: absolute; right: 1%; + text-align: right;} + pre { font-style: italic; font-size: 90%; margin-left: 10%;} + +</style> + </head> + <body> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + +The Project Gutenberg EBook of Lysis, by Plato + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + +Title: Lysis + +Author: Plato + +Translator: Benjamin Jowett + +Release Date: August 24, 2008 [EBook #1579] +Last Updated: January 15, 2013 + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ASCII + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LYSIS *** + + + + +Produced by Sue Asscher, and David Widger + + + + + +</pre> + <p> + <br /><br /> + </p> + <h1> + LYSIS + </h1> + <p> + <br /> + </p> + <h2> + By Plato + </h2> + <p> + <br /> + </p> + <h3> + Translated by Benjamin Jowett + </h3> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <hr /> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <h3> + Contents + </h3> + <table summary="" style="margin-right: auto; margin-left: auto"> + <tr> + <td> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_INTR"> INTRODUCTION. </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0002"> LYSIS, OR FRIENDSHIP </a> + </p> + <p class="toc"> + <a href="#link2H_4_0003"> PERSONS OF THE DIALOGUE </a> + </p> + </td> + </tr> + </table> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <hr /> + <p> + <br /> <br /> <a name="link2H_INTR" id="link2H_INTR"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <h2> + INTRODUCTION. + </h2> + <p> + No answer is given in the Lysis to the question, 'What is Friendship?' any + more than in the Charmides to the question, 'What is Temperance?' There + are several resemblances in the two Dialogues: the same youthfulness and + sense of beauty pervades both of them; they are alike rich in the + description of Greek life. The question is again raised of the relation of + knowledge to virtue and good, which also recurs in the Laches; and + Socrates appears again as the elder friend of the two boys, Lysis and + Menexenus. In the Charmides, as also in the Laches, he is described as + middle-aged; in the Lysis he is advanced in years. + </p> + <p> + The Dialogue consists of two scenes or conversations which seem to have no + relation to each other. The first is a conversation between Socrates and + Lysis, who, like Charmides, is an Athenian youth of noble descent and of + great beauty, goodness, and intelligence: this is carried on in the + absence of Menexenus, who is called away to take part in a sacrifice. + Socrates asks Lysis whether his father and mother do not love him very + much? 'To be sure they do.' 'Then of course they allow him to do exactly + as he likes.' 'Of course not: the very slaves have more liberty than he + has.' 'But how is this?' 'The reason is that he is not old enough.' 'No; + the real reason is that he is not wise enough: for are there not some + things which he is allowed to do, although he is not allowed to do + others?' 'Yes, because he knows them, and does not know the others.' This + leads to the conclusion that all men everywhere will trust him in what he + knows, but not in what he does not know; for in such matters he will be + unprofitable to them, and do them no good. And no one will love him, if he + does them no good; and he can only do them good by knowledge; and as he is + still without knowledge, he can have as yet no conceit of knowledge. In + this manner Socrates reads a lesson to Hippothales, the foolish lover of + Lysis, respecting the style of conversation which he should address to his + beloved. + </p> + <p> + After the return of Menexenus, Socrates, at the request of Lysis, asks him + a new question: 'What is friendship? You, Menexenus, who have a friend + already, can tell me, who am always longing to find one, what is the + secret of this great blessing.' + </p> + <p> + When one man loves another, which is the friend—he who loves, or he + who is loved? Or are both friends? From the first of these suppositions + they are driven to the second; and from the second to the third; and + neither the two boys nor Socrates are satisfied with any of the three or + with all of them. Socrates turns to the poets, who affirm that God brings + like to like (Homer), and to philosophers (Empedocles), who also assert + that like is the friend of like. But the bad are not friends, for they are + not even like themselves, and still less are they like one another. And + the good have no need of one another, and therefore do not care about one + another. Moreover there are others who say that likeness is a cause of + aversion, and unlikeness of love and friendship; and they too adduce the + authority of poets and philosophers in support of their doctrines; for + Hesiod says that 'potter is jealous of potter, bard of bard;' and subtle + doctors tell us that 'moist is the friend of dry, hot of cold,' and the + like. But neither can their doctrine be maintained; for then the just + would be the friend of the unjust, good of evil. + </p> + <p> + Thus we arrive at the conclusion that like is not the friend of like, nor + unlike of unlike; and therefore good is not the friend of good, nor evil + of evil, nor good of evil, nor evil of good. What remains but that the + indifferent, which is neither good nor evil, should be the friend (not of + the indifferent, for that would be 'like the friend of like,' but) of the + good, or rather of the beautiful? + </p> + <p> + But why should the indifferent have this attachment to the beautiful or + good? There are circumstances under which such an attachment would be + natural. Suppose the indifferent, say the human body, to be desirous of + getting rid of some evil, such as disease, which is not essential but only + accidental to it (for if the evil were essential the body would cease to + be indifferent, and would become evil)—in such a case the + indifferent becomes a friend of the good for the sake of getting rid of + the evil. In this intermediate 'indifferent' position the philosopher or + lover of wisdom stands: he is not wise, and yet not unwise, but he has + ignorance accidentally clinging to him, and he yearns for wisdom as the + cure of the evil. (Symp.) + </p> + <p> + After this explanation has been received with triumphant accord, a fresh + dissatisfaction begins to steal over the mind of Socrates: Must not + friendship be for the sake of some ulterior end? and what can that final + cause or end of friendship be, other than the good? But the good is + desired by us only as the cure of evil; and therefore if there were no + evil there would be no friendship. Some other explanation then has to be + devised. May not desire be the source of friendship? And desire is of what + a man wants and of what is congenial to him. But then the congenial cannot + be the same as the like; for like, as has been already shown, cannot be + the friend of like. Nor can the congenial be the good; for good is not the + friend of good, as has been also shown. The problem is unsolved, and the + three friends, Socrates, Lysis, and Menexenus, are still unable to find + out what a friend is. + </p> + <p> + Thus, as in the Charmides and Laches, and several of the other Dialogues + of Plato (compare especially the Protagoras and Theaetetus), no conclusion + is arrived at. Socrates maintains his character of a 'know nothing;' but + the boys have already learned the lesson which he is unable to teach them, + and they are free from the conceit of knowledge. (Compare Chrm.) The + dialogue is what would be called in the language of Thrasyllus tentative + or inquisitive. The subject is continued in the Phaedrus and Symposium, + and treated, with a manifest reference to the Lysis, in the eighth and + ninth books of the Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle. As in other writings + of Plato (for example, the Republic), there is a progress from unconscious + morality, illustrated by the friendship of the two youths, and also by the + sayings of the poets ('who are our fathers in wisdom,' and yet only tell + us half the truth, and in this particular instance are not much improved + upon by the philosophers), to a more comprehensive notion of friendship. + This, however, is far from being cleared of its perplexity. Two notions + appear to be struggling or balancing in the mind of Socrates:—First, + the sense that friendship arises out of human needs and wants; Secondly, + that the higher form or ideal of friendship exists only for the sake of + the good. That friends are not necessarily either like or unlike, is also + a truth confirmed by experience. But the use of the terms 'like' or 'good' + is too strictly limited; Socrates has allowed himself to be carried away + by a sort of eristic or illogical logic against which no definition of + friendship would be able to stand. In the course of the argument he makes + a distinction between property and accident which is a real contribution + to the science of logic. Some higher truths appear through the mist. The + manner in which the field of argument is widened, as in the Charmides and + Laches by the introduction of the idea of knowledge, so here by the + introduction of the good, is deserving of attention. The sense of the + inter-dependence of good and evil, and the allusion to the possibility of + the non-existence of evil, are also very remarkable. + </p> + <p> + The dialectical interest is fully sustained by the dramatic + accompaniments. Observe, first, the scene, which is a Greek Palaestra, at + a time when a sacrifice is going on, and the Hermaea are in course of + celebration; secondly, the 'accustomed irony' of Socrates, who declares, + as in the Symposium, that he is ignorant of all other things, but claims + to have a knowledge of the mysteries of love. There are likewise several + contrasts of character; first of the dry, caustic Ctesippus, of whom + Socrates professes a humorous sort of fear, and Hippothales the flighty + lover, who murders sleep by bawling out the name of his beloved; there is + also a contrast between the false, exaggerated, sentimental love of + Hippothales towards Lysis, and the childlike and innocent friendship of + the boys with one another. Some difference appears to be intended between + the characters of the more talkative Menexenus and the reserved and simple + Lysis. Socrates draws out the latter by a new sort of irony, which is + sometimes adopted in talking to children, and consists in asking a leading + question which can only be answered in a sense contrary to the intention + of the question: 'Your father and mother of course allow you to drive the + chariot?' 'No they do not.' When Menexenus returns, the serious dialectic + begins. He is described as 'very pugnacious,' and we are thus prepared for + the part which a mere youth takes in a difficult argument. But Plato has + not forgotten dramatic propriety, and Socrates proposes at last to refer + the question to some older person. + </p> + <p> + SOME QUESTIONS RELATING TO FRIENDSHIP. + </p> + <p> + The subject of friendship has a lower place in the modern than in the + ancient world, partly because a higher place is assigned by us to love and + marriage. The very meaning of the word has become slighter and more + superficial; it seems almost to be borrowed from the ancients, and has + nearly disappeared in modern treatises on Moral Philosophy. The received + examples of friendship are to be found chiefly among the Greeks and + Romans. Hence the casuistical or other questions which arise out of the + relations of friends have not often been considered seriously in modern + times. Many of them will be found to be the same which are discussed in + the Lysis. We may ask with Socrates, 1) whether friendship is 'of similars + or dissimilars,' or of both; 2) whether such a tie exists between the good + only and for the sake of the good; or 3) whether there may not be some + peculiar attraction, which draws together 'the neither good nor evil' for + the sake of the good and because of the evil; 4) whether friendship is + always mutual,—may there not be a one-sided and unrequited + friendship? This question, which, like many others, is only one of a laxer + or stricter use of words, seems to have greatly exercised the minds both + of Aristotle and Plato. + </p> + <p> + 5) Can we expect friendship to be permanent, or must we acknowledge with + Cicero, 'Nihil difficilius quam amicitiam usque ad extremum vitae + permanere'? Is not friendship, even more than love, liable to be swayed by + the caprices of fancy? The person who pleased us most at first sight or + upon a slight acquaintance, when we have seen him again, and under + different circumstances, may make a much less favourable impression on our + minds. Young people swear 'eternal friendships,' but at these innocent + perjuries their elders laugh. No one forms a friendship with the intention + of renouncing it; yet in the course of a varied life it is practically + certain that many changes will occur of feeling, opinion, locality, + occupation, fortune, which will divide us from some persons and unite us + to others. 6) There is an ancient saying, Qui amicos amicum non habet. But + is not some less exclusive form of friendship better suited to the + condition and nature of man? And in those especially who have no family + ties, may not the feeling pass beyond one or a few, and embrace all with + whom we come into contact, and, perhaps in a few passionate and exalted + natures, all men everywhere? 7) The ancients had their three kinds of + friendship, 'for the sake of the pleasant, the useful, and the good:' is + the last to be resolved into the two first; or are the two first to be + included in the last? The subject was puzzling to them: they could not say + that friendship was only a quality, or a relation, or a virtue, or a kind + of virtue; and they had not in the age of Plato reached the point of + regarding it, like justice, as a form or attribute of virtue. They had + another perplexity: 8) How could one of the noblest feelings of human + nature be so near to one of the most detestable corruptions of it? + (Compare Symposium; Laws). + </p> + <p> + Leaving the Greek or ancient point of view, we may regard the question in + a more general way. Friendship is the union of two persons in mutual + affection and remembrance of one another. The friend can do for his friend + what he cannot do for himself. He can give him counsel in time of + difficulty; he can teach him 'to see himself as others see him'; he can + stand by him, when all the world are against him; he can gladden and + enlighten him by his presence; he 'can divide his sorrows,' he can 'double + his joys;' he can anticipate his wants. He will discover ways of helping + him without creating a sense of his own superiority; he will find out his + mental trials, but only that he may minister to them. Among true friends + jealousy has no place: they do not complain of one another for making new + friends, or for not revealing some secret of their lives; (in friendship + too there must be reserves;) they do not intrude upon one another, and + they mutually rejoice in any good which happens to either of them, though + it may be to the loss of the other. They may live apart and have little + intercourse, but when they meet, the old tie is as strong as ever—according + to the common saying, they find one another always the same. The greatest + good of friendship is not daily intercourse, for circumstances rarely + admit of this; but on the great occasions of life, when the advice of a + friend is needed, then the word spoken in season about conduct, about + health, about marriage, about business,—the letter written from a + distance by a disinterested person who sees with clearer eyes may be of + inestimable value. When the heart is failing and despair is setting in, + then to hear the voice or grasp the hand of a friend, in a shipwreck, in a + defeat, in some other failure or misfortune, may restore the necessary + courage and composure to the paralysed and disordered mind, and convert + the feeble person into a hero; (compare Symposium). + </p> + <p> + It is true that friendships are apt to be disappointing: either we expect + too much from them; or we are indolent and do not 'keep them in repair;' + or being admitted to intimacy with another, we see his faults too clearly + and lose our respect for him; and he loses his affection for us. + Friendships may be too violent; and they may be too sensitive. The egotism + of one of the parties may be too much for the other. The word of counsel + or sympathy has been uttered too obtrusively, at the wrong time, or in the + wrong manner; or the need of it has not been perceived until too late. 'Oh + if he had only told me' has been the silent thought of many a troubled + soul. And some things have to be indicated rather than spoken, because the + very mention of them tends to disturb the equability of friendship. The + alienation of friends, like many other human evils, is commonly due to a + want of tact and insight. There is not enough of the Scimus et hanc veniam + petimusque damusque vicissim. The sweet draught of sympathy is not + inexhaustible; and it tends to weaken the person who too freely partakes + of it. Thus we see that there are many causes which impair the happiness + of friends. + </p> + <p> + We may expect a friendship almost divine, such as philosophers have + sometimes dreamed of: we find what is human. The good of it is necessarily + limited; it does not take the place of marriage; it affords rather a + solace than an arm of support. It had better not be based on pecuniary + obligations; these more often mar than make a friendship. It is most + likely to be permanent when the two friends are equal and independent, or + when they are engaged together in some common work or have some public + interest in common. It exists among the bad or inferior sort of men almost + as much as among the good; the bad and good, and 'the neither bad nor + good,' are drawn together in a strange manner by personal attachment. The + essence of it is loyalty, without which it would cease to be friendship. + </p> + <p> + Another question 9) may be raised, whether friendship can safely exist + between young persons of different sexes, not connected by ties of + relationship, and without the thought of love or marriage; whether, again, + a wife or a husband should have any intimate friend, besides his or her + partner in marriage. The answer to this latter question is rather + perplexing, and would probably be different in different countries + (compare Sympos.). While we do not deny that great good may result from + such attachments, for the mind may be drawn out and the character enlarged + by them; yet we feel also that they are attended with many dangers, and + that this Romance of Heavenly Love requires a strength, a freedom from + passion, a self-control, which, in youth especially, are rarely to be + found. The propriety of such friendships must be estimated a good deal by + the manner in which public opinion regards them; they must be reconciled + with the ordinary duties of life; and they must be justified by the + result. + </p> + <p> + Yet another question, 10). Admitting that friendships cannot be always + permanent, we may ask when and upon what conditions should they be + dissolved. It would be futile to retain the name when the reality has + ceased to be. That two friends should part company whenever the relation + between them begins to drag may be better for both of them. But then + arises the consideration, how should these friends in youth or friends of + the past regard or be regarded by one another? They are parted, but there + still remain duties mutually owing by them. They will not admit the world + to share in their difference any more than in their friendship; the memory + of an old attachment, like the memory of the dead, has a kind of + sacredness for them on which they will not allow others to intrude. + Neither, if they were ever worthy to bear the name of friends, will either + of them entertain any enmity or dislike of the other who was once so much + to him. Neither will he by 'shadowed hint reveal' the secrets great or + small which an unfortunate mistake has placed within his reach. He who is + of a noble mind will dwell upon his own faults rather than those of + another, and will be ready to take upon himself the blame of their + separation. He will feel pain at the loss of a friend; and he will + remember with gratitude his ancient kindness. But he will not lightly + renew a tie which has not been lightly broken...These are a few of the + Problems of Friendship, some of them suggested by the Lysis, others by + modern life, which he who wishes to make or keep a friend may profitably + study. (Compare Bacon, Essay on Friendship; Cic. de Amicitia.) + </p> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0002" id="link2H_4_0002"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h1> + LYSIS, OR FRIENDSHIP + </h1> + <p> + <a name="link2H_4_0003" id="link2H_4_0003"> + <!-- H2 anchor --> </a> + </p> + <div style="height: 4em;"> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </div> + <h2> + PERSONS OF THE DIALOGUE: + </h2> + <h3> + Socrates, who is the narrator, Menexenus, Hippothales, Lysis, Ctesippus. + </h3> + <p> + <br /> <br /> + </p> + <p> + SCENE: A newly-erected Palaestra outside the walls of Athens. + </p> + <p> + I was going from the Academy straight to the Lyceum, intending to take the + outer road, which is close under the wall. When I came to the postern gate + of the city, which is by the fountain of Panops, I fell in with + Hippothales, the son of Hieronymus, and Ctesippus the Paeanian, and a + company of young men who were standing with them. Hippothales, seeing me + approach, asked whence I came and whither I was going. + </p> + <p> + I am going, I replied, from the Academy straight to the Lyceum. + </p> + <p> + Then come straight to us, he said, and put in here; you may as well. + </p> + <p> + Who are you, I said; and where am I to come? + </p> + <p> + He showed me an enclosed space and an open door over against the wall. And + there, he said, is the building at which we all meet: and a goodly company + we are. + </p> + <p> + And what is this building, I asked; and what sort of entertainment have + you? + </p> + <p> + The building, he replied, is a newly erected Palaestra; and the + entertainment is generally conversation, to which you are welcome. + </p> + <p> + Thank you, I said; and is there any teacher there? + </p> + <p> + Yes, he said, your old friend and admirer, Miccus. + </p> + <p> + Indeed, I replied; he is a very eminent professor. + </p> + <p> + Are you disposed, he said, to go with me and see them? + </p> + <p> + Yes, I said; but I should like to know first, what is expected of me, and + who is the favourite among you? + </p> + <p> + Some persons have one favourite, Socrates, and some another, he said. + </p> + <p> + And who is yours? I asked: tell me that, Hippothales. + </p> + <p> + At this he blushed; and I said to him, O Hippothales, thou son of + Hieronymus! do not say that you are, or that you are not, in love; the + confession is too late; for I see that you are not only in love, but are + already far gone in your love. Simple and foolish as I am, the Gods have + given me the power of understanding affections of this kind. + </p> + <p> + Whereupon he blushed more and more. + </p> + <p> + Ctesippus said: I like to see you blushing, Hippothales, and hesitating to + tell Socrates the name; when, if he were with you but for a very short + time, you would have plagued him to death by talking about nothing else. + Indeed, Socrates, he has literally deafened us, and stopped our ears with + the praises of Lysis; and if he is a little intoxicated, there is every + likelihood that we may have our sleep murdered with a cry of Lysis. His + performances in prose are bad enough, but nothing at all in comparison + with his verse; and when he drenches us with his poems and other + compositions, it is really too bad; and worse still is his manner of + singing them to his love; he has a voice which is truly appalling, and we + cannot help hearing him: and now having a question put to him by you, + behold he is blushing. + </p> + <p> + Who is Lysis? I said: I suppose that he must be young; for the name does + not recall any one to me. + </p> + <p> + Why, he said, his father being a very well-known man, he retains his + patronymic, and is not as yet commonly called by his own name; but, + although you do not know his name, I am sure that you must know his face, + for that is quite enough to distinguish him. + </p> + <p> + But tell me whose son he is, I said. + </p> + <p> + He is the eldest son of Democrates, of the deme of Aexone. + </p> + <p> + Ah, Hippothales, I said; what a noble and really perfect love you have + found! I wish that you would favour me with the exhibition which you have + been making to the rest of the company, and then I shall be able to judge + whether you know what a lover ought to say about his love, either to the + youth himself, or to others. + </p> + <p> + Nay, Socrates, he said; you surely do not attach any importance to what he + is saying. + </p> + <p> + Do you mean, I said, that you disown the love of the person whom he says + that you love? + </p> + <p> + No; but I deny that I make verses or address compositions to him. + </p> + <p> + He is not in his right mind, said Ctesippus; he is talking nonsense, and + is stark mad. + </p> + <p> + O Hippothales, I said, if you have ever made any verses or songs in honour + of your favourite, I do not want to hear them; but I want to know the + purport of them, that I may be able to judge of your mode of approaching + your fair one. + </p> + <p> + Ctesippus will be able to tell you, he said; for if, as he avers, the + sound of my words is always dinning in his ears, he must have a very + accurate knowledge and recollection of them. + </p> + <p> + Yes, indeed, said Ctesippus; I know only too well; and very ridiculous the + tale is: for although he is a lover, and very devotedly in love, he has + nothing particular to talk about to his beloved which a child might not + say. Now is not that ridiculous? He can only speak of the wealth of + Democrates, which the whole city celebrates, and grandfather Lysis, and + the other ancestors of the youth, and their stud of horses, and their + victory at the Pythian games, and at the Isthmus, and at Nemea with four + horses and single horses—these are the tales which he composes and + repeats. And there is greater twaddle still. Only the day before yesterday + he made a poem in which he described the entertainment of Heracles, who + was a connexion of the family, setting forth how in virtue of this + relationship he was hospitably received by an ancestor of Lysis; this + ancestor was himself begotten of Zeus by the daughter of the founder of + the deme. And these are the sort of old wives' tales which he sings and + recites to us, and we are obliged to listen to him. + </p> + <p> + When I heard this, I said: O ridiculous Hippothales! how can you be making + and singing hymns in honour of yourself before you have won? + </p> + <p> + But my songs and verses, he said, are not in honour of myself, Socrates. + </p> + <p> + You think not? I said. + </p> + <p> + Nay, but what do you think? he replied. + </p> + <p> + Most assuredly, I said, those songs are all in your own honour; for if you + win your beautiful love, your discourses and songs will be a glory to you, + and may be truly regarded as hymns of praise composed in honour of you who + have conquered and won such a love; but if he slips away from you, the + more you have praised him, the more ridiculous you will look at having + lost this fairest and best of blessings; and therefore the wise lover does + not praise his beloved until he has won him, because he is afraid of + accidents. There is also another danger; the fair, when any one praises or + magnifies them, are filled with the spirit of pride and vain-glory. Do you + not agree with me? + </p> + <p> + Yes, he said. + </p> + <p> + And the more vain-glorious they are, the more difficult is the capture of + them? + </p> + <p> + I believe you. + </p> + <p> + What should you say of a hunter who frightened away his prey, and made the + capture of the animals which he is hunting more difficult? + </p> + <p> + He would be a bad hunter, undoubtedly. + </p> + <p> + Yes; and if, instead of soothing them, he were to infuriate them with + words and songs, that would show a great want of wit: do you not agree. + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + And now reflect, Hippothales, and see whether you are not guilty of all + these errors in writing poetry. For I can hardly suppose that you will + affirm a man to be a good poet who injures himself by his poetry. + </p> + <p> + Assuredly not, he said; such a poet would be a fool. And this is the + reason why I take you into my counsels, Socrates, and I shall be glad of + any further advice which you may have to offer. Will you tell me by what + words or actions I may become