summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/1591-h/1591-h.htm
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to '1591-h/1591-h.htm')
-rw-r--r--1591-h/1591-h.htm3867
1 files changed, 3867 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/1591-h/1591-h.htm b/1591-h/1591-h.htm
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b9e09df
--- /dev/null
+++ b/1591-h/1591-h.htm
@@ -0,0 +1,3867 @@
+<?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>
+ Protagoras, 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 Protagoras, 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: Protagoras
+
+Author: Plato
+
+Translator: B. Jowett
+
+Release Date: November 3, 2008 [EBook #1591]
+Last Updated: January 15, 2013
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ASCII
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PROTAGORAS ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Sue Asscher, and David Widger
+
+
+
+
+
+</pre>
+ <p>
+ <br /><br />
+ </p>
+ <h1>
+ PROTAGORAS
+ </h1>
+ <p>
+ <br />
+ </p>
+ <h2>
+ By Plato
+ </h2>
+ <p>
+ <br /><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"> PROTAGORAS </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>
+ The Protagoras, like several of the Dialogues of Plato, is put into the
+ mouth of Socrates, who describes a conversation which had taken place
+ between himself and the great Sophist at the house of Callias&mdash;'the
+ man who had spent more upon the Sophists than all the rest of the world'&mdash;and
+ in which the learned Hippias and the grammarian Prodicus had also shared,
+ as well as Alcibiades and Critias, both of whom said a few words&mdash;in
+ the presence of a distinguished company consisting of disciples of
+ Protagoras and of leading Athenians belonging to the Socratic circle. The
+ dialogue commences with a request on the part of Hippocrates that Socrates
+ would introduce him to the celebrated teacher. He has come before the dawn
+ had risen&mdash;so fervid is his zeal. Socrates moderates his excitement
+ and advises him to find out 'what Protagoras will make of him,' before he
+ becomes his pupil.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ They go together to the house of Callias; and Socrates, after explaining
+ the purpose of their visit to Protagoras, asks the question, 'What he will
+ make of Hippocrates.' Protagoras answers, 'That he will make him a better
+ and a wiser man.' 'But in what will he be better?'&mdash;Socrates desires
+ to have a more precise answer. Protagoras replies, 'That he will teach him
+ prudence in affairs private and public; in short, the science or knowledge
+ of human life.'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This, as Socrates admits, is a noble profession; but he is or rather would
+ have been doubtful, whether such knowledge can be taught, if Protagoras
+ had not assured him of the fact, for two reasons: (1) Because the Athenian
+ people, who recognize in their assemblies the distinction between the
+ skilled and the unskilled in the arts, do not distinguish between the
+ trained politician and the untrained; (2) Because the wisest and best
+ Athenian citizens do not teach their sons political virtue. Will
+ Protagoras answer these objections?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Protagoras explains his views in the form of an apologue, in which, after
+ Prometheus had given men the arts, Zeus is represented as sending Hermes
+ to them, bearing with him Justice and Reverence. These are not, like the
+ arts, to be imparted to a few only, but all men are to be partakers of
+ them. Therefore the Athenian people are right in distinguishing between
+ the skilled and unskilled in the arts, and not between skilled and
+ unskilled politicians. (1) For all men have the political virtues to a
+ certain degree, and are obliged to say that they have them, whether they
+ have them or not. A man would be thought a madman who professed an art
+ which he did not know; but he would be equally thought a madman if he did
+ not profess a virtue which he had not. (2) And that the political virtues
+ can be taught and acquired, in the opinion of the Athenians, is proved by
+ the fact that they punish evil-doers, with a view to prevention, of course&mdash;mere
+ retribution is for beasts, and not for men. (3) Again, would parents who
+ teach her sons lesser matters leave them ignorant of the common duty of
+ citizens? To the doubt of Socrates the best answer is the fact, that the
+ education of youth in virtue begins almost as soon as they can speak, and
+ is continued by the state when they pass out of the parental control. (4)
+ Nor need we wonder that wise and good fathers sometimes have foolish and