endeared to my love? + </p> + <p> + That is not easy to determine, I said; but if you will bring your love to + me, and will let me talk with him, I may perhaps be able to show you how + to converse with him, instead of singing and reciting in the fashion of + which you are accused. + </p> + <p> + There will be no difficulty in bringing him, he replied; if you will only + go with Ctesippus into the Palaestra, and sit down and talk, I believe + that he will come of his own accord; for he is fond of listening, + Socrates. And as this is the festival of the Hermaea, the young men and + boys are all together, and there is no separation between them. He will be + sure to come: but if he does not, Ctesippus with whom he is familiar, and + whose relation Menexenus is his great friend, shall call him. + </p> + <p> + That will be the way, I said. Thereupon I led Ctesippus into the + Palaestra, and the rest followed. + </p> + <p> + Upon entering we found that the boys had just been sacrificing; and this + part of the festival was nearly at an end. They were all in their white + array, and games at dice were going on among them. Most of them were in + the outer court amusing themselves; but some were in a corner of the + Apodyterium playing at odd and even with a number of dice, which they took + out of little wicker baskets. There was also a circle of lookers-on; among + them was Lysis. He was standing with the other boys and youths, having a + crown upon his head, like a fair vision, and not less worthy of praise for + his goodness than for his beauty. We left them, and went over to the + opposite side of the room, where, finding a quiet place, we sat down; and + then we began to talk. This attracted Lysis, who was constantly turning + round to look at us—he was evidently wanting to come to us. For a + time he hesitated and had not the courage to come alone; but first of all, + his friend Menexenus, leaving his play, entered the Palaestra from the + court, and when he saw Ctesippus and myself, was going to take a seat by + us; and then Lysis, seeing him, followed, and sat down by his side; and + the other boys joined. I should observe that Hippothales, when he saw the + crowd, got behind them, where he thought that he would be out of sight of + Lysis, lest he should anger him; and there he stood and listened. + </p> + <p> + I turned to Menexenus, and said: Son of Demophon, which of you two youths + is the elder? + </p> + <p> + That is a matter of dispute between us, he said. + </p> + <p> + And which is the nobler? Is that also a matter of dispute? + </p> + <p> + Yes, certainly. + </p> + <p> + And another disputed point is, which is the fairer? + </p> + <p> + The two boys laughed. + </p> + <p> + I shall not ask which is the richer of the two, I said; for you are + friends, are you not? + </p> + <p> + Certainly, they replied. + </p> + <p> + And friends have all things in common, so that one of you can be no richer + than the other, if you say truly that you are friends. + </p> + <p> + They assented. I was about to ask which was the juster of the two, and + which was the wiser of the two; but at this moment Menexenus was called + away by some one who came and said that the gymnastic-master wanted him. I + supposed that he had to offer sacrifice. So he went away, and I asked + Lysis some more questions. I dare say, Lysis, I said, that your father and + mother love you very much. + </p> + <p> + Certainly, he said. + </p> + <p> + And they would wish you to be perfectly happy. + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + But do you think that any one is happy who is in the condition of a slave, + and who cannot do what he likes? + </p> + <p> + I should think not indeed, he said. + </p> + <p> + And if your father and mother love you, and desire that you should be + happy, no one can doubt that they are very ready to promote your + happiness. + </p> + <p> + Certainly, he replied. + </p> + <p> + And do they then permit you to do what you like, and never rebuke you or + hinder you from doing what you desire? + </p> + <p> + Yes, indeed, Socrates; there are a great many things which they hinder me + from doing. + </p> + <p> + What do you mean? I said. Do they want you to be happy, and yet hinder you + from doing what you like? for example, if you want to mount one of your + father's chariots, and take the reins at a race, they will not allow you + to do so—they will prevent you? + </p> + <p> + Certainly, he said, they will not allow me to do so. + </p> + <p> + Whom then will they allow? + </p> + <p> + There is a charioteer, whom my father pays for driving. + </p> + <p> + And do they trust a hireling more than you? and may he do what he likes + with the horses? and do they pay him for this? + </p> + <p> + They do. + </p> + <p> + But I dare say that you may take the whip and guide the mule-cart if you + like;—they will permit that? + </p> + <p> + Permit me! indeed they will not. + </p> + <p> + Then, I said, may no one use the whip to the mules? + </p> + <p> + Yes, he said, the muleteer. + </p> + <p> + And is he a slave or a free man? + </p> + <p> + A slave, he said. + </p> + <p> + And do they esteem a slave of more value than you who are their son? And + do they entrust their property to him rather than to you? and allow him to + do what he likes, when they prohibit you? Answer me now: Are you your own + master, or do they not even allow that? + </p> + <p> + Nay, he said; of course they do not allow it. + </p> + <p> + Then you have a master? + </p> + <p> + Yes, my tutor; there he is. + </p> + <p> + And is he a slave? + </p> + <p> + To be sure; he is our slave, he replied. + </p> + <p> + Surely, I said, this is a strange thing, that a free man should be + governed by a slave. And what does he do with you? + </p> + <p> + He takes me to my teachers. + </p> + <p> + You do not mean to say that your teachers also rule over you? + </p> + <p> + Of course they do. + </p> + <p> + Then I must say that your father is pleased to inflict many lords and + masters on you. But at any rate when you go home to your mother, she will + let you have your own way, and will not interfere with your happiness; her + wool, or the piece of cloth which she is weaving, are at your disposal: I + am sure that there is nothing to hinder you from touching her wooden + spathe, or her comb, or any other of her spinning implements. + </p> + <p> + Nay, Socrates, he replied, laughing; not only does she hinder me, but I + should be beaten if I were to touch one of them. + </p> + <p> + Well, I said, this is amazing. And did you ever behave ill to your father + or your mother? + </p> + <p> + No, indeed, he replied. + </p> + <p> + But why then are they so terribly anxious to prevent you from being happy, + and doing as you like?—keeping you all day long in subjection to + another, and, in a word, doing nothing which you desire; so that you have + no good, as would appear, out of their great possessions, which are under + the control of anybody rather than of you, and have no use of your own + fair person, which is tended and taken care of by another; while you, + Lysis, are master of nobody, and can do nothing? + </p> + <p> + Why, he said, Socrates, the reason is that I am not of age. + </p> + <p> + I doubt whether that is the real reason, I said; for I should imagine that + your father Democrates, and your mother, do permit you to do many things + already, and do not wait until you are of age: for example, if they want + anything read or written, you, I presume, would be the first person in the + house who is summoned by them. + </p> + <p> + Very true. + </p> + <p> + And you would be allowed to write or read the letters in any order which + you please, or to take up the lyre and tune the notes, and play with the + fingers, or strike with the plectrum, exactly as you please, and neither + father nor mother would interfere with you. + </p> + <p> + That is true, he said. + </p> + <p> + Then what can be the reason, Lysis, I said, why they allow you to do the + one and not the other? + </p> + <p> + I suppose, he said, because I understand the one, and not the other. + </p> + <p> + Yes, my dear youth, I said, the reason is not any deficiency of years, but + a deficiency of knowledge; and whenever your father thinks that you are + wiser than he is, he will instantly commit himself and his possessions to + you. + </p> + <p> + I think so. + </p> + <p> + Aye, I said; and about your neighbour, too, does not the same rule hold as + about your father? If he is satisfied that you know more of housekeeping + than he does, will he continue to administer his affairs himself, or will + he commit them to you? + </p> + <p> + I think that he will commit them to me. + </p> + <p> + Will not the Athenian people, too, entrust their affairs to you when they + see that you have wisdom enough to manage them? + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + And oh! let me put another case, I said: There is the great king, and he + has an eldest son, who is the Prince of Asia;—suppose that you and I + go to him and establish to his satisfaction that we are better cooks than + his son, will he not entrust to us the prerogative of making soup, and + putting in anything that we like while the pot is boiling, rather than to + the Prince of Asia, who is his son? + </p> + <p> + To us, clearly. + </p> + <p> + And we shall be allowed to throw in salt by handfuls, whereas the son will + not be allowed to put in as much as he can take up between his fingers? + </p> + <p> + Of course. + </p> + <p> + Or suppose again that the son has bad eyes, will he allow him, or will he + not allow him, to touch his own eyes if he thinks that he has no knowledge + of medicine? + </p> + <p> + He will not allow him. + </p> + <p> + Whereas, if he supposes us to have a knowledge of medicine, he will allow + us to do what we like with him—even to open the eyes wide and + sprinkle ashes upon them, because he supposes that we know what is best? + </p> + <p> + That is true. + </p> + <p> + And everything in which we appear to him to be wiser than himself or his + son he will commit to us? + </p> + <p> + That is very true, Socrates, he replied. + </p> + <p> + Then now, my dear Lysis, I said, you perceive that in things which we know + every one will trust us,—Hellenes and barbarians, men and women,—and + we may do as we please about them, and no one will like to interfere with + us; we shall be free, and masters of others; and these things will be + really ours, for we shall be benefited by them. But in things of which we + have no understanding, no one will trust us to do as seems good to us—they + will hinder us as far as they can; and not only strangers, but father and + mother, and the friend, if there be one, who is dearer still, will also + hinder us; and we shall be subject to others; and these things will not be + ours, for we shall not be benefited by them. Do you agree? + </p> + <p> + He assented. + </p> + <p> + And shall we be friends to others, and will any others love us, in as far + as we are useless to them? + </p> + <p> + Certainly not. + </p> + <p> + Neither can your father or mother love you, nor can anybody love anybody + else, in so far as they are useless to them? + </p> + <p> + No. + </p> + <p> + And therefore, my boy, if you are wise, all men will be your friends and + kindred, for you will be useful and good; but if you are not wise, neither + father, nor mother, nor kindred, nor any one else, will be your friends. + And in matters of which you have as yet no knowledge, can you have any + conceit of knowledge? + </p> + <p> + That is impossible, he replied. + </p> + <p> + And you, Lysis, if you require a teacher, have not yet attained to wisdom. + </p> + <p> + True. + </p> + <p> + And therefore you are not conceited, having nothing of which to be + conceited. + </p> + <p> + Indeed, Socrates, I think not. + </p> + <p> + When I heard him say this, I turned to Hippothales, and was very nearly + making a blunder, for I was going to say to him: That is the way, + Hippothales, in which you should talk to your beloved, humbling and + lowering him, and not as you do, puffing him up and spoiling him. But I + saw that he was in great excitement and confusion at what had been said, + and I remembered that, although he was in the neighbourhood, he did not + want to be seen by Lysis; so upon second thoughts I refrained. + </p> + <p> + In the meantime Menexenus came back and sat down in his place by Lysis; + and Lysis, in a childish and affectionate manner, whispered privately in + my ear, so that Menexenus should not hear: Do, Socrates, tell Menexenus + what you have been telling me. + </p> + <p> + Suppose that you tell him yourself, Lysis, I replied; for I am sure that + you were attending. + </p> + <p> + Certainly, he replied. + </p> + <p> + Try, then, to remember the words, and be as exact as you can in repeating + them to him, and if you have forgotten anything, ask me again the next + time that you see me. + </p> + <p> + I will be sure to do so, Socrates; but go on telling him something new, + and let me hear, as long as I am allowed to stay. + </p> + <p> + I certainly cannot refuse, I said, since you ask me; but then, as you + know, Menexenus is very pugnacious, and therefore you must come to the + rescue if he attempts to upset me. + </p> + <p> + Yes, indeed, he said; he is very pugnacious, and that is the reason why I + want you to argue with him. + </p> + <p> + That I may make a fool of myself? + </p> + <p> + No, indeed, he said; but I want you to put him down. + </p> + <p> + That is no easy matter, I replied; for he is a terrible fellow—a + pupil of Ctesippus. And there is Ctesippus himself: do you see him? + </p> + <p> + Never mind, Socrates, you shall argue with him. + </p> + <p> + Well, I suppose that I must, I replied. + </p> + <p> + Hereupon Ctesippus complained that we were talking in secret, and keeping + the feast to ourselves. + </p> + <p> + I shall be happy, I said, to let you have a share. Here is Lysis, who does + not understand something that I was saying, and wants me to ask Menexenus, + who, as he thinks, is likely to know. + </p> + <p> + And why do you not ask him? he said. + </p> + <p> + Very well, I said, I will; and do you, Menexenus, answer. But first I must + tell you that I am one who from my childhood upward have set my heart upon + a certain thing. All people have their fancies; some desire horses, and + others dogs; and some are fond of gold, and others of honour. Now, I have + no violent desire of any of these things; but I have a passion for + friends; and I would rather have a good friend than the best cock or quail + in the world: I would even go further, and say the best horse or dog. Yea, + by the dog of Egypt, I should greatly prefer a real friend to all the gold + of Darius, or even to Darius himself: I am such a lover of friends as + that. And when I see you and Lysis, at your early age, so easily possessed + of this treasure, and so soon, he of you, and you of him, I am amazed and + delighted, seeing that I myself, although I am now advanced in years, am + so far from having made a similar acquisition, that I do not even know in + what way a friend is acquired. But I want to ask you a question about + this, for you have experience: tell me then, when one loves another, is + the lover or the beloved the friend; or may either be the friend? + </p> + <p> + Either may, I should think, be the friend of either. + </p> + <p> + Do you mean, I said, that if only one of them loves the other, they are + mutual friends? + </p> + <p> + Yes, he said; that is my meaning. + </p> + <p> + But what if the lover is not loved in return? which is a very possible + case. + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + Or is, perhaps, even hated? which is a fancy which sometimes is + entertained by lovers respecting their beloved. Nothing can exceed their + love; and yet they imagine either that they are not loved in return, or + that they are hated. Is not that true? + </p> + <p> + Yes, he said, quite true. + </p> + <p> + In that case, the one loves, and the other is loved? + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + Then which is the friend of which? Is the lover the friend of the beloved, + whether he be loved in return, or hated; or is the beloved the friend; or + is there no friendship at all on either side, unless they both love one + another? + </p> + <p> + There would seem to be none at all. + </p> + <p> + Then this notion is not in accordance with our previous one. We were + saying that both were friends, if one only loved; but now, unless they + both love, neither is a friend. + </p> + <p> + That appears to be true. + </p> + <p> + Then nothing which does not love in return is beloved by a lover? + </p> + <p> + I think not. + </p> + <p> + Then they are not lovers of horses, whom the horses do not love in return; + nor lovers of quails, nor of dogs, nor of wine, nor of gymnastic + exercises, who have no return of love; no, nor of wisdom, unless wisdom + loves them in return. Or shall we say that they do love them, although + they are not beloved by them; and that the poet was wrong who sings— + </p> + <p> + 'Happy the man to whom his children are dear, and steeds having single + hoofs, and dogs of chase, and the stranger of another land'? + </p> + <p> + I do not think that he was wrong. + </p> + <p> + You think that he is right? + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + Then, Menexenus, the conclusion is, that what is beloved, whether loving + or hating, may be dear to the lover of it: for example, very young + children, too young to love, or even hating their father or mother when + they are punished by them, are never dearer to them than at the time when + they are being hated by them. + </p> + <p> + I think that what you say is true. + </p> + <p> + And, if so, not the lover, but the beloved, is the friend or dear one? + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + And the hated one, and not the hater, is the enemy? + </p> + <p> + Clearly. + </p> + <p> + Then many men are loved by their enemies, and hated by their friends, and + are the friends of their enemies, and the enemies of their friends. Yet + how absurd, my dear friend, or indeed impossible is this paradox of a man + being an enemy to his friend or a friend to his enemy. + </p> + <p> + I quite agree, Socrates, in what you say. + </p> + <p> + But if this cannot be, the lover will be the friend of that which is + loved? + </p> + <p> + True. + </p> + <p> + And the hater will be the enemy of that which is hated? + </p> + <p> + Certainly. + </p> + <p> + Yet we must acknowledge in this, as in the preceding instance, that a man + may be the friend of one who is not his friend, or who may be his enemy, + when he loves that which does not love him or which even hates him. And he + may be the enemy of one who is not his enemy, and is even his friend: for + example, when he hates that which does not hate him, or which even loves + him. + </p> + <p> + That appears to be true. + </p> + <p> + But if the lover is not a friend, nor the beloved a friend, nor both + together, what are we to say? Whom are we to call friends to one another? + Do any remain? + </p> + <p> + Indeed, Socrates, I cannot find any. + </p> + <p> + But, O Menexenus! I said, may we not have been altogether wrong in our + conclusions? + </p> + <p> + I am sure that we have been wrong, Socrates, said Lysis. And he blushed as + he spoke, the words seeming to come from his lips involuntarily, because + his whole mind was taken up with the argument; there was no mistaking his + attentive look while he was listening. + </p> + <p> + I was pleased at the interest which was shown by Lysis, and I wanted to + give Menexenus a rest, so I turned to him and said, I think, Lysis, that + what you say is true, and that, if we had been right, we should never have + gone so far wrong; let us proceed no further in this direction (for the + road seems to be getting troublesome), but take the other path into which + we turned, and see what the poets have to say; for they are to us in a + manner the fathers and authors of wisdom, and they speak of friends in no + light or trivial manner, but God himself, as they say, makes them and + draws them to one another; and this they express, if I am not mistaken, in + the following words:— + </p> + <p> + 'God is ever drawing like towards like, and making them acquainted.' + </p> + <p> + I dare say that you have heard those words. + </p> + <p> + Yes, he said; I have. + </p> + <p> + And have you not also met with the treatises of philosophers who say that + like must love like? they are the people who argue and write about nature + and the universe. + </p> + <p> + Very true, he replied. + </p> + <p> + And are they right in saying this? + </p> + <p> + They may be. + </p> + <p> + Perhaps, I said, about half, or possibly, altogether, right, if their + meaning were rightly apprehended by us. For the more a bad man has to do + with a bad man, and the more nearly he is brought into contact with him, + the more he will be likely to hate him, for he injures him; and injurer + and injured cannot be friends. Is not that true? + </p> + <p> + Yes, he said. + </p> + <p> + Then one half of the saying is untrue, if the wicked are like one another? + </p> + <p> + That is true. + </p> + <p> + But the real meaning of the saying, as I imagine, is, that the good are + like one another, and friends to one another; and that the bad, as is + often said of them, are never at unity with one another or with + themselves; for they are passionate and restless, and anything which is at + variance and enmity with itself is not likely to be in union or harmony + with any other thing. Do you not agree? + </p> + <p> + Yes, I do. + </p> + <p> + Then, my friend, those who say that the like is friendly to the like mean + to intimate, if I rightly apprehend them, that the good only is the friend + of the good, and of him only; but that the evil never attains to any real + friendship, either with good or evil. Do you agree? + </p> + <p> + He nodded assent. + </p> + <p> + Then now we know how to answer the question 'Who are friends?' for the + argument declares 'That the good are friends.' + </p> + <p> + Yes, he said, that is true. + </p> + <p> + Yes, I replied; and yet I am not quite satisfied with this answer. By + heaven, and shall I tell you what I suspect? I will. Assuming that like, + inasmuch as he is like, is the friend of like, and useful to him—or + rather let me try another way of putting the matter: Can like do any good + or harm to like which he could not do to himself, or suffer anything from + his like which he would not suffer from himself? And if neither can be of + any use to the other, how can they be loved by one another? Can they now? + </p> + <p> + They cannot. + </p> + <p> + And can he who is not loved be a friend? + </p> + <p> + Certainly not. + </p> + <p> + But say that the like is not the friend of the like in so far as he is + like; still the good may be the friend of the good in so far as he is + good? + </p> + <p> + True. + </p> + <p> + But then again, will not the good, in so far as he is good, be sufficient + for himself? Certainly he will. And he who is sufficient wants nothing—that + is implied in the word sufficient. + </p> + <p> + Of course not. + </p> + <p> + And he who wants nothing will desire nothing? + </p> + <p> + He will not. + </p> + <p> + Neither can he love that which he does not desire? + </p> + <p> + He cannot. + </p> + <p> + And he who loves not is not a lover or friend? + </p> + <p> + Clearly not. + </p> + <p> + What place then is there for friendship, if, when absent, good men have no + need of one another (for even when alone they are sufficient for + themselves), and when present have no use of one another? How can such + persons ever be induced to value one another? + </p> + <p> + They cannot. + </p> + <p> + And friends they cannot be, unless they value one another? + </p> + <p> + Very true. + </p> + <p> + But see now, Lysis, whether we are not being deceived in all this—are + we not indeed entirely wrong? + </p> + <p> + How so? he replied. + </p> + <p> + Have I not heard some one say, as I just now recollect, that the like is + the greatest enemy of the like, the good of the good?—Yes, and he + quoted the authority of Hesiod, who says: + </p> + <p> + 'Potter quarrels with potter, bard with bard, Beggar with beggar;' + </p> + <p> + and of all other things he affirmed, in like manner, 'That of necessity + the most like are most full of envy, strife, and hatred of one another, + and the most unlike, of friendship. For the poor man is compelled to be + the friend of the rich, and the weak requires the aid of the strong, and + the sick man of the physician; and every one who is ignorant, has to love + and court him who knows.' And indeed he went on to say in grandiloquent + language, that the idea of friendship existing between similars is not the + truth, but the very reverse of the truth, and that the most opposed are + the most friendly; for that everything desires not like but that which is + most unlike: for example, the dry desires the moist, the cold the hot, the + bitter the sweet, the sharp the blunt, the void the full, the full the + void, and so of all other things; for the opposite is the food of the + opposite, whereas like receives nothing from like. And I thought that he + who said this was a charming man, and that he spoke well. What do the rest + of you say? + </p> + <p> + I should say, at first hearing, that he is right, said Menexenus. + </p> + <p> + Then we are to say that the greatest friendship is of opposites? + </p> + <p> + Exactly. + </p> + <p> + Yes, Menexenus; but will not that be a monstrous answer? and will not the + all-wise eristics be down upon us in triumph, and ask, fairly enough, + whether love is not the very opposite of hate; and what answer shall we + make to them—must we not admit that they speak the truth? + </p> + <p> + We must. + </p> + <p> + They will then proceed to ask whether the enemy is the friend of the + friend, or the friend the friend of the enemy? + </p> + <p> + Neither, he replied. + </p> + <p> + Well, but is a just man the friend of the unjust, or the temperate of the + intemperate, or the good of the bad? + </p> + <p> + I do not see how that is possible. + </p> + <p> + And yet, I said, if friendship goes by contraries, the contraries must be + friends. + </p> + <p> + They must. + </p> + <p> + Then neither like and like nor unlike and unlike are friends. + </p> + <p> + I suppose not. + </p> + <p> + And yet there is a further consideration: may not all these notions of + friendship be erroneous? but may not that which is neither good nor evil + still in some cases be the friend of the good? + </p> + <p> + How do you mean? he said. + </p> + <p> + Why really, I said, the truth is that I do not know; but my head is dizzy + with thinking of the argument, and therefore I hazard the conjecture, that + 'the beautiful is the friend,' as the old proverb says. Beauty is + certainly a soft, smooth, slippery thing, and therefore of a nature which + easily slips in and permeates our souls. For I affirm that the good is the + beautiful. You will agree to that? + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + This I say from a sort of notion that what is neither good nor evil is the + friend of the beautiful and the good, and I will tell you why I am + inclined to think so: I assume that there are three principles—the + good, the bad, and that which is neither good nor bad. You would agree—would + you not? + </p> + <p> + I agree. + </p> + <p> + And neither is the good the friend of the good, nor the evil of the evil, + nor the good of the evil;—these alternatives are excluded by the + previous argument; and therefore, if there be such a thing as friendship + or love at all, we must infer that what is neither good nor evil must be + the friend, either of the good, or of that which is neither good nor evil, + for nothing can be the friend of the bad. + </p> + <p> + True. + </p> + <p> + But neither can like be the friend of like, as we were just now saying. + </p> + <p> + True. + </p> + <p> + And if so, that which is neither good nor evil can have no friend which is + neither good nor evil. + </p> + <p> + Clearly not. + </p> + <p> + Then the good alone is the friend of that only which is neither good nor + evil. + </p> + <p> + That may be assumed to be certain. + </p> + <p> + And does not this seem to put us in the right way? Just remark, that the + body which is in health requires neither medical nor any other aid, but is + well enough; and the healthy man has no love of the physician, because he + is in health. + </p> + <p> + He has none. + </p> + <p> + But the sick loves him, because he is sick? + </p> + <p> + Certainly. + </p> + <p> + And sickness is an evil, and the art of medicine a good and useful thing? + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + But the human body, regarded as a body, is neither good nor evil? + </p> + <p> + True. + </p> + <p> + And the body is compelled by reason of disease to court and make friends + of the art of medicine? + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + Then that which is neither good nor evil becomes the friend of good, by + reason of the presence of evil? + </p> + <p> + So we may infer. + </p> + <p> + And clearly this must have happened before that which was neither good nor + evil had become altogether corrupted with the element of evil—if + itself had become evil it would not still desire and love the good; for, + as we were saying, the evil cannot be the friend of the good. + </p> + <p> + Impossible. + </p> + <p> + Further, I must observe that some substances are assimilated when others + are present with them; and there are some which are not assimilated: take, + for example, the case of an ointment or colour which is put on another + substance. + </p> + <p> + Very good. + </p> + <p> + In such a case, is the substance which is anointed the same as the colour + or ointment? + </p> + <p> + What do you mean? he said. + </p> + <p> + This is what I mean: Suppose that I were to cover your auburn locks with + white lead, would they be really white, or would they only appear to be + white? + </p> + <p> + They would only appear to be white, he replied. + </p> + <p> + And yet whiteness would be present in them? + </p> + <p> + True. + </p> + <p> + But that would not make them at all the more white, notwithstanding the + presence of white in them—they would not be white any more than + black? + </p> + <p> + No. + </p> + <p> + But when old age infuses whiteness into them, then they become + assimilated, and are white by the presence of white. + </p> + <p> + Certainly. + </p> + <p> + Now I want to know whether in all cases a substance is assimilated by the + presence of another substance; or must the presence be after a peculiar + sort? + </p> + <p> + The latter, he said. + </p> + <p> + Then that which is neither good nor evil may be in the presence of evil, + but not as yet evil, and that has happened before now? + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + And when anything is in the presence of evil, not being as yet evil, the + presence of good arouses the desire of good in that thing; but the + presence of evil, which makes a thing evil, takes away the desire and + friendship of the good; for that which was once both good and evil has now + become evil only, and the good was supposed to have no friendship with the + evil? + </p> + <p> + None. + </p> + <p> + And therefore we say that those who are already wise, whether Gods or men, + are no longer lovers of wisdom; nor can they be lovers of wisdom who are + ignorant to the extent of being evil, for no evil or ignorant person is a + lover of wisdom. There remain those who have the misfortune to be + ignorant, but are not yet hardened in their ignorance, or void of + understanding, and do not as yet fancy that they know what they do not + know: and therefore those who are the lovers of wisdom are as yet neither + good nor bad. But the bad do not love wisdom any more than the good; for, + as we have already seen, neither is unlike the friend of unlike, nor like + of like. You remember that? + </p> + <p> + Yes, they both said. + </p> + <p> + And so, Lysis and Menexenus, we have discovered the nature of friendship—there + can be no doubt of it: Friendship is the love which by reason of the + presence of evil the neither good nor evil has of the good, either in the + soul, or in the body, or anywhere. + </p> + <p> + They both agreed and entirely assented, and for a moment I rejoiced and + was satisfied like a huntsman just holding fast his prey. But then a most + unaccountable suspicion came across me, and I felt that the conclusion was + untrue. I was pained, and said, Alas! Lysis and Menexenus, I am afraid + that we have been grasping at a shadow only. + </p> + <p> + Why do you say so? said Menexenus. + </p> + <p> + I am afraid, I said, that the argument about friendship is false: + arguments, like men, are often pretenders. + </p> + <p> + How do you mean? he asked. + </p> + <p> + Well, I said; look at the matter in this way: a friend is the friend of + some one; is he not? + </p> + <p> + Certainly he is. + </p> + <p> + And has he a motive and object in being a friend, or has he no motive and + object? + </p> + <p> + He has a motive and object. + </p> + <p> + And is the object which makes him a friend, dear to him, or neither dear + nor hateful to him? + </p> + <p> + I do not quite follow you, he said. + </p> + <p> + I do not wonder at that, I said. But perhaps, if I put the matter in + another way, you will be able to follow me, and my own meaning will be + clearer to myself. The sick man, as I was just now saying, is the friend + of the physician—is he not? + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + And he is the friend of the physician because of disease, and for the sake + of health? + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + And disease is an evil? + </p> + <p> + Certainly. + </p> + <p> + And what of health? I said. Is that good or evil, or neither? + </p> + <p> + Good, he replied. + </p> + <p> + And we were saying, I believe, that the body being neither good nor evil, + because of disease, that is to say because of evil, is the friend of + medicine, and medicine is a good: and medicine has entered into this + friendship for the sake of health, and health is a good. + </p> + <p> + True. + </p> + <p> + And is health a friend, or not a friend? + </p> + <p> + A friend. + </p> + <p> + And disease is an enemy? + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + Then that which is neither good nor evil is the friend of the good because + of the evil and hateful, and for the sake of the good and the friend? + </p> + <p> + Clearly. + </p> + <p> + Then the friend is a friend for the sake of the friend, and because of the + enemy? + </p> + <p> + That is to be inferred. + </p> + <p> + Then at this point, my boys, let us take heed, and be on our guard against + deceptions. I will not again repeat that the friend is the friend of the + friend, and the like of the like, which has been declared by us to be an + impossibility; but, in order that this new statement may not delude us, + let us attentively examine another point, which I will proceed to explain: + Medicine, as we were saying, is a friend, or dear to us for the sake of + health? + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + And health is also dear? + </p> + <p> + Certainly. + </p> + <p> + And if dear, then dear for the sake of something? + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + And surely this object must also be dear, as is implied in our previous + admissions? + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + And that something dear involves something else dear? + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + But then, proceeding in this way, shall we not arrive at some first + principle of friendship or dearness which is not capable of being referred + to any other, for the sake of which, as we maintain, all other things are + dear, and, having there arrived, we shall stop? + </p> + <p> + True. + </p> + <p> + My fear is that all those other things, which, as we say, are dear for the + sake of another, are illusions and deceptions only, but where that first + principle is, there is the true ideal of friendship. Let me put the matter + thus: Suppose the case of a great treasure (this may be a son, who is more + precious to his father than all his other treasures); would not the + father, who values his son above all things, value other things also for + the sake of his son? I mean, for instance, if he knew that his son had + drunk hemlock, and the father thought that wine would save him, he would + value the wine? + </p> + <p> + He would. + </p> + <p> + And also the vessel which contains the wine? + </p> + <p> + Certainly. + </p> + <p> + But does he therefore value the three measures of wine, or the earthen + vessel which contains them, equally with his son? Is not this rather the + true state of the case? All his anxiety has regard not to the means which + are provided for the sake of an object, but to the object for the sake of + which they are provided. And although we may often say that gold and + silver are highly valued by us, that is not the truth; for there is a + further object, whatever it may be, which we value most of all, and for + the sake of which gold and all our other possessions are acquired by us. + Am I not right? + </p> + <p> + Yes, certainly. + </p> + <p> + And may not the same be said of the friend? That which is only dear to us + for the sake of something else is improperly said to be dear, but the + truly dear is that in which all these so-called dear friendships + terminate. + </p> + <p> + That, he said, appears to be true. + </p> + <p> + And the truly dear or ultimate principle of friendship is not for the sake + of any other or further dear. + </p> + <p> + True. + </p> + <p> + Then we have done with the notion that friendship has any further object. + May we then infer that the good is the friend? + </p> + <p> + I think so. + </p> + <p> + And the good is loved for the sake of the evil? Let me put the case in + this way: Suppose that of the three principles, good, evil, and that which + is neither good nor evil, there remained only the good and the neutral, + and that evil went far away, and in no way affected soul or body, nor ever + at all that class of things which, as we say, are neither good nor evil in + themselves;—would the good be of any use, or other than useless to + us? For if there were nothing to hurt us any longer, we should have no + need of anything that would do us good. Then would be clearly seen that we + did but love and desire the good because of the evil, and as the remedy of + the evil, which was the disease; but if there had been no disease, there + would have been no need of a remedy. Is not this the nature of the good—to + be loved by us who are placed between the two, because of the evil? but + there is no use in the good for its own sake. + </p> + <p> + I suppose not. + </p> + <p> + Then the final principle of friendship, in which all other friendships + terminated, those, I mean, which are relatively dear and for the sake of + something else, is of another and a different nature from them. For they + are called dear because of another dear or friend. But with the true + friend or dear, the case is quite the reverse; for that is proved to be + dear because of the hated, and if the hated were away it would be no + longer dear. + </p> + <p> + Very true, he replied: at any rate not if our present view holds good. + </p> + <p> + But, oh! will you tell me, I said, whether if evil were to perish, we + should hunger any more, or thirst any more, or have any similar desire? Or + may we suppose that hunger will remain while men and animals remain, but + not so as to be hurtful? And the same of thirst and the other desires,—that + they will remain, but will not be evil because evil has perished? Or + rather shall I say, that to ask what either will be then or will not be is + ridiculous, for who knows? This we do know, that in our present condition + hunger may injure us, and may also benefit us:—Is not that true? + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + And in like manner thirst or any similar desire may sometimes be a good + and sometimes an evil to us, and sometimes neither one nor the other? + </p> + <p> + To be sure. + </p> + <p> + But is there any reason why, because evil perishes, that which is not evil + should perish with it? + </p> + <p> + None. + </p> + <p> + Then, even if evil perishes, the desires which are neither good nor evil + will remain? + </p> + <p> + Clearly they will. + </p> + <p> + And must not a man love that which he desires and affects? + </p> + <p> + He must. + </p> + <p> + Then, even if evil perishes, there may still remain some elements of love + or friendship? + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + But not if evil is the cause of friendship: for in that case nothing will + be the friend of any other thing after the destruction of evil; for the + effect cannot remain when the cause is destroyed. + </p> + <p> + True. + </p> + <p> + And have we not admitted already that the friend loves something for a + reason? and at the time of making the admission we were of opinion that + the neither good nor evil loves the good because of the evil? + </p> + <p> + Very true. + </p> + <p> + But now our view is changed, and we conceive that there must be some other + cause of friendship? + </p> + <p> + I suppose so. + </p> + <p> + May not the truth be rather, as we were saying just now, that desire is + the cause of friendship; for that which desires is dear to that which is + desired at the time of desiring it? and may not the other theory have been + only a long story about nothing? + </p> + <p> + Likely enough. + </p> + <p> + But surely, I said, he who desires, desires that of which he is in want? + </p> + <p> + Yes. + </p> + <p> + And that of which he is in want is dear to him? + </p> + <p> + True. + </p> + <p> + And he is in want of that of which he is deprived? + </p> + <p> + Certainly. + </p> + <p> + Then love, and desire, and friendship would appear to be of the natural or + congenial. Such, Lysis and Menexenus, is the inference. + </p> + <p> + They assented. + </p> + <p> + Then if you are friends, you must have natures which are congenial to one + another? + </p> + <p> + Certainly, they both said. + </p> + <p> + And I say, my boys, that no one who loves or desires another would ever + have loved or desired or affected him, if he had not been in some way + congenial to him, either in his soul, or in his character, or in his + manners, or in his form. + </p> + <p> + Yes, yes, said Menexenus. But Lysis was silent. + </p> + <p> + Then, I said, the conclusion is, that what is of a congenial nature must + be loved. + </p> + <p> + It follows, he said. + </p> + <p> + Then the lover, who is true and no counterfeit, must of necessity be loved + by his love. + </p> + <p> + Lysis and Menexenus gave a faint assent to this; and Hippothales changed + into all manner of colours with delight. + </p> + <p> + Here, intending to revise the argument, I said: Can we point out any + difference between the congenial and the like? For if that is possible, + then I think, Lysis and Menexenus, there may be some sense in our argument + about friendship. But if the congenial is only the like, how will you get + rid of the other argument, of the uselessness of like to like in as far as + they are like; for to say that what is useless is dear, would be absurd? + Suppose, then, that we agree to distinguish between the congenial and the + like—in the intoxication of argument, that may perhaps be allowed. + </p> + <p> + Very true. + </p> + <p> + And shall we further say that the good is congenial, and the evil + uncongenial to every one? Or again that the evil is congenial to the evil, + and the good to the good; and that which is neither good nor evil to that + which is neither good nor evil? + </p> + <p> + They agreed to the latter alternative. + </p> + <p> + Then, my boys, we have again fallen into the old discarded error; for the + unjust will be the friend of the unjust, and the bad of the bad, as well + as the good of the good. + </p> + <p> + That appears to be the result. + </p> + <p> + But again, if we say that the congenial is the same as the good, in that + case the good and he only will be the friend of the good. + </p> + <p> + True. + </p> + <p> + But that too was a position of ours which, as you will remember, has been + already refuted by ourselves. + </p> + <p> + We remember. + </p> + <p> + Then what is to be done? Or rather is there anything to be done? I can + only, like the wise men who argue in courts, sum up the arguments:—If + neither the beloved, nor the lover, nor the like, nor the unlike, nor the + good, nor the congenial, nor any other of whom we spoke—for there + were such a number of them that I cannot remember all—if none of + these are friends, I know not what remains to be said. + </p> + <p> + Here I was going to invite the opinion of some older person, when suddenly + we were interrupted by the tutors of Lysis and Menexenus, who came upon us + like an evil apparition with their brothers, and bade them go home, as it + was getting late. At first, we and the by-standers drove them off; but + afterwards, as they would not mind, and only went on shouting in their + barbarous dialect, and got angry, and kept calling the boys—they + appeared to us to have been drinking rather too much at the Hermaea, which + made them difficult to manage—we fairly gave way and broke up the + company. + </p> + <p> + I said, however, a few words to the boys at parting: O Menexenus and + Lysis, how ridiculous that you two boys, and I, an old boy, who would fain + be one of you, should imagine ourselves to be friends—this is what + the by-standers will go away and say—and as yet we have not been + able to discover what is a friend! + </p> + <p> + <br /><br /><br /><br /> + </p> +<pre xml:space="preserve"> + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Lysis, by Plato + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LYSIS *** + +***** This file should be named 1579-h.htm or 1579-h.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + http://www.gutenberg.org/1/5/7/1579/ + +Produced by Sue Asscher, and David Widger + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +http://gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at +http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at http://pglaf.org + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit http://pglaf.org + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. +To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + http://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + + +</pre> + </body> +</html> diff --git a/1579.txt b/1579.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a99aa47 --- /dev/null +++ b/1579.txt @@ -0,0 +1,1997 @@ +The Project Gutenberg EBook of Lysis, by Plato + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + +Title: Lysis + +Author: Plato + +Translator: Benjamin Jowett + +Posting Date: August 24, 2008 [EBook #1579] +Release Date: December, 1998 + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ASCII + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LYSIS *** + + + + +Produced by Sue Asscher + + + + + +LYSIS + +By Plato + + +Translated by Benjamin Jowett + + + + +INTRODUCTION. + +No answer is given in the Lysis to the question, 'What is Friendship?' +any more than in the Charmides to the question, 'What is Temperance?' +There are several resemblances in the two Dialogues: the same +youthfulness and sense of beauty pervades both of them; they are alike +rich in the description of Greek life. The question is again raised of +the relation of knowledge to virtue and good, which also recurs in the +Laches; and Socrates appears again as the elder friend of the two boys, +Lysis and Menexenus. In the Charmides, as also in the Laches, he is +described as middle-aged; in the Lysis he is advanced in years. + +The Dialogue consists of two scenes or conversations which seem to have +no relation to each other. The first is a conversation between Socrates +and Lysis, who, like Charmides, is an Athenian youth of noble descent +and of great beauty, goodness, and intelligence: this is carried on +in the absence of Menexenus, who is called away to take part in a +sacrifice. Socrates asks Lysis whether his father and mother do not love +him very much? 'To be sure they do.' 'Then of course they allow him +to do exactly as he likes.' 'Of course not: the very slaves have more +liberty than he has.' 'But how is this?' 'The reason is that he is not +old enough.' 'No; the real reason is that he is not wise enough: for +are there not some things which he is allowed to do, although he is not +allowed to do others?' 'Yes, because he knows them, and does not know +the others.' This leads to the conclusion that all men everywhere will +trust him in what he knows, but not in what he does not know; for in +such matters he will be unprofitable to them, and do them no good. And +no one will love him, if he does them no good; and he can only do them +good by knowledge; and as he is still without knowledge, he can have as +yet no conceit of knowledge. In this manner Socrates reads a lesson +to Hippothales, the foolish lover of Lysis, respecting the style of +conversation which he should address to his beloved. + +After the return of Menexenus, Socrates, at the request of Lysis, asks +him a new question: 'What is friendship? You, Menexenus, who have a +friend already, can tell me, who am always longing to find one, what is +the secret of this great blessing.' + +When one man loves another, which is the friend--he who loves, or he who +is loved? Or are both friends? From the first of these suppositions they +are driven to the second; and from the second to the third; and neither +the two boys nor Socrates are satisfied with any of the three or with +all of them. Socrates turns to the poets, who affirm that God brings +like to like (Homer), and to philosophers (Empedocles), who also assert +that like is the friend of like. But the bad are not friends, for they +are not even like themselves, and still less are they like one another. +And the good have no need of one another, and therefore do not care +about one another. Moreover there are others who say that likeness is a +cause of aversion, and unlikeness of love and friendship; and they +too adduce the authority of poets and philosophers in support of their +doctrines; for Hesiod says that 'potter is jealous of potter, bard of +bard;' and subtle doctors tell us that 'moist is the friend of dry, hot +of cold,' and the like. But neither can their doctrine be maintained; +for then the just would be the friend of the unjust, good of evil. + +Thus we arrive at the conclusion that like is not the friend of like, +nor unlike of unlike; and therefore good is not the friend of good, nor +evil of evil, nor good of evil, nor evil of good. What remains but that +the indifferent, which is neither good nor evil, should be the friend +(not of the indifferent, for that would be 'like the friend of like,' +but) of the good, or rather of the beautiful? + +But why should the indifferent have this attachment to the beautiful or +good? There are circumstances under which such an attachment would be +natural. Suppose the indifferent, say the human body, to be desirous of +getting rid of some evil, such as disease, which is not essential but +only accidental to it (for if the evil were essential the body would +cease to be indifferent, and would become evil)--in such a case the +indifferent becomes a friend of the good for the sake of getting rid of +the evil. In this intermediate 'indifferent' position the philosopher or +lover of wisdom stands: he is not wise, and yet not unwise, but he has +ignorance accidentally clinging to him, and he yearns for wisdom as the +cure of the evil. (Symp.) + +After this explanation has been received with triumphant accord, a fresh +dissatisfaction begins to steal over the mind of Socrates: Must not +friendship be for the sake of some ulterior end? and what can that final +cause or end of friendship be, other than the good? But the good is +desired by us only as the cure of evil; and therefore if there were no +evil there would be no friendship. Some other explanation then has to +be devised. May not desire be the source of friendship? And desire is of +what a man wants and of what is congenial to him. But then the congenial +cannot be the same as the like; for like, as has been already shown, +cannot be the friend of like. Nor can the congenial be the good; for +good is not the friend of good, as has been also shown. The problem is +unsolved, and the three friends, Socrates, Lysis, and Menexenus, are +still unable to find out what a friend is. + +Thus, as in the Charmides and Laches, and several of the other Dialogues +of Plato (compare especially the Protagoras and Theaetetus), no +conclusion is arrived at. Socrates maintains his character of a 'know +nothing;' but the boys have already learned the lesson which he is +unable to teach them, and they are free from the conceit of knowledge. +(Compare Chrm.) The dialogue is what would be called in the language +of Thrasyllus tentative or inquisitive. The subject is continued in the +Phaedrus and Symposium, and treated, with a manifest reference to +the Lysis, in the eighth and ninth books of the Nicomachean Ethics of +Aristotle. As in other writings of Plato (for example, the Republic), +there is a progress from unconscious morality, illustrated by the +friendship of the two youths, and also by the sayings of the poets ('who +are our fathers in wisdom,' and yet only tell us half the truth, and +in this particular instance are not much improved upon by the +philosophers), to a more comprehensive notion of friendship. This, +however, is far from being cleared of its perplexity. Two notions appear +to be struggling or balancing in the mind of Socrates:--First, the sense +that friendship arises out of human needs and wants; Secondly, that the +higher form or ideal of friendship exists only for the sake of the good. +That friends are not necessarily either like or unlike, is also a truth +confirmed by experience. But the use of the terms 'like' or 'good' is +too strictly limited; Socrates has allowed himself to be carried away +by a sort of eristic or illogical logic against which no definition +of friendship would be able to stand. In the course of the argument +he makes a distinction between property and accident which is a real +contribution to the science of logic. Some higher truths appear through +the mist. The manner in which the field of argument is widened, as in +the Charmides and Laches by the introduction of the idea of knowledge, +so here by the introduction of the good, is deserving of attention. The +sense of the inter-dependence of good and evil, and the allusion to the +possibility of the non-existence of evil, are also very remarkable. + +The dialectical interest is fully sustained by the dramatic +accompaniments. Observe, first, the scene, which is a Greek Palaestra, +at a time when a sacrifice is going on, and the Hermaea are in course of +celebration; secondly, the 'accustomed irony' of Socrates, who declares, +as in the Symposium, that he is ignorant of all other things, but claims +to have a knowledge of the mysteries of love. There are likewise several +contrasts of character; first of the dry, caustic Ctesippus, of whom +Socrates professes a humorous sort of fear, and Hippothales the flighty +lover, who murders sleep by bawling out the name of his beloved; there +is also a contrast between the false, exaggerated, sentimental love of +Hippothales towards Lysis, and the childlike and innocent friendship +of the boys with one another. Some difference appears to be intended +between the characters of the more talkative Menexenus and the reserved +and simple Lysis. Socrates draws out the latter by a new sort of irony, +which is sometimes adopted in talking to children, and consists in +asking a leading question which can only be answered in a sense contrary +to the intention of the question: 'Your father and mother of course +allow you to drive the chariot?' 'No they do not.' When Menexenus +returns, the serious dialectic begins. He is described as 'very +pugnacious,' and we are thus prepared for the part which a mere youth +takes in a difficult argument. But Plato has not forgotten dramatic +propriety, and Socrates proposes at last to refer the question to some +older person. + + +SOME QUESTIONS RELATING TO FRIENDSHIP. + +The subject of friendship has a lower place in the modern than in the +ancient world, partly because a higher place is assigned by us to love +and marriage. The very meaning of the word has become slighter and more +superficial; it seems almost to be borrowed from the ancients, and has +nearly disappeared in modern treatises on Moral Philosophy. The received +examples of friendship are to be found chiefly among the Greeks and +Romans. Hence the casuistical or other questions which arise out of the +relations of friends have not often been considered seriously in modern +times. Many of them will be found to be the same which are discussed +in the Lysis. We may ask with Socrates, 1) whether friendship is 'of +similars or dissimilars,' or of both; 2) whether such a tie exists +between the good only and for the sake of the good; or 3) whether there +may not be some peculiar attraction, which draws together 'the neither +good nor evil' for the sake of the good and because of the evil; 4) +whether friendship is always mutual,--may there not be a one-sided and +unrequited friendship? This question, which, like many others, is only +one of a laxer or stricter use of words, seems to have greatly exercised +the minds both of Aristotle and Plato. + +5) Can we expect friendship to be permanent, or must we acknowledge +with Cicero, 'Nihil difficilius quam amicitiam usque ad extremum vitae +permanere'? Is not friendship, even more than love, liable to be swayed +by the caprices of fancy? The person who pleased us most at first sight +or upon a slight acquaintance, when we have seen him again, and under +different circumstances, may make a much less favourable impression +on our minds. Young people swear 'eternal friendships,' but at these +innocent perjuries their elders laugh. No one forms a friendship with +the intention of renouncing it; yet in the course of a varied life it +is practically certain that many changes will occur of feeling, opinion, +locality, occupation, fortune, which will divide us from some persons +and unite us to others. 