+ worthless sons. Virtue, as we were saying, is not the private possession
+ of any man, but is shared by all, only however to the extent of which each
+ individual is by nature capable. And, as a matter of fact, even the worst
+ of civilized mankind will appear virtuous and just, if we compare them
+ with savages. (5) The error of Socrates lies in supposing that there are
+ no teachers of virtue, whereas all men are teachers in a degree. Some,
+ like Protagoras, are better than others, and with this result we ought to
+ be satisfied.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Socrates is highly delighted with the explanation of Protagoras. But he
+ has still a doubt lingering in his mind. Protagoras has spoken of the
+ virtues: are they many, or one? are they parts of a whole, or different
+ names of the same thing? Protagoras replies that they are parts, like the
+ parts of a face, which have their several functions, and no one part is
+ like any other part. This admission, which has been somewhat hastily made,
+ is now taken up and cross-examined by Socrates:&mdash;
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ 'Is justice just, and is holiness holy? And are justice and holiness
+ opposed to one another?'&mdash;'Then justice is unholy.' Protagoras would
+ rather say that justice is different from holiness, and yet in a certain
+ point of view nearly the same. He does not, however, escape in this way
+ from the cunning of Socrates, who inveigles him into an admission that
+ everything has but one opposite. Folly, for example, is opposed to wisdom;
+ and folly is also opposed to temperance; and therefore temperance and
+ wisdom are the same. And holiness has been already admitted to be nearly
+ the same as justice. Temperance, therefore, has now to be compared with
+ justice.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Protagoras, whose temper begins to get a little ruffled at the process to
+ which he has been subjected, is aware that he will soon be compelled by
+ the dialectics of Socrates to admit that the temperate is the just. He
+ therefore defends himself with his favourite weapon; that is to say, he
+ makes a long speech not much to the point, which elicits the applause of
+ the audience.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Here occurs a sort of interlude, which commences with a declaration on the
+ part of Socrates that he cannot follow a long speech, and therefore he
+ must beg Protagoras to speak shorter. As Protagoras declines to
+ accommodate him, he rises to depart, but is detained by Callias, who
+ thinks him unreasonable in not allowing Protagoras the liberty which he
+ takes himself of speaking as he likes. But Alcibiades answers that the two
+ cases are not parallel. For Socrates admits his inability to speak long;
+ will Protagoras in like manner acknowledge his inability to speak short?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Counsels of moderation are urged first in a few words by Critias, and then
+ by Prodicus in balanced and sententious language: and Hippias proposes an
+ umpire. But who is to be the umpire? rejoins Socrates; he would rather
+ suggest as a compromise that Protagoras shall ask and he will answer, and
+ that when Protagoras is tired of asking he himself will ask and Protagoras
+ shall answer. To this the latter yields a reluctant assent.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Protagoras selects as his thesis a poem of Simonides of Ceos, in which he
+ professes to find a contradiction. First the poet says,
+ </p>
+<pre xml:space="preserve">
+ 'Hard is it to become good,'
+</pre>
+ <p>
+ and then reproaches Pittacus for having said, 'Hard is it to be good.' How
+ is this to be reconciled? Socrates, who is familiar with the poem, is
+ embarrassed at first, and invokes the aid of Prodicus, the countryman of
+ Simonides, but apparently only with the intention of flattering him into
+ absurdities. First a distinction is drawn between (Greek) to be, and
+ (Greek) to become: to become good is difficult; to be good is easy. Then
+ the word difficult or hard is explained to mean 'evil' in the Cean
+ dialect. To all this Prodicus assents; but when Protagoras reclaims,
+ Socrates slily withdraws Prodicus from the fray, under the pretence that
+ his assent was only intended to test the wits of his adversary. He then
+ proceeds to give another and more elaborate explanation of the whole
+ passage. The explanation is as follows:&mdash;
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The Lacedaemonians are great philosophers (although this is a fact which
+ is not generally known); and the soul of their philosophy is brevity,
+ which was also the style of primitive antiquity and of the seven sages.