6) There is an ancient saying, Qui amicos amicum +non habet. But is not some less exclusive form of friendship better +suited to the condition and nature of man? And in those especially who +have no family ties, may not the feeling pass beyond one or a few, +and embrace all with whom we come into contact, and, perhaps in a few +passionate and exalted natures, all men everywhere? 7) The ancients +had their three kinds of friendship, 'for the sake of the pleasant, the +useful, and the good:' is the last to be resolved into the two first; or +are the two first to be included in the last? The subject was puzzling +to them: they could not say that friendship was only a quality, or a +relation, or a virtue, or a kind of virtue; and they had not in the age +of Plato reached the point of regarding it, like justice, as a form or +attribute of virtue. They had another perplexity: 8) How could one +of the noblest feelings of human nature be so near to one of the most +detestable corruptions of it? (Compare Symposium; Laws). + +Leaving the Greek or ancient point of view, we may regard the question +in a more general way. Friendship is the union of two persons in mutual +affection and remembrance of one another. The friend can do for his +friend what he cannot do for himself. He can give him counsel in time of +difficulty; he can teach him 'to see himself as others see him'; he can +stand by him, when all the world are against him; he can gladden and +enlighten him by his presence; he 'can divide his sorrows,' he can +'double his joys;' he can anticipate his wants. He will discover ways +of helping him without creating a sense of his own superiority; he will +find out his mental trials, but only that he may minister to them. Among +true friends jealousy has no place: they do not complain of one another +for making new friends, or for not revealing some secret of their lives; +(in friendship too there must be reserves;) they do not intrude upon one +another, and they mutually rejoice in any good which happens to either +of them, though it may be to the loss of the other. They may live apart +and have little intercourse, but when they meet, the old tie is as +strong as ever--according to the common saying, they find one +another always the same. The greatest good of friendship is not daily +intercourse, for circumstances rarely admit of this; but on the great +occasions of life, when the advice of a friend is needed, then the word +spoken in season about conduct, about health, about marriage, about +business,--the letter written from a distance by a disinterested person +who sees with clearer eyes may be of inestimable value. When the heart +is failing and despair is setting in, then to hear the voice or grasp +the hand of a friend, in a shipwreck, in a defeat, in some other failure +or misfortune, may restore the necessary courage and composure to the +paralysed and disordered mind, and convert the feeble person into a +hero; (compare Symposium). + +It is true that friendships are apt to be disappointing: either we +expect too much from them; or we are indolent and do not 'keep them in +repair;' or being admitted to intimacy with another, we see his faults +too clearly and lose our respect for him; and he loses his affection for +us. Friendships may be too violent; and they may be too sensitive. The +egotism of one of the parties may be too much for the other. The word of +counsel or sympathy has been uttered too obtrusively, at the wrong time, +or in the wrong manner; or the need of it has not been perceived until +too late. 'Oh if he had only told me' has been the silent thought of +many a troubled soul. And some things have to be indicated rather than +spoken, because the very mention of them tends to disturb the equability +of friendship. The alienation of friends, like many other human evils, +is commonly due to a want of tact and insight. There is not enough +of the Scimus et hanc veniam petimusque damusque vicissim. The sweet +draught of sympathy is not inexhaustible; and it tends to weaken the +person who too freely partakes of it. Thus we see that there are many +causes which impair the happiness of friends. + +We may expect a friendship almost divine, such as philosophers +have sometimes dreamed of: we find what is human. The good of it is +necessarily limited; it does not take the place of marriage; it affords +rather a solace than an arm of support. It had better not be based on +pecuniary obligations; these more often mar than make a friendship. +It is most likely to be permanent when the two friends are equal and +independent, or when they are engaged together in some common work or +have some public interest in common. It exists among the bad or inferior +sort of men almost as much as among the good; the bad and good, and +'the neither bad nor good,' are drawn together in a strange manner by +personal attachment. The essence of it is loyalty, without which it +would cease to be friendship. + +Another question 9) may be raised, whether friendship can safely exist +between young persons of different sexes, not connected by ties of +relationship, and without the thought of love or marriage; whether, +again, a wife or a husband should have any intimate friend, besides his +or her partner in marriage. The answer to this latter question is rather +perplexing, and would probably be different in different countries +(compare Sympos.). While we do not deny that great good may result +from such attachments, for the mind may be drawn out and the character +enlarged by them; yet we feel also that they are attended with many +dangers, and that this Romance of Heavenly Love requires a strength, a +freedom from passion, a self-control, which, in youth especially, are +rarely to be found. The propriety of such friendships must be estimated +a good deal by the manner in which public opinion regards them; they +must be reconciled with the ordinary duties of life; and they must be +justified by the result. + +Yet another question, 10). Admitting that friendships cannot be always +permanent, we may ask when and upon what conditions should they be +dissolved. It would be futile to retain the name when the reality has +ceased to be. That two friends should part company whenever the relation +between them begins to drag may be better for both of them. But then +arises the consideration, how should these friends in youth or friends +of the past regard or be regarded by one another? They are parted, but +there still remain duties mutually owing by them. They will not +admit the world to share in their difference any more than in their +friendship; the memory of an old attachment, like the memory of the +dead, has a kind of sacredness for them on which they will not allow +others to intrude. Neither, if they were ever worthy to bear the name +of friends, will either of them entertain any enmity or dislike of the +other who was once so much to him. Neither will he by 'shadowed hint +reveal' the secrets great or small which an unfortunate mistake has +placed within his reach. He who is of a noble mind will dwell upon his +own faults rather than those of another, and will be ready to take upon +himself the blame of their separation. He will feel pain at the loss of +a friend; and he will remember with gratitude his ancient kindness. +But he will not lightly renew a tie which has not been lightly +broken...These are a few of the Problems of Friendship, some of them +suggested by the Lysis, others by modern life, which he who wishes to +make or keep a friend may profitably study. (Compare Bacon, Essay on +Friendship; Cic. de Amicitia.) + + + + +LYSIS, OR FRIENDSHIP + + + + +PERSONS OF THE DIALOGUE: + +Socrates, who is the narrator, Menexenus, Hippothales, Lysis, Ctesippus. + +SCENE: A newly-erected Palaestra outside the walls of Athens. + + +I was going from the Academy straight to the Lyceum, intending to +take the outer road, which is close under the wall. When I came to the +postern gate of the city, which is by the fountain of Panops, I fell in +with Hippothales, the son of Hieronymus, and Ctesippus the Paeanian, and +a company of young men who were standing with them. Hippothales, seeing +me approach, asked whence I came and whither I was going. + +I am going, I replied, from the Academy straight to the Lyceum. + +Then come straight to us, he said, and put in here; you may as well. + +Who are you, I said; and where am I to come? + +He showed me an enclosed space and an open door over against the wall. +And there, he said, is the building at which we all meet: and a goodly +company we are. + +And what is this building, I asked; and what sort of entertainment have +you? + +The building, he replied, is a newly erected Palaestra; and the +entertainment is generally conversation, to which you are welcome. + +Thank you, I said; and is there any teacher there? + +Yes, he said, your old friend and admirer, Miccus. + +Indeed, I replied; he is a very eminent professor. + +Are you disposed, he said, to go with me and see them? + +Yes, I said; but I should like to know first, what is expected of me, +and who is the favourite among you? + +Some persons have one favourite, Socrates, and some another, he said. + +And who is yours? I asked: tell me that, Hippothales. + +At this he blushed; and I said to him, O Hippothales, thou son of +Hieronymus! do not say that you are, or that you are not, in love; the +confession is too late; for I see that you are not only in love, but are +already far gone in your love. Simple and foolish as I am, the Gods have +given me the power of understanding affections of this kind. + +Whereupon he blushed more and more. + +Ctesippus said: I like to see you blushing, Hippothales, and hesitating +to tell Socrates the name; when, if he were with you but for a very +short time, you would have plagued him to death by talking about nothing +else. Indeed, Socrates, he has literally deafened us, and stopped our +ears with the praises of Lysis; and if he is a little intoxicated, there +is every likelihood that we may have our sleep murdered with a cry of +Lysis. His performances in prose are bad enough, but nothing at all in +comparison with his verse; and when he drenches us with his poems and +other compositions, it is really too bad; and worse still is his manner +of singing them to his love; he has a voice which is truly appalling, +and we cannot help hearing him: and now having a question put to him by +you, behold he is blushing. + +Who is Lysis? I said: I suppose that he must be young; for the name does +not recall any one to me. + +Why, he said, his father being a very well-known man, he retains his +patronymic, and is not as yet commonly called by his own name; but, +although you do not know his name, I am sure that you must know his +face, for that is quite enough to distinguish him. + +But tell me whose son he is, I said. + +He is the eldest son of Democrates, of the deme of Aexone. + +Ah, Hippothales, I said; what a noble and really perfect love you have +found! I wish that you would favour me with the exhibition which you +have been making to the rest of the company, and then I shall be able to +judge whether you know what a lover ought to say about his love, either +to the youth himself, or to others. + +Nay, Socrates, he said; you surely do not attach any importance to what +he is saying. + +Do you mean, I said, that you disown the love of the person whom he says +that you love? + +No; but I deny that I make verses or address compositions to him. + +He is not in his right mind, said Ctesippus; he is talking nonsense, and +is stark mad. + +O Hippothales, I said, if you have ever made any verses or songs in +honour of your favourite, I do not want to hear them; but I want to +know the purport of them, that I may be able to judge of your mode of +approaching your fair one. + +Ctesippus will be able to tell you, he said; for if, as he avers, the +sound of my words is always dinning in his ears, he must have a very +accurate knowledge and recollection of them. + +Yes, indeed, said Ctesippus; I know only too well; and very ridiculous +the tale is: for although he is a lover, and very devotedly in love, he +has nothing particular to talk about to his beloved which a child might +not say. Now is not that ridiculous? He can only speak of the wealth of +Democrates, which the whole city celebrates, and grandfather Lysis, and +the other ancestors of the youth, and their stud of horses, and their +victory at the Pythian games, and at the Isthmus, and at Nemea with +four horses and single horses--these are the tales which he composes +and repeats. And there is greater twaddle still. Only the day before +yesterday he made a poem in which he described the entertainment of +Heracles, who was a connexion of the family, setting forth how in virtue +of this relationship he was hospitably received by an ancestor of +Lysis; this ancestor was himself begotten of Zeus by the daughter of the +founder of the deme. And these are the sort of old wives' tales which he +sings and recites to us, and we are obliged to listen to him. + +When I heard this, I said: O ridiculous Hippothales! how can you be +making and singing hymns in honour of yourself before you have won? + +But my songs and verses, he said, are not in honour of myself, Socrates. + +You think not? I said. + +Nay, but what do you think? he replied. + +Most assuredly, I said, those songs are all in your own honour; for if +you win your beautiful love, your discourses and songs will be a glory +to you, and may be truly regarded as hymns of praise composed in honour +of you who have conquered and won such a love; but if he slips away from +you, the more you have praised him, the more ridiculous you will look at +having lost this fairest and best of blessings; and therefore the wise +lover does not praise his beloved until he has won him, because he is +afraid of accidents. There is also another danger; the fair, when any +one praises or magnifies them, are filled with the spirit of pride and +vain-glory. Do you not agree with me? + +Yes, he said. + +And the more vain-glorious they are, the more difficult is the capture +of them? + +I believe you. + +What should you say of a hunter who frightened away his prey, and made +the capture of the animals which he is hunting more difficult? + +He would be a bad hunter, undoubtedly. + +Yes; and if, instead of soothing them, he were to infuriate them with +words and songs, that would show a great want of wit: do you not agree. + +Yes. + +And now reflect, Hippothales, and see whether you are not guilty of all +these errors in writing poetry. For I can hardly suppose that you will +affirm a man to be a good poet who injures himself by his poetry. + +Assuredly not, he said; such a poet would be a fool. And this is the +reason why I take you into my counsels, Socrates, and I shall be glad of +any further advice which you may have to offer. Will you tell me by what +words or actions I may become endeared to my love? + +That is not easy to determine, I said; but if you will bring your love +to me, and will let me talk with him, I may perhaps be able to show you +how to converse with him, instead of singing and reciting in the fashion +of which you are accused. + +There will be no difficulty in bringing him, he replied; if you will +only go with Ctesippus into the Palaestra, and sit down and talk, +I believe that he will come of his own accord; for he is fond of +listening, Socrates. And as this is the festival of the Hermaea, the +young men and boys are all together, and there is no separation between +them. He will be sure to come: but if he does not, Ctesippus with whom +he is familiar, and whose relation Menexenus is his great friend, shall +call him. + +That will be the way, I said. Thereupon I led Ctesippus into the +Palaestra, and the rest followed. + +Upon entering we found that the boys had just been sacrificing; and this +part of the festival was nearly at an end. They were all in their white +array, and games at dice were going on among them. Most of them were +in the outer court amusing themselves; but some were in a corner of the +Apodyterium playing at odd and even with a number of dice, which +they took out of little wicker baskets. There was also a circle of +lookers-on; among them was Lysis. He was standing with the other boys +and youths, having a crown upon his head, like a fair vision, and not +less worthy of praise for his goodness than for his beauty. We left +them, and went over to the opposite side of the room, where, finding +a quiet place, we sat down; and then we began to talk. This attracted +Lysis, who was constantly turning round to look at us--he was evidently +wanting to come to us. For a time he hesitated and had not the courage +to come alone; but first of all, his friend Menexenus, leaving his play, +entered the Palaestra from the court, and when he saw Ctesippus and +myself, was going to take a seat by us; and then Lysis, seeing him, +followed, and sat down by his side; and the other boys joined. I should +observe that Hippothales, when he saw the crowd, got behind them, where +he thought that he would be out of sight of Lysis, lest he should anger +him; and there he stood and listened. + +I turned to Menexenus, and said: Son of Demophon, which of you two +youths is the elder? + +That is a matter of dispute between us, he said. + +And which is the nobler? Is that also a matter of dispute? + +Yes, certainly. + +And another disputed point is, which is the fairer? + +The two boys laughed. + +I shall not ask which is the richer of the two, I said; for you are +friends, are you not? + +Certainly, they replied. + +And friends have all things in common, so that one of you can be no +richer than the other, if you say truly that you are friends. + +They assented. I was about to ask which was the juster of the two, and +which was the wiser of the two; but at this moment Menexenus was called +away by some one who came and said that the gymnastic-master wanted him. +I supposed that he had to offer sacrifice. So he went away, and I asked +Lysis some more questions. I dare say, Lysis, I said, that your father +and mother love you very much. + +Certainly, he said. + +And they would wish you to be perfectly happy. + +Yes. + +But do you think that any one is happy who is in the condition of a +slave, and who cannot do what he likes? + +I should think not indeed, he said. + +And if your father and mother love you, and desire that you should +be happy, no one can doubt that they are very ready to promote your +happiness. + +Certainly, he replied. + +And do they then permit you to do what you like, and never rebuke you or +hinder you from doing what you desire? + +Yes, indeed, Socrates; there are a great many things which they hinder +me from doing. + +What do you mean? I said. Do they want you to be happy, and yet hinder +you from doing what you like? for example, if you want to mount one +of your father's chariots, and take the reins at a race, they will not +allow you to do so--they will prevent you? + +Certainly, he said, they will not allow me to do so. + +Whom then will they allow? + +There is a charioteer, whom my father pays for driving. + +And do they trust a hireling more than you? and may he do what he likes +with the horses? and do they pay him for this? + +They do. + +But I dare say that you may take the whip and guide the mule-cart if you +like;--they will permit that? + +Permit me! indeed they will not. + +Then, I said, may no one use the whip to the mules? + +Yes, he said, the muleteer. + +And is he a slave or a free man? + +A slave, he said. + +And do they esteem a slave of more value than you who are their son? And +do they entrust their property to him rather than to you? and allow him +to do what he likes, when they prohibit you? Answer me now: Are you your +own master, or do they not even allow that? + +Nay, he said; of course they do not allow it. + +Then you have a master? + +Yes, my tutor; there he is. + +And is he a slave? + +To be sure; he is our slave, he replied. + +Surely, I said, this is a strange thing, that a free man should be +governed by a slave. And what does he do with you? + +He takes me to my teachers. + +You do not mean to say that your teachers also rule over you? + +Of course they do. + +Then I must say that your father is pleased to inflict many lords and +masters on you. But at any rate when you go home to your mother, +she will let you have your own way, and will not interfere with your +happiness; her wool, or the piece of cloth which she is weaving, are +at your disposal: I am sure that there is nothing to hinder you from +touching her wooden spathe, or her comb, or any other of her spinning +implements. + +Nay, Socrates, he replied, laughing; not only does she hinder me, but I +should be beaten if I were to touch one of them. + +Well, I said, this is amazing. And did you ever behave ill to your +father or your mother? + +No, indeed, he replied. + +But why then are they so terribly anxious to prevent you from being +happy, and doing as you like?--keeping you all day long in subjection +to another, and, in a word, doing nothing which you desire; so that you +have no good, as would appear, out of their great possessions, which are +under the control of anybody rather than of you, and have no use of your +own fair person, which is tended and taken care of by another; while +you, Lysis, are master of nobody, and can do nothing? + +Why, he said, Socrates, the reason is that I am not of age. + +I doubt whether that is the real reason, I said; for I should imagine +that your father Democrates, and your mother, do permit you to do many +things already, and do not wait until you are of age: for example, if +they want anything read or written, you, I presume, would be the first +person in the house who is summoned by them. + +Very true. + +And you would be allowed to write or read the letters in any order which +you please, or to take up the lyre and tune the notes, and play with the +fingers, or strike with the plectrum, exactly as you please, and neither +father nor mother would interfere with you. + +That is true, he said. + +Then what can be the reason, Lysis, I said, why they allow you to do the +one and not the other? + +I suppose, he said, because I understand the one, and not the other. + +Yes, my dear youth, I said, the reason is not any deficiency of years, +but a deficiency of knowledge; and whenever your father thinks that +you are wiser than he is, he will instantly commit himself and his +possessions to you. + +I think so. + +Aye, I said; and about your neighbour, too, does not the same rule +hold as about your father? If he is satisfied that you know more of +housekeeping than he does, will he continue to administer his affairs +himself, or will he commit them to you? + +I think that he will commit them to me. + +Will not the Athenian people, too, entrust their affairs to you when +they see that you have wisdom enough to manage them? + +Yes. + +And oh! let me put another case, I said: There is the great king, and he +has an eldest son, who is the Prince of Asia;--suppose that you and I go +to him and establish to his satisfaction that we are better cooks than +his son, will he not entrust to us the prerogative of making soup, and +putting in anything that we like while the pot is boiling, rather than +to the Prince of Asia, who is his son? + +To us, clearly. + +And we shall be allowed to throw in salt by handfuls, whereas the son +will not be allowed to put in as much as he can take up between his +fingers? + +Of course. + +Or suppose again that the son has bad eyes, will he allow him, or will +he not allow him, to touch his own eyes if he thinks that he has no +knowledge of medicine? + +He will not allow him. + +Whereas, if he supposes us to have a knowledge of medicine, he will +allow us to do what we like with him--even to open the eyes wide and +sprinkle ashes upon them, because he supposes that we know what is best? + +That is true. + +And everything in which we appear to him to be wiser than himself or his +son he will commit to us? + +That is very true, Socrates, he replied. + +Then now, my dear Lysis, I said, you perceive that in things which +we know every one will trust us,--Hellenes and barbarians, men and +women,--and we may do as we please about them, and no one will like to +interfere with us; we shall be free, and masters of others; and these +things will be really ours, for we shall be benefited by them. But in +things of which we have no understanding, no one will trust us to do as +seems good to us--they will hinder us as far as they can; and not only +strangers, but father and mother, and the friend, if there be one, who +is dearer still, will also hinder us; and we shall be subject to others; +and these things will not be ours, for we shall not be benefited by +them. Do you agree? + +He assented. + +And shall we be friends to others, and will any others love us, in as +far as we are useless to them? + +Certainly not. + +Neither can your father or mother love you, nor can anybody love anybody +else, in so far as they are useless to them? + +No. + +And therefore, my boy, if you are wise, all men will be your friends +and kindred, for you will be useful and good; but if you are not wise, +neither father, nor mother, nor kindred, nor any one else, will be your +friends. And in matters of which you have as yet no knowledge, can you +have any conceit of knowledge? + +That is impossible, he replied. + +And you, Lysis, if you require a teacher, have not yet attained to +wisdom. + +True. + +And therefore you are not conceited, having nothing of which to be +conceited. + +Indeed, Socrates, I think not. + +When I heard him say this, I turned to Hippothales, and was very nearly +making a blunder, for I was going to say to him: That is the way, +Hippothales, in which you should talk to your beloved, humbling and +lowering him, and not as you do, puffing him up and spoiling him. But I +saw that he was in great excitement and confusion at what had been said, +and I remembered that, although he was in the neighbourhood, he did not +want to be seen by Lysis; so upon second thoughts I refrained. + +In the meantime Menexenus came back and sat down in his place by Lysis; +and Lysis, in a childish and affectionate manner, whispered privately in +my ear, so that Menexenus should not hear: Do, Socrates, tell Menexenus +what you have been telling me. + +Suppose that you tell him yourself, Lysis, I replied; for I am sure that +you were attending. + +Certainly, he replied. + +Try, then, to remember the words, and be as exact as you can in +repeating them to him, and if you have forgotten anything, ask me again +the next time that you see me. + +I will be sure to do so, Socrates; but go on telling him something new, +and let me hear, as long as I am allowed to stay. + +I certainly cannot refuse, I said, since you ask me; but then, as you +know, Menexenus is very pugnacious, and therefore you must come to the +rescue if he attempts to upset me. + +Yes, indeed, he said; he is very pugnacious, and that is the reason why +I want you to argue with him. + +That I may make a fool of myself? + +No, indeed, he said; but I want you to put him down. + +That is no easy matter, I replied; for he is a terrible fellow--a pupil +of Ctesippus. And there is Ctesippus himself: do you see him? + +Never mind, Socrates, you shall argue with him. + +Well, I suppose that I must, I replied. + +Hereupon Ctesippus complained that we were talking in secret, and +keeping the feast to ourselves. + +I shall be happy, I said, to let you have a share. Here is Lysis, who +does not understand something that I was saying, and wants me to ask +Menexenus, who, as he thinks, is likely to know. + +And why do you not ask him? he said. + +Very well, I said, I will; and do you, Menexenus, answer. But first I +must tell you that I am one who from my childhood upward have set my +heart upon a certain thing. All people have their fancies; some desire +horses, and others dogs; and some are fond of gold, and others of +honour. Now, I have no violent desire of any of these things; but I have +a passion for friends; and I would rather have a good friend than the +best cock or quail in the world: I would even go further, and say the +best horse or dog. Yea, by the dog of Egypt, I should greatly prefer a +real friend to all the gold of Darius, or even to Darius himself: I am +such a lover of friends as that. And when I see you and Lysis, at your +early age, so easily possessed of this treasure, and so soon, he of +you, and you of him, I am amazed and delighted, seeing that I myself, +although I am now advanced in years, am so far from having made a +similar acquisition, that I do not even know in what way a friend is +acquired. But I want to ask you a question about this, for you have +experience: tell me then, when one loves another, is the lover or the +beloved the friend; or may either be the friend? + +Either may, I should think, be the friend of either. + +Do you mean, I said, that if only one of them loves the other, they are +mutual friends? + +Yes, he said; that is my meaning. + +But what if the lover is not loved in return? which is a very possible +case. + +Yes. + +Or is, perhaps, even hated? which is a fancy which sometimes is +entertained by lovers respecting their beloved. Nothing can exceed their +love; and yet they imagine either that they are not loved in return, or +that they are hated. Is not that true? + +Yes, he said, quite true. + +In that case, the one loves, and the other is loved? + +Yes. + +Then which is the friend of which? Is the lover the friend of the +beloved, whether he be loved in return, or hated; or is the beloved the +friend; or is there no friendship at all on either side, unless they +both love one another? + +There would seem to be none at all. + +Then this notion is not in accordance with our previous one. We were +saying that both were friends, if one only loved; but now, unless they +both love, neither is a friend. + +That appears to be true. + +Then nothing which does not love in return is beloved by a lover? + +I think not. + +Then they are not lovers of horses, whom the horses do not love in +return; nor lovers of quails, nor of dogs, nor of wine, nor of gymnastic +exercises, who have no return of love; no, nor of wisdom, unless wisdom +loves them in return. Or shall we say that they do love them, although +they are not beloved by them; and that the poet was wrong who sings-- + +'Happy the man to whom his children are dear, and steeds having single +hoofs, and dogs of chase, and the stranger of another land'? + +I do not think that he was wrong. + +You think that he is right? + +Yes. + +Then, Menexenus, the conclusion is, that what is beloved, whether loving +or hating, may be dear to the lover of it: for example, very young +children, too young to love, or even hating their father or mother when +they are punished by them, are never dearer to them than at the time +when they are being hated by them. + +I think that what you say is true. + +And, if so, not the lover, but the beloved, is the friend or dear one? + +Yes. + +And the hated one, and not the hater, is the enemy? + +Clearly. + +Then many men are loved by their enemies, and hated by their friends, +and are the friends of their enemies, and the enemies of their friends. +Yet how absurd, my dear friend, or indeed impossible is this paradox of +a man being an enemy to his friend or a friend to his enemy. + +I quite agree, Socrates, in what you say. + +But if this cannot be, the lover will be the friend of that which is +loved? + +True. + +And the hater will be the enemy of that which is hated? + +Certainly. + +Yet we must acknowledge in this, as in the preceding instance, that a +man may be the friend of one who is not his friend, or who may be his +enemy, when he loves that which does not love him or which even hates +him. And he may be the enemy of one who is not his enemy, and is even +his friend: for example, when he hates that which does not hate him, or +which even loves him. + +That appears to be true. + +But if the lover is not a friend, nor the beloved a friend, nor both +together, what are we to say? Whom are we to call friends to one +another? Do any remain? + +Indeed, Socrates, I cannot find any. + +But, O Menexenus! I said, may we not have been altogether wrong in our +conclusions? + +I am sure that we have been wrong, Socrates, said Lysis. And he blushed +as he spoke, the words seeming to come from his lips involuntarily, +because his whole mind was taken up with the argument; there was no +mistaking his attentive look while he was listening. + +I was pleased at the interest which was shown by Lysis, and I wanted to +give Menexenus a rest, so I turned to him and said, I think, Lysis, that +what you say is true, and that, if we had been right, we should never +have gone so far wrong; let us proceed no further in this direction (for +the road seems to be getting troublesome), but take the other path into +which we turned, and see what the poets have to say; for they are to us +in a manner the fathers and authors of wisdom, and they speak of friends +in no light or trivial manner, but God himself, as they say, makes +them and draws them to one another; and this they express, if I am not +mistaken, in the following words:-- + +'God is ever drawing like towards like, and making them acquainted.' + +I dare say that you have heard those words. + +Yes, he said; I have. + +And have you not also met with the treatises of philosophers who say +that like must love like? they are the people who argue and write about +nature and the universe. + +Very true, he replied. + +And are they right in saying this? + +They may be. + +Perhaps, I said, about half, or possibly, altogether, right, if their +meaning were rightly apprehended by us. For the more a bad man has to do +with a bad man, and the more nearly he is brought into contact with him, +the more he will be likely to hate him, for he injures him; and injurer +and injured cannot be friends. Is not that true? + +Yes, he said. + +Then one half of the saying is untrue, if the wicked are like one +another? + +That is true. + +But the real meaning of the saying, as I imagine, is, that the good are +like one another, and friends to one another; and that the bad, as +is often said of them, are never at unity with one another or with +themselves; for they are passionate and restless, and anything which +is at variance and enmity with itself is not likely to be in union or +harmony with any other thing. Do you not agree? + +Yes, I do. + +Then, my friend, those who say that the like is friendly to the like +mean to intimate, if I rightly apprehend them, that the good only is the +friend of the good, and of him only; but that the evil never attains to +any real friendship, either with good or evil. Do you agree? + +He nodded assent. + +Then now we know how to answer the question 'Who are friends?' for the +argument declares 'That the good are friends.' + +Yes, he said, that is true. + +Yes, I replied; and yet I am not quite satisfied with this answer. By +heaven, and shall I tell you what I suspect? I will. Assuming that like, +inasmuch as he is like, is the friend of like, and useful to him--or +rather let me try another way of putting the matter: Can like do +any good or harm to like which he could not do to himself, or suffer +anything from his like which he would not suffer from himself? And if +neither can be of any use to the other, how can they be loved by one +another? Can they now? + +They cannot. + +And can he who is not loved be a friend? + +Certainly not. + +But say that the like is not the friend of the like in so far as he is +like; still the good may be the friend of the good in so far as he is +good? + +True. + +But then again, will not the good, in so far as he is good, be +sufficient for himself? Certainly he will. And he who is sufficient +wants nothing--that is implied in the word sufficient. + +Of course not. + +And he who wants nothing will desire nothing? + +He will not. + +Neither can he love that which he does not desire? + +He cannot. + +And he who loves not is not a lover or friend? + +Clearly not. + +What place then is there for friendship, if, when absent, good men have +no need of one another (for even when alone they are sufficient for +themselves), and when present have no use of one another? How can such +persons ever be induced to value one another? + +They cannot. + +And friends they cannot be, unless they value one another? + +Very true. + +But see now, Lysis, whether we are not being deceived in all this--are +we not indeed entirely wrong? + +How so? he replied. + +Have I not heard some one say, as I just now recollect, that the like +is the greatest enemy of the like, the good of the good?--Yes, and he +quoted the authority of Hesiod, who says: + +'Potter quarrels with potter, bard with bard, Beggar with beggar;' + +and of all other things he affirmed, in like manner, 'That of necessity +the most like are most full of envy, strife, and hatred of one another, +and the most unlike, of friendship. For the poor man is compelled to be +the friend of the rich, and the weak requires the aid of the strong, +and the sick man of the physician; and every one who is ignorant, has +to love and court him who knows.' And indeed he went on to say in +grandiloquent language, that the idea of friendship existing between +similars is not the truth, but the very reverse of the truth, and that +the most opposed are the most friendly; for that everything desires not +like but that which is most unlike: for example, the dry desires the +moist, the cold the hot, the bitter the sweet, the sharp the blunt, the +void the full, the full the void, and so of all other things; for the +opposite is the food of the opposite, whereas like receives nothing from +like. And I thought that he who said this was a charming man, and that +he spoke well. What do the rest of you say? + +I should say, at first hearing, that he is right, said Menexenus. + +Then we are to say that the greatest friendship is of opposites? + +Exactly. + +Yes, Menexenus; but will not that be a monstrous answer? and will +not the all-wise eristics be down upon us in triumph, and ask, fairly +enough, whether love is not the very opposite of hate; and what answer +shall we make to them--must we not admit that they speak the truth? + +We must. + +They will then proceed to ask whether the enemy is the friend of the +friend, or the friend the friend of the enemy? + +Neither, he replied. + +Well, but is a just man the friend of the unjust, or the temperate of +the intemperate, or the good of the bad? + +I do not see how that is possible. + +And yet, I said, if friendship goes by contraries, the contraries must +be friends. + +They must. + +Then neither like and like nor unlike and unlike are friends. + +I suppose not. + +And yet there is a further consideration: may not all these notions of +friendship be erroneous? but may not that which is neither good nor evil +still in some cases be the friend of the good? + +How do you mean? he said. + +Why really, I said, the truth is that I do not know; but my head +is dizzy with thinking of the argument, and therefore I hazard the +conjecture, that 'the beautiful is the friend,' as the old proverb says. +Beauty is certainly a soft, smooth, slippery thing, and therefore of a +nature which easily slips in and permeates our souls. For I affirm that +the good is the beautiful. You will agree to that? + +Yes. + +This I say from a sort of notion that what is neither good nor evil is +the friend of the beautiful and the good, and I will tell you why I +am inclined to think so: I assume that there are three principles--the +good, the bad, and that which is neither good nor bad. You would +agree--would you not? + +I agree. + +And neither is the good the friend of the good, nor the evil of the +evil, nor the good of the evil;--these alternatives are excluded by the +previous argument; and therefore, if there be such a thing as friendship +or love at all, we must infer that what is neither good nor evil must +be the friend, either of the good, or of that which is neither good nor +evil, for nothing can be the friend of the bad. + +True. + +But neither can like be the friend of like, as we were just now saying. + +True. + +And if so, that which is neither good nor evil can have no friend which +is neither good nor evil. + +Clearly not. + +Then the good alone is the friend of that only which is neither good nor +evil. + +That may be assumed to be certain. + +And does not this seem to put us in the right way? Just remark, that the +body which is in health requires neither medical nor any other aid, +but is well enough; and the healthy man has no love of the physician, +because he is in health. + +He has none. + +But the sick loves him, because he is sick? + +Certainly. + +And sickness is an evil, and the art of medicine a good and useful +thing? + +Yes. + +But the human body, regarded as a body, is neither good nor evil? + +True. + +And the body is compelled by reason of disease to court and make friends +of the art of medicine? + +Yes. + +Then that which is neither good nor evil becomes the friend of good, by +reason of the presence of evil? + +So we may infer. + +And clearly this must have happened before that which was neither good +nor evil had become altogether corrupted with the element of evil--if +itself had become evil it would not still desire and love the good; for, +as we were saying, the evil cannot be the friend of the good. + +Impossible. + +Further, I must observe that some substances are assimilated when others +are present with them; and there are some which are not assimilated: +take, for example, the case of an ointment or colour which is put on +another substance. + +Very good. + +In such a case, is the substance which is anointed the same as the +colour or ointment? + +What do you mean? he said. + +This is what I mean: Suppose that I were to cover your auburn locks with +white lead, would they be really white, or would they only appear to be +white? + +They would only appear to be white, he replied. + +And yet whiteness would be present in them? + +True. + +But that would not make them at all the more white, notwithstanding the +presence of white in them--they would not be white any more than black? + +No. + +But when old age infuses whiteness into them, then they become +assimilated, and are white by the presence of white. + +Certainly. + +Now I want to know whether in all cases a substance is assimilated +by the presence of another substance; or must the presence be after a +peculiar sort? + +The latter, he said. + +Then that which is neither good nor evil may be in the presence of evil, +but not as yet evil, and that has happened before now? + +Yes. + +And when anything is in the presence of evil, not being as yet evil, +the presence of good arouses the desire of good in that thing; but the +presence of evil, which makes a thing evil, takes away the desire and +friendship of the good; for that which was once both good and evil has +now become evil only, and the good was supposed to have no friendship +with the evil? + +None. + +And therefore we say that those who are already wise, whether Gods or +men, are no longer lovers of wisdom; nor can they be lovers of wisdom +who are ignorant to the extent of being evil, for no evil or ignorant +person is a lover of wisdom. There remain those who have the misfortune +to be ignorant, but are not yet hardened in their ignorance, or void of +understanding, and do not as yet fancy that they know what they do +not know: and therefore those who are the lovers of wisdom are as yet +neither good nor bad. But the bad do not love wisdom any more than the +good; for, as we have already seen, neither is unlike the friend of +unlike, nor like of like. You remember that? + +Yes, they both said. + +And so, Lysis and Menexenus, we have discovered the nature of +friendship--there can be no doubt of it: Friendship is the love which +by reason of the presence of evil the neither good nor evil has of the +good, either in the soul, or in the body, or anywhere. + +They both agreed and entirely assented, and for a moment I rejoiced and +was satisfied like a huntsman just holding fast his prey. But then +a most unaccountable suspicion came across me, and I felt that +the conclusion was untrue. I was pained, and said, Alas! Lysis and +Menexenus, I am afraid that we have been grasping at a shadow only. + +Why do you say so? said Menexenus. + +I am afraid, I said, that the argument about friendship is false: +arguments, like men, are often pretenders. + +How do you mean? he asked. + +Well, I said; look at the matter in this way: a friend is the friend of +some one; is he not? + +Certainly he is. + +And has he a motive and object in being a friend, or has he no motive +and object? + +He has a motive and object. + +And is the object which makes him a friend, dear to him, or neither dear +nor hateful to him? + +I do not quite follow you, he said. + +I do not wonder at that, I said. But perhaps, if I put the matter in +another way, you will be able to follow me, and my own meaning will be +clearer to myself. The sick man, as I was just now saying, is the friend +of the physician--is he not? + +Yes. + +And he is the friend of the physician because of disease, and for the +sake of health? + +Yes. + +And disease is an evil? + +Certainly. + +And what of health? I said. Is that good or evil, or neither? + +Good, he replied. + +And we were saying, I believe, that the body being neither good nor +evil, because of disease, that is to say because of evil, is the friend +of medicine, and medicine is a good: and medicine has entered into this +friendship for the sake of health, and health is a good. + +True. + +And is health a friend, or not a friend? + +A friend. + +And disease is an enemy? + +Yes. + +Then that which is neither good nor evil is the friend of the good +because of the evil and hateful, and for the sake of the good and the +friend? + +Clearly. + +Then the friend is a friend for the sake of the friend, and because of +the enemy? + +That is to be inferred. + +Then at this point, my boys, let us take heed, and be on our guard +against deceptions. I will not again repeat that the friend is the +friend of the friend, and the like of the like, which has been declared +by us to be an impossibility; but, in order that this new statement may +not delude us, let us attentively examine another point, which I will +proceed to explain: Medicine, as we were saying, is a friend, or dear to +us for the sake of health? + +Yes. + +And health is also dear? + +Certainly. + +And if dear, then dear for the sake of something? + +Yes. + +And surely this object must also be dear, as is implied in our previous +admissions? + +Yes. + +And that something dear involves something else dear? + +Yes. + +But then, proceeding in this way, shall we not arrive at some first +principle of friendship or dearness which is not capable of being +referred to any other, for the sake of which, as we maintain, all other +things are dear, and, having there arrived, we shall stop? + +True. + +My fear is that all those other things, which, as we say, are dear for +the sake of another, are illusions and deceptions only, but where that +first principle is, there is the true ideal of friendship. Let me put +the matter thus: Suppose the case of a great treasure (this may be a +son, who is more precious to his father than all his other treasures); +would not the father, who values his son above all things, value other +things also for the sake of his son? I mean, for instance, if he knew +that his son had drunk hemlock, and the father thought that wine would +save him, he would value the wine? + +He would. + +And also the vessel which contains the wine? + +Certainly. + +But does he therefore value the three measures of wine, or the earthen +vessel which contains them, equally with his son? Is not this rather +the true state of the case? All his anxiety has regard not to the means +which are provided for the sake of an object, but to the object for the +sake of which they are provided. And although we may often say that gold +and silver are highly valued by us, that is not the truth; for there is +a further object, whatever it may be, which we value most of all, and +for the sake of which gold and all our other possessions are acquired by +us. Am I not right? + +Yes, certainly. + +And may not the same be said of the friend? That which is only dear to +us for the sake of something else is improperly said to be dear, but +the truly dear is that in which all these so-called dear friendships +terminate. + +That, he said, appears to be true. + +And the truly dear or ultimate principle of friendship is not for the +sake of any other or further dear. + +True. + +Then we have done with the notion that friendship has any further +object. May we then infer that the good is the friend? + +I think so. + +And the good is loved for the sake of the evil? Let me put the case in +this way: Suppose that of the three principles, good, evil, and that +which is neither good nor evil, there remained only the good and the +neutral, and that evil went far away, and in no way affected soul or +body, nor ever at all that class of things which, as we say, are neither +good nor evil in themselves;--would the good be of any use, or other +than useless to us? For if there were nothing to hurt us any longer, +we should have no need of anything that would do us good. Then would +be clearly seen that we did but love and desire the good because of the +evil, and as the remedy of the evil, which was the disease; but if there +had been no disease, there would have been no need of a remedy. Is not +this the nature of the good--to be loved by us who are placed between +the two, because of the evil? but there is no use in the good for its +own sake. + +I suppose not. + +Then the final principle of friendship, in which all other friendships +terminated, those, I mean, which are relatively dear and for the sake of +something else, is of another and a different nature from them. For they +are called dear because of another dear or friend. But with the true +friend or dear, the case is quite the reverse; for that is proved to +be dear because of the hated, and if the hated were away it would be no +longer dear. + +Very true, he replied: at any rate not if our present view holds good. + +But, oh! will you tell me, I said, whether if evil were to perish, we +should hunger any more, or thirst any more, or have any similar desire? +Or may we suppose that hunger will remain while men and animals remain, +but not so as to be hurtful? And the same of thirst and the other +desires,--that they will remain, but will not be evil because evil has +perished? Or rather shall I say, that to ask what either will be then or +will not be is ridiculous, for who knows? This we do know, that in our +present condition hunger may injure us, and may also benefit us:--Is not +that true? + +Yes. + +And in like manner thirst or any similar desire may sometimes be a good +and sometimes an evil to us, and sometimes neither one nor the other? + +To be sure. + +But is there any reason why, because evil perishes, that which is not +evil should perish with it? + +None. + +Then, even if evil perishes, the desires which are neither good nor evil +will remain? + +Clearly they will. + +And must not a man love that which he desires and affects? + +He must. + +Then, even if evil perishes, there may still remain some elements of +love or friendship? + +Yes. + +But not if evil is the cause of friendship: for in that case nothing +will be the friend of any other thing after the destruction of evil; for +the effect cannot remain when the cause is destroyed. + +True. + +And have we not admitted already that the friend loves something for a +reason? and at the time of making the admission we were of opinion that +the neither good nor evil loves the good because of the evil? + +Very true. + +But now our view is changed, and we conceive that there must be some +other cause of friendship? + +I suppose so. + +May not the truth be rather, as we were saying just now, that desire is +the cause of friendship; for that which desires is dear to that which +is desired at the time of desiring it? and may not the other theory have +been only a long story about nothing? + +Likely enough. + +But surely, I said, he who desires, desires that of which he is in want? + +Yes. + +And that of which he is in want is dear to him? + +True. + +And he is in want of that of which he is deprived? + +Certainly. + +Then love, and desire, and friendship would appear to be of the natural +or congenial. Such, Lysis and Menexenus, is the inference. + +They assented. + +Then if you are friends, you must have natures which are congenial to +one another? + +Certainly, they both said. + +And I say, my boys, that no one who loves or desires another would ever +have loved or desired or affected him, if he had not been in some way +congenial to him, either in his soul, or in his character, or in his +manners, or in his form. + +Yes, yes, said Menexenus. But Lysis was silent. + +Then, I said, the conclusion is, that what is of a congenial nature must +be loved. + +It follows, he said. + +Then the lover, who is true and no counterfeit, must of necessity be +loved by his love. + +Lysis and Menexenus gave a faint assent to this; and Hippothales changed +into all manner of colours with delight. + +Here, intending to revise the argument, I said: Can we point out any +difference between the congenial and the like? For if that is possible, +then I think, Lysis and Menexenus, there may be some sense in our +argument about friendship. But if the congenial is only the like, how +will you get rid of the other argument, of the uselessness of like to +like in as far as they are like; for to say that what is useless is +dear, would be absurd? Suppose, then, that we agree to distinguish +between the congenial and the like--in the intoxication of argument, +that may perhaps be allowed. + +Very true. + +And shall we further say that the good is congenial, and the evil +uncongenial to every one? Or again that the evil is congenial to the +evil, and the good to the good; and that which is neither good nor evil +to that which is neither good nor evil? + +They agreed to the latter alternative. + +Then, my boys, we have again fallen into the old discarded error; for +the unjust will be the friend of the unjust, and the bad of the bad, as +well as the good of the good. + +That appears to be the result. + +But again, if we say that the congenial is the same as the good, in that +case the good and he only will be the friend of the good. + +True. + +But that too was a position of ours which, as you will remember, has +been already refuted by ourselves. + +We remember. + +Then what is to be done? Or rather is there anything to be done? I can +only, like the wise men who argue in courts, sum up the arguments:--If +neither the beloved, nor the lover, nor the like, nor the unlike, nor +the good, nor the congenial, nor any other of whom we spoke--for there +were such a number of them that I cannot remember all--if none of these +are friends, I know not what remains to be said. + +Here I was going to invite the opinion of some older person, when +suddenly we were interrupted by the tutors of Lysis and Menexenus, who +came upon us like an evil apparition with their brothers, and bade them +go home, as it was getting late. At first, we and the by-standers drove +them off; but afterwards, as they would not mind, and only went on +shouting in their barbarous dialect, and got angry, and kept calling the +boys--they appeared to us to have been drinking rather too much at the +Hermaea, which made them difficult to manage--we fairly gave way and +broke up the company. + +I said, however, a few words to the boys at parting: O Menexenus and +Lysis, how ridiculous that you two boys, and I, an old boy, who would +fain be one of you, should imagine ourselves to be friends--this is what +the by-standers will go away and say--and as yet we have not been able +to discover what is a friend! + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Lysis, by Plato + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LYSIS *** + +***** This file should be named 1579.txt or 1579.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + http://www.gutenberg.org/1/5/7/1579/ + +Produced by Sue Asscher + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +http://gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at +http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at http://pglaf.org + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit http://pglaf.org + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. +To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + http://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. diff --git a/1579.zip b/1579.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..ec3339b --- /dev/null +++ b/1579.zip diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..61c4049 --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #1579 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/1579) diff --git a/old/lysis10.txt b/old/lysis10.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a4fa872 --- /dev/null +++ b/old/lysis10.txt @@ -0,0 +1,1839 @@ +*********The Project Gutenberg Etext of Lysis, by Plato*********
+#4 in our series by Plato
+
+Copyright laws are changing all over the world, be sure to check
+the copyright laws for your country before posting these files!!