+ Now Pittacus had a saying, 'Hard is it to be good:' and Simonides, who was
+ jealous of the fame of this saying, wrote a poem which was designed to
+ controvert it. No, says he, Pittacus; not 'hard to be good,' but 'hard to
+ become good.' Socrates proceeds to argue in a highly impressive manner
+ that the whole composition is intended as an attack upon Pittacus. This,
+ though manifestly absurd, is accepted by the company, and meets with the
+ special approval of Hippias, who has however a favourite interpretation of
+ his own, which he is requested by Alcibiades to defer.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The argument is now resumed, not without some disdainful remarks of
+ Socrates on the practice of introducing the poets, who ought not to be
+ allowed, any more than flute-girls, to come into good society. Men's own
+ thoughts should supply them with the materials for discussion. A few
+ soothing flatteries are addressed to Protagoras by Callias and Socrates,
+ and then the old question is repeated, 'Whether the virtues are one or
+ many?' To which Protagoras is now disposed to reply, that four out of the
+ five virtues are in some degree similar; but he still contends that the
+ fifth, courage, is unlike the rest. Socrates proceeds to undermine the
+ last stronghold of the adversary, first obtaining from him the admission
+ that all virtue is in the highest degree good:&mdash;
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The courageous are the confident; and the confident are those who know
+ their business or profession: those who have no such knowledge and are
+ still confident are madmen. This is admitted. Then, says Socrates, courage
+ is knowledge&mdash;an inference which Protagoras evades by drawing a
+ futile distinction between the courageous and the confident in a fluent
+ speech.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Socrates renews the attack from another side: he would like to know
+ whether pleasure is not the only good, and pain the only evil? Protagoras
+ seems to doubt the morality or propriety of assenting to this; he would
+ rather say that 'some pleasures are good, some pains are evil,' which is
+ also the opinion of the generality of mankind. What does he think of
+ knowledge? Does he agree with the common opinion that knowledge is
+ overcome by passion? or does he hold that knowledge is power? Protagoras
+ agrees that knowledge is certainly a governing power.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This, however, is not the doctrine of men in general, who maintain that
+ many who know what is best, act contrary to their knowledge under the
+ influence of pleasure. But this opposition of good and evil is really the
+ opposition of a greater or lesser amount of pleasure. Pleasures are evils
+ because they end in pain, and pains are goods because they end in
+ pleasures. Thus pleasure is seen to be the only good; and the only evil is
+ the preference of the lesser pleasure to the greater. But then comes in
+ the illusion of distance. Some art of mensuration is required in order to
+ show us pleasures and pains in their true proportion. This art of
+ mensuration is a kind of knowledge, and knowledge is thus proved once more
+ to be the governing principle of human life, and ignorance the origin of
+ all evil: for no one prefers the less pleasure to the greater, or the
+ greater pain to the less, except from ignorance. The argument is drawn out
+ in an imaginary 'dialogue within a dialogue,' conducted by Socrates and
+ Protagoras on the one part, and the rest of the world on the other.
+ Hippias and Prodicus, as well as Protagoras, admit the soundness of the
+ conclusion.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Socrates then applies this new conclusion to the case of courage&mdash;the
+ only virtue which still holds out against the assaults of the Socratic
+ dialectic. No one chooses the evil or refuses the good except through
+ ignorance. This explains why cowards refuse to go to war:&mdash;because
+ they form a wrong estimate of good, and honour, and pleasure. And why are
+ the courageous willing to go to war?&mdash;because they form a right
+ estimate of pleasures and pains, of things terrible and not terrible.
+ Courage then is knowledge, and cowardice is ignorance. And the five
+ virtues, which were originally maintained to have five different natures,
+ after having been easily reduced to two only, at last coalesce in one. The
+ assent of Protagoras to this last position is extracted with great
+ difficulty.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Socrates concludes by professing his disinterested love of the truth, and
+ remarks on the singular manner in which he and his adversary had changed
+ sides. Protagoras began by asserting, and Socrates by denying, the
+ teachableness of virtue, and now the latter ends by affirming that virtue
+ is knowledge, which is the most teachable of all things, while Protagoras
+ has been striving to show that virtue is not knowledge, and this is almost
+ equivalent to saying that virtue cannot be taught. He is not satisfied
+ with the result, and would like to renew the enquiry with the help of
+ Protagoras in a different order, asking (1) What virtue is, and (2)
+ Whether virtue can be taught. Protagoras declines this offer, but commends
+ Socrates' earnestness and his style of discussion.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The Protagoras is often supposed to be full of difficulties. These are
+ partly imaginary and partly real. The imaginary ones are (1)
+ Chronological,&mdash;which were pointed out in ancient times by Athenaeus,
+ and are noticed by Schleiermacher and others, and relate to the
+ impossibility of all the persons in the Dialogue meeting at any one time,
+ whether in the year 425 B.C., or in any other. But Plato, like all writers
+ of fiction, aims only at the probable, and shows in many Dialogues (e.g.