+
+Please take a look at the important information in this header.
+We encourage you to keep this file on your own disk, keeping an
+electronic path open for the next readers. Do not remove this.
+
+**Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts**
+
+**Etexts Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971**
+
+*These Etexts Prepared By Hundreds of Volunteers and Donations*
+
+Information on contacting Project Gutenberg to get Etexts, and
+further information is included below. We need your donations.
+
+
+Lysis
+
+by Plato
+
+Translated by Benjamin Jowett
+
+December, 1998 [Etext #1579]
+
+*********The Project Gutenberg Etext of Lysis, by Plato*********
+******This file should be named lysis10.txt or lysis10.zip******
+
+Corrected EDITIONS of our etexts get a new NUMBER, lysis11.txt
+VERSIONS based on separate sources get new LETTER, lysis10a.txt
+
+This etext was prepared by Sue Asscher <asschers@aia.net.au>
+
+Project Gutenberg Etexts are usually created from multiple editions,
+all of which are in the Public Domain in the United States, unless a
+copyright notice is included. Therefore, we do NOT keep these books
+in compliance with any particular paper edition, usually otherwise.
+
+
+We are now trying to release all our books one month in advance
+of the official release dates, for time for better editing.
+
+Please note: neither this list nor its contents are final till
+midnight of the last day of the month of any such announcement.
+The official release date of all Project Gutenberg Etexts is at
+Midnight, Central Time, of the last day of the stated month. A
+preliminary version may often be posted for suggestion, comment
+and editing by those who wish to do so. To be sure you have an
+up to date first edition [xxxxx10x.xxx] please check file sizes
+in the first week of the next month. Since our ftp program has
+a bug in it that scrambles the date [tried to fix and failed] a
+look at the file size will have to do, but we will try to see a
+new copy has at least one byte more or less.
+
+Information about Project Gutenberg (one page)
+
+We produce about two million dollars for each hour we work. The
+fifty hours is one conservative estimate for how long it we take
+to get any etext selected, entered, proofread, edited, copyright
+searched and analyzed, the copyright letters written, etc. This
+projected audience is one hundred million readers. If our value
+per text is nominally estimated at one dollar then we produce $2
+million dollars per hour this year as we release thirty-two text
+files per month, or 384 more Etexts in 1998 for a total of 1500+
+If these reach just 10% of the computerized population, then the
+total should reach over 150 billion Etexts given away.
+
+The Goal of Project Gutenberg is to Give Away One Trillion Etext
+Files by the December 31, 2001. [10,000 x 100,000,000=Trillion]
+This is ten thousand titles each to one hundred million readers,
+which is only 10% of the present number of computer users. 2001
+should have at least twice as many computer users as that, so it
+will require us reaching less than 5% of the users in 2001.
+
+We need your donations more than ever!
+
+All donations should be made to "Project Gutenberg/CMU": and are
+tax deductible to the extent allowable by law. (CMU = Carnegie-
+Mellon University).
+
+For these and other matters, please mail to:
+
+Project Gutenberg
+P. O. Box 2782
+Champaign, IL 61825
+
+When all other email fails try our Executive Director:
+Michael S. Hart <hart@pobox.com>
+
+We would prefer to send you this information by email
+(Internet, Bitnet, Compuserve, ATTMAIL or MCImail).
+
+******
+If you have an FTP program (or emulator), please
+FTP directly to the Project Gutenberg archives:
+[Mac users, do NOT point and click. . .type]
+
+ftp uiarchive.cso.uiuc.edu
+login: anonymous
+password: your@login
+cd etext/etext90 through /etext96
+or cd etext/articles [get suggest gut for more information]
+dir [to see files]
+get or mget [to get files. . .set bin for zip files]
+GET INDEX?00.GUT
+for a list of books
+and
+GET NEW GUT for general information
+and
+MGET GUT* for newsletters.
+
+**Information prepared by the Project Gutenberg legal advisor**
+(Three Pages)
+
+***START**THE SMALL PRINT!**FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN ETEXTS**START***
+Why is this "Small Print!" statement here? You know: lawyers.
+They tell us you might sue us if there is something wrong with
+your copy of this etext, even if you got it for free from
+someone other than us, and even if what's wrong is not our
+fault. So, among other things, this "Small Print!" statement
+disclaims most of our liability to you. It also tells you how
+you can distribute copies of this etext if you want to.
+
+*BEFORE!* YOU USE OR READ THIS ETEXT
+By using or reading any part of this PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
+etext, you indicate that you understand, agree to and accept
+this "Small Print!" statement. If you do not, you can receive
+a refund of the money (if any) you paid for this etext by
+sending a request within 30 days of receiving it to the person
+you got it from. If you received this etext on a physical
+medium (such as a disk), you must return it with your request.
+
+ABOUT PROJECT GUTENBERG-TM ETEXTS
+This PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etext, like most PROJECT GUTENBERG-
+tm etexts, is a "public domain" work distributed by Professor
+Michael S. Hart through the Project Gutenberg Association at
+Carnegie-Mellon University (the "Project"). Among other
+things, this means that no one owns a United States copyright
+on or for this work, so the Project (and you!) can copy and
+distribute it in the United States without permission and
+without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth
+below, apply if you wish to copy and distribute this etext
+under the Project's "PROJECT GUTENBERG" trademark.
+
+To create these etexts, the Project expends considerable
+efforts to identify, transcribe and proofread public domain
+works. Despite these efforts, the Project's etexts and any
+medium they may be on may contain "Defects". Among other
+things, Defects may take the form of incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
+intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged
+disk or other etext medium, a computer virus, or computer
+codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.
+
+LIMITED WARRANTY; DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES
+But for the "Right of Replacement or Refund" described below,
+[1] the Project (and any other party you may receive this
+etext from as a PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm etext) disclaims all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including
+legal fees, and [2] YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE OR
+UNDER STRICT LIABILITY, OR FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY OR CONTRACT,
+INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE
+OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE
+POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
+
+If you discover a Defect in this etext within 90 days of
+receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any)
+you paid for it by sending an explanatory note within that
+time to the person you received it from. If you received it
+on a physical medium, you must return it with your note, and
+such person may choose to alternatively give you a replacement
+copy. If you received it electronically, such person may
+choose to alternatively give you a second opportunity to
+receive it electronically.
+
+THIS ETEXT IS OTHERWISE PROVIDED TO YOU "AS-IS". NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARE MADE TO YOU AS
+TO THE ETEXT OR ANY MEDIUM IT MAY BE ON, INCLUDING BUT NOT
+LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A
+PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
+
+Some states do not allow disclaimers of implied warranties or
+the exclusion or limitation of consequential damages, so the
+above disclaimers and exclusions may not apply to you, and you
+may have other legal rights.
+
+INDEMNITY
+You will indemnify and hold the Project, its directors,
+officers, members and agents harmless from all liability, cost
+and expense, including legal fees, that arise directly or
+indirectly from any of the following that you do or cause:
+[1] distribution of this etext, [2] alteration, modification,
+or addition to the etext, or [3] any Defect.
+
+DISTRIBUTION UNDER "PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm"
+You may distribute copies of this etext electronically, or by
+disk, book or any other medium if you either delete this
+"Small Print!" and all other references to Project Gutenberg,
+or:
+
+[1] Only give exact copies of it. Among other things, this
+ requires that you do not remove, alter or modify the
+ etext or this "small print!" statement. You may however,
+ if you wish, distribute this etext in machine readable
+ binary, compressed, mark-up, or proprietary form,
+ including any form resulting from conversion by word pro-
+ cessing or hypertext software, but only so long as
+ *EITHER*:
+
+ [*] The etext, when displayed, is clearly readable, and
+ does *not* contain characters other than those
+ intended by the author of the work, although tilde
+ (~), asterisk (*) and underline (_) characters may
+ be used to convey punctuation intended by the
+ author, and additional characters may be used to
+ indicate hypertext links; OR
+
+ [*] The etext may be readily converted by the reader at
+ no expense into plain ASCII, EBCDIC or equivalent
+ form by the program that displays the etext (as is
+ the case, for instance, with most word processors);
+ OR
+
+ [*] You provide, or agree to also provide on request at
+ no additional cost, fee or expense, a copy of the
+ etext in its original plain ASCII form (or in EBCDIC
+ or other equivalent proprietary form).
+
+[2] Honor the etext refund and replacement provisions of this
+ "Small Print!" statement.
+
+[3] Pay a trademark license fee to the Project of 20% of the
+ net profits you derive calculated using the method you
+ already use to calculate your applicable taxes. If you
+ don't derive profits, no royalty is due. Royalties are
+ payable to "Project Gutenberg Association/Carnegie-Mellon
+ University" within the 60 days following each
+ date you prepare (or were legally required to prepare)
+ your annual (or equivalent periodic) tax return.
+
+WHAT IF YOU *WANT* TO SEND MONEY EVEN IF YOU DON'T HAVE TO?
+The Project gratefully accepts contributions in money, time,
+scanning machines, OCR software, public domain etexts, royalty
+free copyright licenses, and every other sort of contribution
+you can think of. Money should be paid to "Project Gutenberg
+Association / Carnegie-Mellon University".
+
+*END*THE SMALL PRINT! FOR PUBLIC DOMAIN ETEXTS*Ver.04.29.93*END*
+
+
+
+
+
+This etext was prepared by Sue Asscher <asschers@aia.net.au>
+
+
+
+
+
+LYSIS
+
+by PLATO
+
+
+
+Translated by Benjamin Jowett
+
+
+
+
+INTRODUCTION.
+
+No answer is given in the Lysis to the question, 'What is Friendship?' any
+more than in the Charmides to the question, 'What is Temperance?' There
+are several resemblances in the two Dialogues: the same youthfulness and
+sense of beauty pervades both of them; they are alike rich in the
+description of Greek life. The question is again raised of the relation of
+knowledge to virtue and good, which also recurs in the Laches; and Socrates
+appears again as the elder friend of the two boys, Lysis and Menexenus. In
+the Charmides, as also in the Laches, he is described as middleaged; in the
+Lysis he is advanced in years.
+
+The Dialogue consists of two scenes or conversations which seem to have no
+relation to each other. The first is a conversation between Socrates and
+Lysis, who, like Charmides, is an Athenian youth of noble descent and of
+great beauty, goodness, and intelligence: this is carried on in the
+absence of Menexenus, who is called away to take part in a sacrifice.
+Socrates asks Lysis whether his father and mother do not love him very
+much? 'To be sure they do.' 'Then of course they allow him to do exactly
+as he likes.' 'Of course not: the very slaves have more liberty than he
+has.' 'But how is this?' 'The reason is that he is not old enough.' 'No;
+the real reason is that he is not wise enough: for are there not some
+things which he is allowed to do, although he is not allowed to do others?'
+'Yes, because he knows them, and does not know the others.' This leads to
+the conclusion that all men everywhere will trust him in what he knows, but
+not in what he does not know; for in such matters he will be unprofitable
+to them, and do them no good. And no one will love him, if he does them no
+good; and he can only do them good by knowledge; and as he is still without
+knowledge, he can have as yet no conceit of knowledge. In this manner
+Socrates reads a lesson to Hippothales, the foolish lover of Lysis,
+respecting the style of conversation which he should address to his
+beloved.
+
+After the return of Menexenus, Socrates, at the request of Lysis, asks him
+a new question: 'What is friendship? You, Menexenus, who have a friend
+already, can tell me, who am always longing to find one, what is the secret
+of this great blessing.'
+
+When one man loves another, which is the friend--he who loves, or he who is
+loved? Or are both friends? From the first of these suppositions they are
+driven to the second; and from the second to the third; and neither the two
+boys nor Socrates are satisfied with any of the three or with all of them.
+Socrates turns to the poets, who affirm that God brings like to like
+(Homer), and to philosophers (Empedocles), who also assert that like is the
+friend of like. But the bad are not friends, for they are not even like
+themselves, and still less are they like one another. And the good have no
+need of one another, and therefore do not care about one another. Moreover
+there are others who say that likeness is a cause of aversion, and
+unlikeness of love and friendship; and they too adduce the authority of
+poets and philosophers in support of their doctrines; for Hesiod says that
+'potter is jealous of potter, bard of bard;' and subtle doctors tell us
+that 'moist is the friend of dry, hot of cold,' and the like. But neither
+can their doctrine be maintained; for then the just would be the friend of
+the unjust, good of evil.
+
+Thus we arrive at the conclusion that like is not the friend of like, nor
+unlike of unlike; and therefore good is not the friend of good, nor evil of
+evil, nor good of evil, nor evil of good. What remains but that the
+indifferent, which is neither good nor evil, should be the friend (not of
+the indifferent, for that would be 'like the friend of like,' but) of the
+good, or rather of the beautiful?
+
+But why should the indifferent have this attachment to the beautiful or
+good? There are circumstances under which such an attachment would be
+natural. Suppose the indifferent, say the human body, to be desirous of
+getting rid of some evil, such as disease, which is not essential but only
+accidental to it (for if the evil were essential the body would cease to be
+indifferent, and would become evil)--in such a case the indifferent becomes
+a friend of the good for the sake of getting rid of the evil. In this
+intermediate 'indifferent' position the philosopher or lover of wisdom
+stands: he is not wise, and yet not unwise, but he has ignorance
+accidentally clinging to him, and he yearns for wisdom as the cure of the
+evil. (Symp.)
+
+After this explanation has been received with triumphant accord, a fresh
+dissatisfaction begins to steal over the mind of Socrates: Must not
+friendship be for the sake of some ulterior end? and what can that final
+cause or end of friendship be, other than the good? But the good is
+desired by us only as the cure of evil; and therefore if there were no evil
+there would be no friendship. Some other explanation then has to be
+devised. May not desire be the source of friendship? And desire is of
+what a man wants and of what is congenial to him. But then the congenial
+cannot be the same as the like; for like, as has been already shown, cannot
+be the friend of like. Nor can the congenial be the good; for good is not
+the friend of good, as has been also shown. The problem is unsolved, and
+the three friends, Socrates, Lysis, and Menexenus, are still unable to find
+out what a friend is.
+
+Thus, as in the Charmides and Laches, and several of the other Dialogues of
+Plato (compare especially the Protagoras and Theaetetus), no conclusion is
+arrived at. Socrates maintains his character of a 'know nothing;' but the
+boys have already learned the lesson which he is unable to teach them, and
+they are free from the conceit of knowledge. (Compare Chrm.) The dialogue
+is what would be called in the language of Thrasyllus tentative or
+inquisitive. The subject is continued in the Phaedrus and Symposium, and
+treated, with a manifest reference to the Lysis, in the eighth and ninth
+books of the Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle. As in other writings of
+Plato (for example, the Republic), there is a progress from unconscious
+morality, illustrated by the friendship of the two youths, and also by the
+sayings of the poets ('who are our fathers in wisdom,' and yet only tell us
+half the truth, and in this particular instance are not much improved upon
+by the philosophers), to a more comprehensive notion of friendship. This,
+however, is far from being cleared of its perplexity. Two notions appear
+to be struggling or balancing in the mind of Socrates:--First, the sense
+that friendship arises out of human needs and wants; Secondly, that the
+higher form or ideal of friendship exists only for the sake of the good.
+That friends are not necessarily either like or unlike, is also a truth
+confirmed by experience. But the use of the terms 'like' or 'good' is too
+strictly limited; Socrates has allowed himself to be carried away by a sort
+of eristic or illogical logic against which no definition of friendship
+would be able to stand. In the course of the argument he makes a
+distinction between property and accident which is a real contribution to
+the science of logic. Some higher truths appear through the mist. The
+manner in which the field of argument is widened, as in the Charmides and
+Laches by the introduction of the idea of knowledge, so here by the
+introduction of the good, is deserving of attention. The sense of the
+inter-dependence of good and evil, and the allusion to the possibility of
+the non-existence of evil, are also very remarkable.
+
+The dialectical interest is fully sustained by the dramatic accompaniments.
+Observe, first, the scene, which is a Greek Palaestra, at a time when a
+sacrifice is going on, and the Hermaea are in course of celebration;
+secondly, the 'accustomed irony' of Socrates, who declares, as in the
+Symposium, that he is ignorant of all other things, but claims to have a
+knowledge of the mysteries of love. There are likewise several contrasts
+of character; first of the dry, caustic Ctesippus, of whom Socrates
+professes a humorous sort of fear, and Hippothales the flighty lover, who
+murders sleep by bawling out the name of his beloved; there is also a
+contrast between the false, exaggerated, sentimental love of Hippothales
+towards Lysis, and the childlike and innocent friendship of the boys with
+one another. Some difference appears to be intended between the characters
+of the more talkative Menexenus and the reserved and simple Lysis.
+Socrates draws out the latter by a new sort of irony, which is sometimes
+adopted in talking to children, and consists in asking a leading question
+which can only be answered in a sense contrary to the intention of the
+question: 'Your father and mother of course allow you to drive the
+chariot?' 'No they do not.' When Menexenus returns, the serious dialectic
+begins. He is described as 'very pugnacious,' and we are thus prepared for
+the part which a mere youth takes in a difficult argument. But Plato has
+not forgotten dramatic propriety, and Socrates proposes at last to refer
+the question to some older person.
+
+SOME QUESTIONS RELATING TO FRIENDSHIP.
+
+The subject of friendship has a lower place in the modern than in the
+ancient world, partly because a higher place is assigned by us to love and
+marriage. The very meaning of the word has become slighter and more
+superficial; it seems almost to be borrowed from the ancients, and has
+nearly disappeared in modern treatises on Moral Philosophy. The received
+examples of friendship are to be found chiefly among the Greeks and Romans.
+Hence the casuistical or other questions which arise out of the relations
+of friends have not often been considered seriously in modern times. Many
+of them will be found to be the same which are discussed in the Lysis. We
+may ask with Socrates, 1) whether friendship is 'of similars or
+dissimilars,' or of both; 2) whether such a tie exists between the good
+only and for the sake of the good; or 3) whether there may not be some
+peculiar attraction, which draws together 'the neither good nor evil' for
+the sake of the good and because of the evil; 4) whether friendship is
+always mutual,--may there not be a one-sided and unrequited friendship?
+This question, which, like many others, is only one of a laxer or stricter
+use of words, seems to have greatly exercised the minds both of Aristotle
+and Plato.
+
+5) Can we expect friendship to be permanent, or must we acknowledge with
+Cicero, 'Nihil difficilius quam amicitiam usque ad extremum vitae
+permanere'? Is not friendship, even more than love, liable to be swayed by
+the caprices of fancy? The person who pleased us most at first sight or
+upon a slight acquaintance, when we have seen him again, and under
+different circumstances, may make a much less favourable impression on our
+minds. Young people swear 'eternal friendships,' but at these innocent
+perjuries their elders laugh. No one forms a friendship with the intention
+of renouncing it; yet in the course of a varied life it is practically
+certain that many changes will occur of feeling, opinion, locality,
+occupation, fortune, which will divide us from some persons and unite us to
+others. 6) There is an ancient saying, Qui amicos amicum non habet. But
+is not some less exclusive form of friendship better suited to the
+condition and nature of man? And in those especially who have no family
+ties, may not the feeling pass beyond one or a few, and embrace all with
+whom we come into contact, and, perhaps in a few passionate and exalted
+natures, all men everywhere? 7) The ancients had their three kinds of
+friendship, 'for the sake of the pleasant, the useful, and the good:' is
+the last to be resolved into the two first; or are the two first to be
+included in the last? The subject was puzzling to them: they could not
+say that friendship was only a quality, or a relation, or a virtue, or a
+kind of virtue; and they had not in the age of Plato reached the point of
+regarding it, like justice, as a form or attribute of virtue. They had
+another perplexity: 8) How could one of the noblest feelings of human
+nature be so near to one of the most detestable corruptions of it?
+(Compare Symposium; Laws).
+
+Leaving the Greek or ancient point of view, we may regard the question in a
+more general way. Friendship is the union of two persons in mutual
+affection and remembrance of one another. The friend can do for his friend
+what he cannot do for himself. He can give him counsel in time of
+difficulty; he can teach him 'to see himself as others see him'; he can
+stand by him, when all the world are against him; he can gladden and
+enlighten him by his presence; he 'can divide his sorrows,' he can 'double
+his joys;' he can anticipate his wants. He will discover ways of helping
+him without creating a sense of his own superiority; he will find out his
+mental trials, but only that he may minister to them. Among true friends
+jealousy has no place: they do not complain of one another for making new
+friends, or for not revealing some secret of their lives; (in friendship
+too there must be reserves;) they do not intrude upon one another, and they
+mutually rejoice in any good which happens to either of them, though it may
+be to the loss of the other. They may live apart and have little
+intercourse, but when they meet, the old tie is as strong as ever--
+according to the common saying, they find one another always the same. The
+greatest good of friendship is not daily intercourse, for circumstances
+rarely admit of this; but on the great occasions of life, when the advice
+of a friend is needed, then the word spoken in season about conduct, about
+health, about marriage, about business,--the letter written from a distance
+by a disinterested person who sees with clearer eyes may be of inestimable
+value. When the heart is failing and despair is setting in, then to hear
+the voice or grasp the hand of a friend, in a shipwreck, in a defeat, in
+some other failure or misfortune, may restore the necessary courage and
+composure to the paralysed and disordered mind, and convert the feeble
+person into a hero; (compare Symposium).
+
+It is true that friendships are apt to be disappointing: either we expect
+too much from them; or we are indolent and do not 'keep them in repair;' or
+being admitted to intimacy with another, we see his faults too clearly and
+lose our respect for him; and he loses his affection for us. Friendships
+may be too violent; and they may be too sensitive. The egotism of one of
+the parties may be too much for the other. The word of counsel or sympathy
+has been uttered too obtrusively, at the wrong time, or in the wrong
+manner; or the need of it has not been perceived until too late. 'Oh if he
+had only told me' has been the silent thought of many a troubled soul. And
+some things have to be indicated rather than spoken, because the very
+mention of them tends to disturb the equability of friendship. The
+alienation of friends, like many other human evils, is commonly due to a
+want of tact and insight. There is not enough of the Scimus et hanc veniam
+petimusque damusque vicissim. The sweet draught of sympathy is not
+inexhaustible; and it tends to weaken the person who too freely partakes of
+it. Thus we see that there are many causes which impair the happiness of
+friends.
+
+We may expect a friendship almost divine, such as philosophers have
+sometimes dreamed of: we find what is human. The good of it is
+necessarily limited; it does not take the place of marriage; it affords
+rather a solace than an arm of support. It had better not be based on
+pecuniary obligations; these more often mar than make a friendship. It is
+most likely to be permanent when the two friends are equal and independent,
+or when they are engaged together in some common work or have some public
+interest in common. It exists among the bad or inferior sort of men almost
+as much as among the good; the bad and good, and 'the neither bad nor
+good,' are drawn together in a strange manner by personal attachment. The
+essence of it is loyalty, without which it would cease to be friendship.
+
+Another question 9) may be raised, whether friendship can safely exist
+between young persons of different sexes, not connected by ties of
+relationship, and without the thought of love or marriage; whether, again,
+a wife or a husband should have any intimate friend, besides his or her
+partner in marriage. The answer to this latter question is rather
+perplexing, and would probably be different in different countries (compare
+Sympos.). While we do not deny that great good may result from such
+attachments, for the mind may be drawn out and the character enlarged by
+them; yet we feel also that they are attended with many dangers, and that
+this Romance of Heavenly Love requires a strength, a freedom from passion,
+a self-control, which, in youth especially, are rarely to be found. The
+propriety of such friendships must be estimated a good deal by the manner
+in which public opinion regards them; they must be reconciled with the
+ordinary duties of life; and they must be justified by the result.
+
+Yet another question, 10). Admitting that friendships cannot be always
+permanent, we may ask when and upon what conditions should they be
+dissolved. It would be futile to retain the name when the reality has
+ceased to be. That two friends should part company whenever the relation
+between them begins to drag may be better for both of them. But then
+arises the consideration, how should these friends in youth or friends of
+the past regard or be regarded by one another? They are parted, but there
+still remain duties mutually owing by them. They will not admit the world
+to share in their difference any more than in their friendship; the memory
+of an old attachment, like the memory of the dead, has a kind of sacredness
+for them on which they will not allow others to intrude. Neither, if they
+were ever worthy to bear the name of friends, will either of them entertain
+any enmity or dislike of the other who was once so much to him. Neither
+will he by 'shadowed hint reveal' the secrets great or small which an
+unfortunate mistake has placed within his reach. He who is of a noble mind
+will dwell upon his own faults rather than those of another, and will be
+ready to take upon himself the blame of their separation. He will feel
+pain at the loss of a friend; and he will remember with gratitude his
+ancient kindness. But he will not lightly renew a tie which has not been
+lightly broken...These are a few of the Problems of Friendship, some of
+them suggested by the Lysis, others by modern life, which he who wishes to
+make or keep a friend may profitably study. (Compare Bacon, Essay on
+Friendship; Cic. de Amicitia.)
+
+
+LYSIS, OR FRIENDSHIP
+
+by
+
+Plato
+
+Translated by Benjamin Jowett
+
+
+PERSONS OF THE DIALOGUE: Socrates, who is the narrator, Menexenus,
+Hippothales, Lysis, Ctesippus.
+
+SCENE: A newly-erected Palaestra outside the walls of Athens.
+
+
+I was going from the Academy straight to the Lyceum, intending to take the
+outer road, which is close under the wall. When I came to the postern gate
+of the city, which is by the fountain of Panops, I fell in with
+Hippothales, the son of Hieronymus, and Ctesippus the Paeanian, and a
+company of young men who were standing with them. Hippothales, seeing me
+approach, asked whence I came and whither I was going.
+
+I am going, I replied, from the Academy straight to the Lyceum.
+
+Then come straight to us, he said, and put in here; you may as well.
+
+Who are you, I said; and where am I to come?
+
+He showed me an enclosed space and an open door over against the wall. And
+there, he said, is the building at which we all meet: and a goodly company
+we are.
+
+And what is this building, I asked; and what sort of entertainment have
+you?
+
+The building, he replied, is a newly erected Palaestra; and the
+entertainment is generally conversation, to which you are welcome.
+
+Thank you, I said; and is there any teacher there?
+
+Yes, he said, your old friend and admirer, Miccus.
+
+Indeed, I replied; he is a very eminent professor.
+
+Are you disposed, he said, to go with me and see them?
+
+Yes, I said; but I should like to know first, what is expected of me, and
+who is the favourite among you?
+
+Some persons have one favourite, Socrates, and some another, he said.
+
+And who is yours? I asked: tell me that, Hippothales.
+
+At this he blushed; and I said to him, O Hippothales, thou son of
+Hieronymus! do not say that you are, or that you are not, in love; the
+confession is too late; for I see that you are not only in love, but are
+already far gone in your love. Simple and foolish as I am, the Gods have
+given me the power of understanding affections of this kind.
+
+Whereupon he blushed more and more.
+
+Ctesippus said: I like to see you blushing, Hippothales, and hesitating to
+tell Socrates the name; when, if he were with you but for a very short
+time, you would have plagued him to death by talking about nothing else.
+Indeed, Socrates, he has literally deafened us, and stopped our ears with
+the praises of Lysis; and if he is a little intoxicated, there is every
+likelihood that we may have our sleep murdered with a cry of Lysis. His
+performances in prose are bad enough, but nothing at all in comparison with
+his verse; and when he drenches us with his poems and other compositions,
+it is really too bad; and worse still is his manner of singing them to his
+love; he has a voice which is truly appalling, and we cannot help hearing
+him: and now having a question put to him by you, behold he is blushing.
+
+Who is Lysis? I said: I suppose that he must be young; for the name does
+not recall any one to me.
+
+Why, he said, his father being a very well-known man, he retains his
+patronymic, and is not as yet commonly called by his own name; but,
+although you do not know his name, I am sure that you must know his face,
+for that is quite enough to distinguish him.
+
+But tell me whose son he is, I said.
+
+He is the eldest son of Democrates, of the deme of Aexone.
+
+Ah, Hippothales, I said; what a noble and really perfect love you have
+found! I wish that you would favour me with the exhibition which you have
+been making to the rest of the company, and then I shall be able to judge
+whether you know what a lover ought to say about his love, either to the
+youth himself, or to others.
+
+Nay, Socrates, he said; you surely do not attach any importance to what he
+is saying.
+
+Do you mean, I said, that you disown the love of the person whom he says
+that you love?
+
+No; but I deny that I make verses or address compositions to him.
+
+He is not in his right mind, said Ctesippus; he is talking nonsense, and is
+stark mad.
+
+O Hippothales, I said, if you have ever made any verses or songs in honour
+of your favourite, I do not want to hear them; but I want to know the
+purport of them, that I may be able to judge of your mode of approaching
+your fair one.
+
+Ctesippus will be able to tell you, he said; for if, as he avers, the sound
+of my words is always dinning in his ears, he must have a very accurate
+knowledge and recollection of them.
+
+Yes, indeed, said Ctesippus; I know only too well; and very ridiculous the
+tale is: for although he is a lover, and very devotedly in love, he has
+nothing particular to talk about to his beloved which a child might not
+say. Now is not that ridiculous? He can only speak of the wealth of
+Democrates, which the whole city celebrates, and grandfather Lysis, and the
+other ancestors of the youth, and their stud of horses, and their victory
+at the Pythian games, and at the Isthmus, and at Nemea with four horses and
+single horses--these are the tales which he composes and repeats. And
+there is greater twaddle still. Only the day before yesterday he made a
+poem in which he described the entertainment of Heracles, who was a
+connexion of the family, setting forth how in virtue of this relationship
+he was hospitably received by an ancestor of Lysis; this ancestor was
+himself begotten of Zeus by the daughter of the founder of the deme. And
+these are the sort of old wives' tales which he sings and recites to us,
+and we are obliged to listen to him.
+
+When I heard this, I said: O ridiculous Hippothales! how can you be making
+and singing hymns in honour of yourself before you have won?
+
+But my songs and verses, he said, are not in honour of myself, Socrates.
+
+You think not? I said.
+
+Nay, but what do you think? he replied.
+
+Most assuredly, I said, those songs are all in your own honour; for if you
+win your beautiful love, your discourses and songs will be a glory to you,
+and may be truly regarded as hymns of praise composed in honour of you who
+have conquered and won such a love; but if he slips away from you, the more
+you have praised him, the more ridiculous you will look at having lost this
+fairest and best of blessings; and therefore the wise lover does not praise
+his beloved until he has won him, because he is afraid of accidents. There
+is also another danger; the fair, when any one praises or magnifies them,
+are filled with the spirit of pride and vain-glory. Do you not agree with
+me?
+
+Yes, he said.
+
+And the more vain-glorious they are, the more difficult is the capture of
+them?
+
+I believe you.
+
+What should you say of a hunter who frightened away his prey, and made the
+capture of the animals which he is hunting more difficult?
+
+He would be a bad hunter, undoubtedly.
+
+Yes; and if, instead of soothing them, he were to infuriate them with words
+and songs, that would show a great want of wit: do you not agree.
+
+Yes.
+
+And now reflect, Hippothales, and see whether you are not guilty of all
+these errors in writing poetry. For I can hardly suppose that you will
+affirm a man to be a good poet who injures himself by his poetry.
+
+Assuredly not, he said; such a poet would be a fool. And this is the
+reason why I take you into my counsels, Socrates, and I shall be glad of
+any further advice which you may have to offer. Will you tell me by what
+words or actions I may become endeared to my love?
+
+That is not easy to determine, I said; but if you will bring your love to
+me, and will let me talk with him, I may perhaps be able to show you how to
+converse with him, instead of singing and reciting in the fashion of which
+you are accused.
+
+There will be no difficulty in bringing him, he replied; if you will only
+go with Ctesippus into the Palaestra, and sit down and talk, I believe that
+he will come of his own accord; for he is fond of listening, Socrates. And
+as this is the festival of the Hermaea, the young men and boys are all
+together, and there is no separation between them. He will be sure to
+come: but if he does not, Ctesippus with whom he is familiar, and whose
+relation Menexenus is his great friend, shall call him.
+
+That will be the way, I said. Thereupon I led Ctesippus into the
+Palaestra, and the rest followed.
+
+Upon entering we found that the boys had just been sacrificing; and this
+part of the festival was nearly at an end. They were all in their white
+array, and games at dice were going on among them. Most of them were in
+the outer court amusing themselves; but some were in a corner of the
+Apodyterium playing at odd and even with a number of dice, which they took
+out of little wicker baskets. There was also a circle of lookers-on; among
+them was Lysis. He was standing with the other boys and youths, having a
+crown upon his head, like a fair vision, and not less worthy of praise for
+his goodness than for his beauty. We left them, and went over to the
+opposite side of the room, where, finding a quiet place, we sat down; and
+then we began to talk. This attracted Lysis, who was constantly turning
+round to look at us--he was evidently wanting to come to us. For a time he
+hesitated and had not the courage to come alone; but first of all, his
+friend Menexenus, leaving his play, entered the Palaestra from the court,
+and when he saw Ctesippus and myself, was going to take a seat by us; and
+then Lysis, seeing him, followed, and sat down by his side; and the other
+boys joined. I should observe that Hippothales, when he saw the crowd, got
+behind them, where he thought that he would be out of sight of Lysis, lest
+he should anger him; and there he stood and listened.
+
+I turned to Menexenus, and said: Son of Demophon, which of you two youths
+is the elder?
+
+That is a matter of dispute between us, he said.
+
+And which is the nobler? Is that also a matter of dispute?
+
+Yes, certainly.
+
+And another disputed point is, which is the fairer?
+
+The two boys laughed.
+
+I shall not ask which is the richer of the two, I said; for you are
+friends, are you not?
+
+Certainly, they replied.
+
+And friends have all things in common, so that one of you can be no richer
+than the other, if you say truly that you are friends.
+
+They assented. I was about to ask which was the juster of the two, and
+which was the wiser of the two; but at this moment Menexenus was called
+away by some one who came and said that the gymnastic-master wanted him. I
+supposed that he had to offer sacrifice. So he went away, and I asked
+Lysis some more questions. I dare say, Lysis, I said, that your father and
+mother love you very much.
+
+Certainly, he said.
+
+And they would wish you to be perfectly happy.
+
+Yes.
+
+But do you think that any one is happy who is in the condition of a slave,
+and who cannot do what he likes?
+
+I should think not indeed, he said.
+
+And if your father and mother love you, and desire that you should be
+happy, no one can doubt that they are very ready to promote your happiness.
+
+Certainly, he replied.
+
+And do they then permit you to do what you like, and never rebuke you or
+hinder you from doing what you desire?
+
+Yes, indeed, Socrates; there are a great many things which they hinder me
+from doing.
+
+What do you mean? I said. Do they want you to be happy, and yet hinder you
+from doing what you like? for example, if you want to mount one of your
+father's chariots, and take the reins at a race, they will not allow you to
+do so--they will prevent you?
+
+Certainly, he said, they will not allow me to do so.
+
+Whom then will they allow?
+
+There is a charioteer, whom my father pays for driving.
+
+And do they trust a hireling more than you? and may he do what he likes
+with the horses? and do they pay him for this?
+
+They do.
+
+But I dare say that you may take the whip and guide the mule-cart if you
+like;--they will permit that?
+
+Permit me! indeed they will not.
+
+Then, I said, may no one use the whip to the mules?
+
+Yes, he said, the muleteer.
+
+And is he a slave or a free man?
+
+A slave, he said.
+
+And do they esteem a slave of more value than you who are their son? And
+do they entrust their property to him rather than to you? and allow him to
+do what he likes, when they prohibit you? Answer me now: Are you your own
+master, or do they not even allow that?
+
+Nay, he said; of course they do not allow it.
+
+Then you have a master?
+
+Yes, my tutor; there he is.
+
+And is he a slave?
+
+To be sure; he is our slave, he replied.
+
+Surely, I said, this is a strange thing, that a free man should be governed
+by a slave. And what does he do with you?
+
+He takes me to my teachers.
+
+You do not mean to say that your teachers also rule over you?
+
+Of course they do.
+
+Then I must say that your father is pleased to inflict many lords and
+masters on you. But at any rate when you go home to your mother, she will
+let you have your own way, and will not interfere with your happiness; her
+wool, or the piece of cloth which she is weaving, are at your disposal: I
+am sure that there is nothing to hinder you from touching her wooden
+spathe, or her comb, or any other of her spinning implements.
+
+Nay, Socrates, he replied, laughing; not only does she hinder me, but I
+should be beaten if I were to touch one of them.
+
+Well, I said, this is amazing. And did you ever behave ill to your father
+or your mother?
+
+No, indeed, he replied.
+
+But why then are they so terribly anxious to prevent you from being happy,
+and doing as you like?--keeping you all day long in subjection to another,
+and, in a word, doing nothing which you desire; so that you have no good,
+as would appear, out of their great possessions, which are under the
+control of anybody rather than of you, and have no use of your own fair
+person, which is tended and taken care of by another; while you, Lysis, are
+master of nobody, and can do nothing?
+
+Why, he said, Socrates, the reason is that I am not of age.
+
+I doubt whether that is the real reason, I said; for I should imagine that
+your father Democrates, and your mother, do permit you to do many things
+already, and do not wait until you are of age: for example, if they want
+anything read or written, you, I presume, would be the first person in the
+house who is summoned by them.
+
+Very true.
+
+And you would be allowed to write or read the letters in any order which
+you please, or to take up the lyre and tune the notes, and play with the
+fingers, or strike with the plectrum, exactly as you please, and neither
+father nor mother would interfere with you.
+
+That is true, he said.
+
+Then what can be the reason, Lysis, I said, why they allow you to do the
+one and not the other?
+
+I suppose, he said, because I understand the one, and not the other.
+
+Yes, my dear youth, I said, the reason is not any deficiency of years, but
+a deficiency of knowledge; and whenever your father thinks that you are
+wiser than he is, he will instantly commit himself and his possessions to
+you.
+
+I think so.
+
+Aye, I said; and about your neighbour, too, does not the same rule hold as
+about your father? If he is satisfied that you know more of housekeeping
+than he does, will he continue to administer his affairs himself, or will
+he commit them to you?
+
+I think that he will commit them to me.
+
+Will not the Athenian people, too, entrust their affairs to you when they
+see that you have wisdom enough to manage them?
+
+Yes.
+
+And oh! let me put another case, I said: There is the great king, and he
+has an eldest son, who is the Prince of Asia;--suppose that you and I go to
+him and establish to his satisfaction that we are better cooks than his
+son, will he not entrust to us the prerogative of making soup, and putting
+in anything that we like while the pot is boiling, rather than to the
+Prince of Asia, who is his son?
+
+To us, clearly.
+
+And we shall be allowed to throw in salt by handfuls, whereas the son will
+not be allowed to put in as much as he can take up between his fingers?
+
+Of course.
+
+Or suppose again that the son has bad eyes, will he allow him, or will he
+not allow him, to touch his own eyes if he thinks that he has no knowledge
+of medicine?
+
+He will not allow him.
+
+Whereas, if he supposes us to have a knowledge of medicine, he will allow
+us to do what we like with him--even to open the eyes wide and sprinkle
+ashes upon them, because he supposes that we know what is best?
+
+That is true.
+
+And everything in which we appear to him to be wiser than himself or his
+son he will commit to us?
+
+That is very true, Socrates, he replied.
+
+Then now, my dear Lysis, I said, you perceive that in things which we know
+every one will trust us,--Hellenes and barbarians, men and women,--and we
+may do as we please about them, and no one will like to interfere with us;
+we shall be free, and masters of others; and these things will be really
+ours, for we shall be benefited by them. But in things of which we have no
+understanding, no one will trust us to do as seems good to us--they will
+hinder us as far as they can; and not only strangers, but father and
+mother, and the friend, if there be one, who is dearer still, will also
+hinder us; and we shall be subject to others; and these things will not be
+ours, for we shall not be benefited by them. Do you agree?
+
+He assented.
+
+And shall we be friends to others, and will any others love us, in as far
+as we are useless to them?
+
+Certainly not.
+
+Neither can your father or mother love you, nor can anybody love anybody
+else, in so far as they are useless to them?
+
+No.
+
+And therefore, my boy, if you are wise, all men will be your friends and
+kindred, for you will be useful and good; but if you are not wise, neither
+father, nor mother, nor kindred, nor any one else, will be your friends.
+And in matters of which you have as yet no knowledge, can you have any
+conceit of knowledge?
+
+That is impossible, he replied.
+
+And you, Lysis, if you require a teacher, have not yet attained to wisdom.
+
+True.
+
+And therefore you are not conceited, having nothing of which to be
+conceited.
+
+Indeed, Socrates, I think not.
+
+When I heard him say this, I turned to Hippothales, and was very nearly
+making a blunder, for I was going to say to him: That is the way,
+Hippothales, in which you should talk to your beloved, humbling and
+lowering him, and not as you do, puffing him up and spoiling him. But I
+saw that he was in great excitement and confusion at what had been said,
+and I remembered that, although he was in the neighbourhood, he did not
+want to be seen by Lysis; so upon second thoughts I refrained.
+
+In the meantime Menexenus came back and sat down in his place by Lysis; and
+Lysis, in a childish and affectionate manner, whispered privately in my
+ear, so that Menexenus should not hear: Do, Socrates, tell Menexenus what
+you have been telling me.
+
+Suppose that you tell him yourself, Lysis, I replied; for I am sure that
+you were attending.
+
+Certainly, he replied.
+
+Try, then, to remember the words, and be as exact as you can in repeating
+them to him, and if you have forgotten anything, ask me again the next time
+that you see me.
+
+I will be sure to do so, Socrates; but go on telling him something new, and
+let me hear, as long as I am allowed to stay.
+
+I certainly cannot refuse, I said, since you ask me; but then, as you know,
+Menexenus is very pugnacious, and therefore you must come to the rescue if
+he attempts to upset me.
+
+Yes, indeed, he said; he is very pugnacious, and that is the reason why I
+want you to argue with him.
+
+That I may make a fool of myself?
+
+No, indeed, he said; but I want you to put him down.
+
+That is no easy matter, I replied; for he is a terrible fellow--a pupil of
+Ctesippus. And there is Ctesippus himself: do you see him?
+
+Never mind, Socrates, you shall argue with him.
+
+Well, I suppose that I must, I replied.
+
+Hereupon Ctesippus complained that we were talking in secret, and keeping
+the feast to ourselves.
+
+I shall be happy, I said, to let you have a share. Here is Lysis, who does
+not understand something that I was saying, and wants me to ask Menexenus,
+who, as he thinks, is likely to know.
+
+And why do you not ask him? he said.
+
+Very well, I said, I will; and do you, Menexenus, answer. But first I must
+tell you that I am one who from my childhood upward have set my heart upon
+a certain thing. All people have their fancies; some desire horses, and
+others dogs; and some are fond of gold, and others of honour. Now, I have
+no violent desire of any of these things; but I have a passion for friends;
+and I would rather have a good friend than the best cock or quail in the
+world: I would even go further, and say the best horse or dog. Yea, by
+the dog of Egypt, I should greatly prefer a real friend to all the gold of
+Darius, or even to Darius himself: I am such a lover of friends as that.
+And when I see you and Lysis, at your early age, so easily possessed of
+this treasure, and so soon, he of you, and you of him, I am amazed and
+delighted, seeing that I myself, although I am now advanced in years, am so
+far from having made a similar acquisition, that I do not even know in what
+way a friend is acquired. But I want to ask you a question about this, for
+you have experience: tell me then, when one loves another, is the lover or
+the beloved the friend; or may either be the friend?
+
+Either may, I should think, be the friend of either.
+
+Do you mean, I said, that if only one of them loves the other, they are
+mutual friends?
+
+Yes, he said; that is my meaning.
+
+But what if the lover is not loved in return? which is a very possible
+case.
+
+Yes.
+
+Or is, perhaps, even hated? which is a fancy which sometimes is entertained
+by lovers respecting their beloved. Nothing can exceed their love; and yet
+they imagine either that they are not loved in return, or that they are
+hated. Is not that true?
+
+Yes, he said, quite true.
+
+In that case, the one loves, and the other is loved?
+
+Yes.
+
+Then which is the friend of which? Is the lover the friend of the beloved,
+whether he be loved in return, or hated; or is the beloved the friend; or
+is there no friendship at all on either side, unless they both love one
+another?
+
+There would seem to be none at all.
+
+Then this notion is not in accordance with our previous one. We were
+saying that both were friends, if one only loved; but now, unless they both
+love, neither is a friend.
+
+That appears to be true.
+
+Then nothing which does not love in return is beloved by a lover?
+
+I think not.
+
+Then they are not lovers of horses, whom the horses do not love in return;
+nor lovers of quails, nor of dogs, nor of wine, nor of gymnastic exercises,
+who have no return of love; no, nor of wisdom, unless wisdom loves them in
+return. Or shall we say that they do love them, although they are not
+beloved by them; and that the poet was wrong who sings--
+
+'Happy the man to whom his children are dear, and steeds having single
+hoofs, and dogs of chase, and the stranger of another land'?
+
+I do not think that he was wrong.
+
+You think that he is right?
+
+Yes.
+
+Then, Menexenus, the conclusion is, that what is beloved, whether loving or
+hating, may be dear to the lover of it: for example, very young children,
+too young to love, or even hating their father or mother when they are
+punished by them, are never dearer to them than at the time when they are
+being hated by them.
+
+I think that what you say is true.
+
+And, if so, not the lover, but the beloved, is the friend or dear one?
+
+Yes.
+
+And the hated one, and not the hater, is the enemy?
+
+Clearly.
+
+Then many men are loved by their enemies, and hated by their friends, and
+are the friends of their enemies, and the enemies of their friends. Yet
+how absurd, my dear friend, or indeed impossible is this paradox of a man
+being an enemy to his friend or a friend to his enemy.
+
+I quite agree, Socrates, in what you say.
+
+But if this cannot be, the lover will be the friend of that which is loved?
+
+True.
+
+And the hater will be the enemy of that which is hated?
+
+Certainly.
+
+Yet we must acknowledge in this, as in the preceding instance, that a man
+may be the friend of one who is not his friend, or who may be his enemy,
+when he loves that which does not love him or which even hates him. And he
+may be the enemy of one who is not his enemy, and is even his friend: for
+example, when he hates that which does not hate him, or which even loves
+him.
+
+That appears to be true.
+
+But if the lover is not a friend, nor the beloved a friend, nor both
+together, what are we to say? Whom are we to call friends to one another?
+Do any remain?
+
+Indeed, Socrates, I cannot find any.
+
+But, O Menexenus! I said, may we not have been altogether wrong in our
+conclusions?
+
+I am sure that we have been wrong, Socrates, said Lysis. And he blushed as
+he spoke, the words seeming to come from his lips involuntarily, because
+his whole mind was taken up with the argument; there was no mistaking his
+attentive look while he was listening.
+
+I was pleased at the interest which was shown by Lysis, and I wanted to
+give Menexenus a rest, so I turned to him and said, I think, Lysis, that
+what you say is true, and that, if we had been right, we should never have
+gone so far wrong; let us proceed no further in this direction (for the
+road seems to be getting troublesome), but take the other path into which
+we turned, and see what the poets have to say; for they are to us in a
+manner the fathers and authors of wisdom, and they speak of friends in no
+light or trivial manner, but God himself, as they say, makes them and draws
+them to one another; and this they express, if I am not mistaken, in the
+following words:--
+
+'God is ever drawing like towards like, and making them acquainted.'
+
+I dare say that you have heard those words.
+
+Yes, he said; I have.
+
+And have you not also met with the treatises of philosophers who say that
+like must love like? they are the people who argue and write about nature
+and the universe.
+
+Very true, he replied.
+
+And are they right in saying this?
+
+They may be.
+
+Perhaps, I said, about half, or possibly, altogether, right, if their
+meaning were rightly apprehended by us. For the more a bad man has to do
+with a bad man, and the more nearly he is brought into contact with him,
+the more he will be likely to hate him, for he injures him; and injurer and
+injured cannot be friends. Is not that true?
+
+Yes, he said.
+
+Then one half of the saying is untrue, if the wicked are like one another?
+
+That is true.
+
+But the real meaning of the saying, as I imagine, is, that the good are
+like one another, and friends to one another; and that the bad, as is often
+said of them, are never at unity with one another or with themselves; for
+they are passionate and restless, and anything which is at variance and
+enmity with itself is not likely to be in union or harmony with any other
+thing. Do you not agree?
+
+Yes, I do.
+
+Then, my friend, those who say that the like is friendly to the like mean
+to intimate, if I rightly apprehend them, that the good only is the friend
+of the good, and of him only; but that the evil never attains to any real
+friendship, either with good or evil. Do you agree?
+
+He nodded assent.
+
+Then now we know how to answer the question 'Who are friends?' for the
+argument declares 'That the good are friends.'
+
+Yes, he said, that is true.
+
+Yes, I replied; and yet I am not quite satisfied with this answer. By
+heaven, and shall I tell you what I suspect? I will. Assuming that like,
+inasmuch as he is like, is the friend of like, and useful to him--or rather
+let me try another way of putting the matter: Can like do any good or harm
+to like which he could not do to himself, or suffer anything from his like
+which he would not suffer from himself? And if neither can be of any use
+to the other, how can they be loved by one another? Can they now?
+
+They cannot.
+
+And can he who is not loved be a friend?
+
+Certainly not.
+
+But say that the like is not the friend of the like in so far as he is
+like; still the good may be the friend of the good in so far as he is good?
+
+True.
+
+But then again, will not the good, in so far as he is good, be sufficient
+for himself? Certainly he will. And he who is sufficient wants nothing--
+that is implied in the word sufficient.
+
+Of course not.
+
+And he who wants nothing will desire nothing?
+
+He will not.
+
+Neither can he love that which he does not desire?
+
+He cannot.
+
+And he who loves not is not a lover or friend?
+
+Clearly not.
+
+What place then is there for friendship, if, when absent, good men have no
+need of one another (for even when alone they are sufficient for
+themselves), and when present have no use of one another? How can such
+persons ever be induced to value one another?
+
+They cannot.
+
+And friends they cannot be, unless they value one another?
+
+Very true.
+
+But see now, Lysis, whether we are not being deceived in all this--are we
+not indeed entirely wrong?
+
+How so? he replied.
+
+Have I not heard some one say, as I just now recollect, that the like is
+the greatest enemy of the like, the good of the good?--Yes, and he quoted
+the authority of Hesiod, who says:
+
+'Potter quarrels with potter, bard with bard,
+Beggar with beggar;'
+
+and of all other things he affirmed, in like manner, 'That of necessity the
+most like are most full of envy, strife, and hatred of one another, and the
+most unlike, of friendship. For the poor man is compelled to be the friend
+of the rich, and the weak requires the aid of the strong, and the sick man
+of the physician; and every one who is ignorant, has to love and court him
+who knows.' And indeed he went on to say in grandiloquent language, that
+the idea of friendship existing between similars is not the truth, but the
+very reverse of the truth, and that the most opposed are the most friendly;
+for that everything desires not like but that which is most unlike: for
+example, the dry desires the moist, the cold the hot, the bitter the sweet,
+the sharp the blunt, the void the full, the full the void, and so of all
+other things; for the opposite is the food of the opposite, whereas like
+receives nothing from like. And I thought that he who said this was a
+charming man, and that he spoke well. What do the rest of you say?
+
+I should say, at first hearing, that he is right, said Menexenus.
+
+Then we are to say that the greatest friendship is of opposites?
+
+Exactly.
+
+Yes, Menexenus; but will not that be a monstrous answer? and will not the
+all-wise eristics be down upon us in triumph, and ask, fairly enough,
+whether love is not the very opposite of hate; and what answer shall we
+make to them--must we not admit that they speak the truth?
+
+We must.
+
+They will then proceed to ask whether the enemy is the friend of the
+friend, or the friend the friend of the enemy?
+
+Neither, he replied.
+
+Well, but is a just man the friend of the unjust, or the temperate of the
+intemperate, or the good of the bad?
+
+I do not see how that is possible.
+
+And yet, I said, if friendship goes by contraries, the contraries must be
+friends.
+
+They must.
+
+Then neither like and like nor unlike and unlike are friends.
+
+I suppose not.
+
+And yet there is a further consideration: may not all these notions of
+friendship be erroneous? but may not that which is neither good nor evil
+still in some cases be the friend of the good?
+
+How do you mean? he said.
+
+Why really, I said, the truth is that I do not know; but my head is dizzy
+with thinking of the argument, and therefore I hazard the conjecture, that
+'the beautiful is the friend,' as the old proverb says. Beauty is
+certainly a soft, smooth, slippery thing, and therefore of a nature which
+easily slips in and permeates our souls. For I affirm that the good is the
+beautiful. You will agree to that?
+
+Yes.
+
+This I say from a sort of notion that what is neither good nor evil is the
+friend of the beautiful and the good, and I will tell you why I am inclined
+to think so: I assume that there are three principles--the good, the bad,
+and that which is neither good nor bad. You would agree--would you not?
+
+I agree.
+
+And neither is the good the friend of the good, nor the evil of the evil,
+nor the good of the evil;--these alternatives are excluded by the previous
+argument; and therefore, if there be such a thing as friendship or love at
+all, we must infer that what is neither good nor evil must be the friend,
+either of the good, or of that which is neither good nor evil, for nothing
+can be the friend of the bad.
+
+True.
+
+But neither can like be the friend of like, as we were just now saying.
+
+True.
+
+And if so, that which is neither good nor evil can have no friend which is
+neither good nor evil.
+
+Clearly not.
+
+Then the good alone is the friend of that only which is neither good nor
+evil.
+
+That may be assumed to be certain.
+
+And does not this seem to put us in the right way? Just remark, that the
+body which is in health requires neither medical nor any other aid, but is
+well enough; and the healthy man has no love of the physician, because he
+is in health.
+
+He has none.
+
+But the sick loves him, because he is sick?
+
+Certainly.
+
+And sickness is an evil, and the art of medicine a good and useful thing?
+
+Yes.
+
+But the human body, regarded as a body, is neither good nor evil?
+
+True.
+
+And the body is compelled by reason of disease to court and make friends of
+the art of medicine?
+
+Yes.
+
+Then that which is neither good nor evil becomes the friend of good, by
+reason of the presence of evil?
+
+So we may infer.
+
+And clearly this must have happened before that which was neither good nor
+evil had become altogether corrupted with the element of evil--if itself
+had become evil it would not still desire and love the good; for, as we
+were saying, the evil cannot be the friend of the good.
+
+Impossible.
+
+Further, I must observe that some substances are assimilated when others
+are present with them; and there are some which are not assimilated: take,
+for example, the case of an ointment or colour which is put on another
+substance.
+
+Very good.
+
+In such a case, is the substance which is anointed the same as the colour
+or ointment?
+
+What do you mean? he said.
+
+This is what I mean: Suppose that I were to cover your auburn locks with
+white lead, would they be really white, or would they only appear to be
+white?
+
+They would only appear to be white, he replied.
+
+And yet whiteness would be present in them?
+
+True.
+
+But that would not make them at all the more white, notwithstanding the
+presence of white in them--they would not be white any more than black?
+
+No.
+
+But when old age infuses whiteness into them, then they become assimilated,
+and are white by the presence of white.
+
+Certainly.
+
+Now I want to know whether in all cases a substance is assimilated by the
+presence of another substance; or must the presence be after a peculiar
+sort?
+
+The latter, he said.
+
+Then that which is neither good nor evil may be in the presence of evil,
+but not as yet evil, and that has happened before now?
+
+Yes.
+
+And when anything is in the presence of evil, not being as yet evil, the
+presence of good arouses the desire of good in that thing; but the presence
+of evil, which makes a thing evil, takes away the desire and friendship of
+the good; for that which was once both good and evil has now become evil
+only, and the good was supposed to have no friendship with the evil?
+
+None.
+
+And therefore we say that those who are already wise, whether Gods or men,
+are no longer lovers of wisdom; nor can they be lovers of wisdom who are
+ignorant to the extent of being evil, for no evil or ignorant person is a
+lover of wisdom. There remain those who have the misfortune to be
+ignorant, but are not yet hardened in their ignorance, or void of
+understanding, and do not as yet fancy that they know what they do not
+know: and therefore those who are the lovers of wisdom are as yet neither
+good nor bad. But the bad do not love wisdom any more than the good; for,
+as we have already seen, neither is unlike the friend of unlike, nor like
+of like. You remember that?
+
+Yes, they both said.
+
+And so, Lysis and Menexenus, we have discovered the nature of friendship--
+there can be no doubt of it: Friendship is the love which by reason of the
+presence of evil the neither good nor evil has of the good, either in the
+soul, or in the body, or anywhere.
+
+They both agreed and entirely assented, and for a moment I rejoiced and was
+satisfied like a huntsman just holding fast his prey. But then a most
+unaccountable suspicion came across me, and I felt that the conclusion was
+untrue. I was pained, and said, Alas! Lysis and Menexenus, I am afraid
+that we have been grasping at a shadow only.
+
+Why do you say so? said Menexenus.
+
+I am afraid, I said, that the argument about friendship is false:
+arguments, like men, are often pretenders.
+
+How do you mean? he asked.
+
+Well, I said; look at the matter in this way: a friend is the friend of
+some one; is he not?
+
+Certainly he is.
+
+And has he a motive and object in being a friend, or has he no motive and
+object?
+
+He has a motive and object.
+
+And is the object which makes him a friend, dear to him, or neither dear
+nor hateful to him?
+
+I do not quite follow you, he said.
+
+I do not wonder at that, I said. But perhaps, if I put the matter in
+another way, you will be able to follow me, and my own meaning will be
+clearer to myself. The sick man, as I was just now saying, is the friend
+of the physician--is he not?
+
+Yes.
+
+And he is the friend of the physician because of disease, and for the sake
+of health?
+
+Yes.
+
+And disease is an evil?
+
+Certainly.
+
+And what of health? I said. Is that good or evil, or neither?
+
+Good, he replied.
+
+And we were saying, I believe, that the body being neither good nor evil,
+because of disease, that is to say because of evil, is the friend of
+medicine, and medicine is a good: and medicine has entered into this
+friendship for the sake of health, and health is a good.
+
+True.
+
+And is health a friend, or not a friend?
+
+A friend.
+
+And disease is an enemy?
+
+Yes.
+
+Then that which is neither good nor evil is the friend of the good because
+of the evil and hateful, and for the sake of the good and the friend?
+
+Clearly.
+
+Then the friend is a friend for the sake of the friend, and because of the
+enemy?
+
+That is to be inferred.
+
+Then at this point, my boys, let us take heed, and be on our guard against
+deceptions. I will not again repeat that the friend is the friend of the
+friend, and the like of the like, which has been declared by us to be an
+impossibility; but, in order that this new statement may not delude us, let
+us attentively examine another point, which I will proceed to explain:
+Medicine, as we were saying, is a friend, or dear to us for the sake of
+health?
+
+Yes.
+
+And health is also dear?
+
+Certainly.
+
+And if dear, then dear for the sake of something?
+
+Yes.
+
+And surely this object must also be dear, as is implied in our previous
+admissions?
+
+Yes.
+
+And that something dear involves something else dear?
+
+Yes.
+
+But then, proceeding in this way, shall we not arrive at some first
+principle of friendship or dearness which is not capable of being referred
+to any other, for the sake of which, as we maintain, all other things are
+dear, and, having there arrived, we shall stop?
+
+True.
+
+My fear is that all those other things, which, as we say, are dear for the
+sake of another, are illusions and deceptions only, but where that first
+principle is, there is the true ideal of friendship. Let me put the matter
+thus: Suppose the case of a great treasure (this may be a son, who is more
+precious to his father than all his other treasures); would not the father,
+who values his son above all things, value other things also for the sake
+of his son? I mean, for instance, if he knew that his son had drunk
+hemlock, and the father thought that wine would save him, he would value
+the wine?
+
+He would.
+
+And also the vessel which contains the wine?
+
+Certainly.
+
+But does he therefore value the three measures of wine, or the earthen
+vessel which contains them, equally with his son? Is not this rather the
+true state of the case? All his anxiety has regard not to the means which
+are provided for the sake of an object, but to the object for the sake of
+which they are provided. And although we may often say that gold and
+silver are highly valued by us, that is not the truth; for there is a
+further object, whatever it may be, which we value most of all, and for the
+sake of which gold and all our other possessions are acquired by us. Am I
+not right?
+
+Yes, certainly.
+
+And may not the same be said of the friend? That which is only dear to us
+for the sake of something else is improperly said to be dear, but the truly
+dear is that in which all these so-called dear friendships terminate.
+
+That, he said, appears to be true.
+
+And the truly dear or ultimate principle of friendship is not for the sake
+of any other or further dear.
+
+True.
+
+Then we have done with the notion that friendship has any further object.
+May we then infer that the good is the friend?
+
+I think so.
+
+And the good is loved for the sake of the evil? Let me put the case in
+this way: Suppose that of the three principles, good, evil, and that which
+is neither good nor evil, there remained only the good and the neutral, and
+that evil went far away, and in no way affected soul or body, nor ever at
+all that class of things which, as we say, are neither good nor evil in
+themselves;--would the good be of any use, or other than useless to us?
+For if there were nothing to hurt us any longer, we should have no need of
+anything that would do us good. Then would be clearly seen that we did but
+love and desire the good because of the evil, and as the remedy of the
+evil, which was the disease; but if there had been no disease, there would
+have been no need of a remedy. Is not this the nature of the good--to be
+loved by us who are placed between the two, because of the evil? but there
+is no use in the good for its own sake.
+
+I suppose not.
+
+Then the final principle of friendship, in which all other friendships
+terminated, those, I mean, which are relatively dear and for the sake of
+something else, is of another and a different nature from them. For they
+are called dear because of another dear or friend. But with the true
+friend or dear, the case is quite the reverse; for that is proved to be
+dear because of the hated, and if the hated were away it would be no longer
+dear.
+
+Very true, he replied: at any rate not if our present view holds good.
+
+But, oh! will you tell me, I said, whether if evil were to perish, we
+should hunger any more, or thirst any more, or have any similar desire? Or
+may we suppose that hunger will remain while men and animals remain, but
+not so as to be hurtful? And the same of thirst and the other desires,--
+that they will remain, but will not be evil because evil has perished? Or
+rather shall I say, that to ask what either will be then or will not be is
+ridiculous, for who knows? This we do know, that in our present condition
+hunger may injure us, and may also benefit us:--Is not that true?
+
+Yes.
+
+And in like manner thirst or any similar desire may sometimes be a good and
+sometimes an evil to us, and sometimes neither one nor the other?
+
+To be sure.
+
+But is there any reason why, because evil perishes, that which is not evil
+should perish with it?
+
+None.
+
+Then, even if evil perishes, the desires which are neither good nor evil
+will remain?
+
+Clearly they will.
+
+And must not a man love that which he desires and affects?
+
+He must.
+
+Then, even if evil perishes, there may still remain some elements of love
+or friendship?
+
+Yes.
+
+But not if evil is the cause of friendship: for in that case nothing will
+be the friend of any other thing after the destruction of evil; for the
+effect cannot remain when the cause is destroyed.
+
+True.
+
+And have we not admitted already that the friend loves something for a
+reason? and at the time of making the admission we were of opinion that the
+neither good nor evil loves the good because of the evil?
+
+Very true.
+
+But now our view is changed, and we conceive that there must be some other
+cause of friendship?
+
+I suppose so.
+
+May not the truth be rather, as we were saying just now, that desire is the
+cause of friendship; for that which desires is dear to that which is
+desired at the time of desiring it? and may not the other theory have been
+only a long story about nothing?
+
+Likely enough.
+
+But surely, I said, he who desires, desires that of which he is in want?
+
+Yes.
+
+And that of which he is in want is dear to him?
+
+True.
+
+And he is in want of that of which he is deprived?
+
+Certainly.
+
+Then love, and desire, and friendship would appear to be of the natural or
+congenial. Such, Lysis and Menexenus, is the inference.
+
+They assented.
+
+Then if you are friends, you must have natures which are congenial to one
+another?
+
+Certainly, they both said.
+
+And I say, my boys, that no one who loves or desires another would ever
+have loved or desired or affected him, if he had not been in some way
+congenial to him, either in his soul, or in his character, or in his
+manners, or in his form.
+
+Yes, yes, said Menexenus. But Lysis was silent.
+
+Then, I said, the conclusion is, that what is of a congenial nature must be
+loved.
+
+It follows, he said.
+
+Then the lover, who is true and no counterfeit, must of necessity be loved
+by his love.
+
+Lysis and Menexenus gave a faint assent to this; and Hippothales changed
+into all manner of colours with delight.
+
+Here, intending to revise the argument, I said: Can we point out any
+difference between the congenial and the like? For if that is possible,
+then I think, Lysis and Menexenus, there may be some sense in our argument
+about friendship. But if the congenial is only the like, how will you get
+rid of the other argument, of the uselessness of like to like in as far as
+they are like; for to say that what is useless is dear, would be absurd?
+Suppose, then, that we agree to distinguish between the congenial and the
+like--in the intoxication of argument, that may perhaps be allowed.
+
+Very true.
+
+And shall we further say that the good is congenial, and the evil
+uncongenial to every one? Or again that the evil is congenial to the evil,
+and the good to the good; and that which is neither good nor evil to that
+which is neither good nor evil?
+
+They agreed to the latter alternative.
+
+Then, my boys, we have again fallen into the old discarded error; for the
+unjust will be the friend of the unjust, and the bad of the bad, as well as
+the good of the good.
+
+That appears to be the result.
+
+But again, if we say that the congenial is the same as the good, in that
+case the good and he only will be the friend of the good.
+
+True.
+
+But that too was a position of ours which, as you will remember, has been
+already refuted by ourselves.
+
+We remember.
+
+Then what is to be done? Or rather is there anything to be done? I can
+only, like the wise men who argue in courts, sum up the arguments:--If
+neither the beloved, nor the lover, nor the like, nor the unlike, nor the
+good, nor the congenial, nor any other of whom we spoke--for there were
+such a number of them that I cannot remember all--if none of these are
+friends, I know not what remains to be said.
+
+Here I was going to invite the opinion of some older person, when suddenly
+we were interrupted by the tutors of Lysis and Menexenus, who came upon us
+like an evil apparition with their brothers, and bade them go home, as it
+was getting late. At first, we and the by-standers drove them off; but
+afterwards, as they would not mind, and only went on shouting in their
+barbarous dialect, and got angry, and kept calling the boys--they appeared
+to us to have been drinking rather too much at the Hermaea, which made them
+difficult to manage--we fairly gave way and broke up the company.
+
+I said, however, a few words to the boys at parting: O Menexenus and
+Lysis, how ridiculous that you two boys, and I, an old boy, who would fain
+be one of you, should imagine ourselves to be friends--this is what the by-
+standers will go away and say--and as yet we have not been able to discover
+what is a friend!
+
+
+
+End of this Project Gutenberg Etext of Lysis by Plato
+
diff --git a/old/lysis10.zip b/old/lysis10.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..0bb9334 --- /dev/null +++ b/old/lysis10.zip |