+ the Symposium and Republic, and already in the Laches) an extreme
+ disregard of the historical accuracy which is sometimes demanded of him.
+ (2) The exact place of the Protagoras among the Dialogues, and the date of
+ composition, have also been much disputed. But there are no criteria which
+ afford any real grounds for determining the date of composition; and the
+ affinities of the Dialogues, when they are not indicated by Plato himself,
+ must always to a great extent remain uncertain. (3) There is another class
+ of difficulties, which may be ascribed to preconceived notions of
+ commentators, who imagine that Protagoras the Sophist ought always to be
+ in the wrong, and his adversary Socrates in the right; or that in this or
+ that passage&mdash;e.g. in the explanation of good as pleasure&mdash;Plato
+ is inconsistent with himself; or that the Dialogue fails in unity, and has
+ not a proper beginning, middle, and ending. They seem to forget that Plato
+ is a dramatic writer who throws his thoughts into both sides of the
+ argument, and certainly does not aim at any unity which is inconsistent
+ with freedom, and with a natural or even wild manner of treating his
+ subject; also that his mode of revealing the truth is by lights and
+ shadows, and far-off and opposing points of view, and not by dogmatic
+ statements or definite results.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The real difficulties arise out of the extreme subtlety of the work,
+ which, as Socrates says of the poem of Simonides, is a most perfect piece
+ of art. There are dramatic contrasts and interests, threads of philosophy
+ broken and resumed, satirical reflections on mankind, veils thrown over
+ truths which are lightly suggested, and all woven together in a single
+ design, and moving towards one end.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In the introductory scene Plato raises the expectation that a 'great
+ personage' is about to appear on the stage; perhaps with a further view of
+ showing that he is destined to be overthrown by a greater still, who makes
+ no pretensions. Before introducing Hippocrates to him, Socrates thinks
+ proper to warn the youth against the dangers of 'influence,' of which the
+ invidious nature is recognized by Protagoras himself. Hippocrates readily
+ adopts the suggestion of Socrates that he shall learn of Protagoras only
+ the accomplishments which befit an Athenian gentleman, and let alone his
+ 'sophistry.' There is nothing however in the introduction which leads to
+ the inference that Plato intended to blacken the character of the
+ Sophists; he only makes a little merry at their expense.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The 'great personage' is somewhat ostentatious, but frank and honest. He
+ is introduced on a stage which is worthy of him&mdash;at the house of the
+ rich Callias, in which are congregated the noblest and wisest of the
+ Athenians. He considers openness to be the best policy, and particularly
+ mentions his own liberal mode of dealing with his pupils, as if in answer
+ to the favourite accusation of the Sophists that they received pay. He is
+ remarkable for the good temper which he exhibits throughout the discussion
+ under the trying and often sophistical cross-examination of Socrates.
+ Although once or twice ruffled, and reluctant to continue the discussion,
+ he parts company on perfectly good terms, and appears to be, as he says of
+ himself, the 'least jealous of mankind.'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Nor is there anything in the sentiments of Protagoras which impairs this
+ pleasing impression of the grave and weighty old man. His real defect is
+ that he is inferior to Socrates in dialectics. The opposition between him
+ and Socrates is not the opposition of good and bad, true and false, but of
+ the old art of rhetoric and the new science of interrogation and argument;
+ also of the irony of Socrates and the self-assertion of the Sophists.
+ There is quite as much truth on the side of Protagoras as of Socrates; but
+ the truth of Protagoras is based on common sense and common maxims of
+ morality, while that of Socrates is paradoxical or transcendental, and
+ though full of meaning and insight, hardly intelligible to the rest of
+ mankind. Here as elsewhere is the usual contrast between the Sophists
+ representing average public opinion and Socrates seeking for increased
+ clearness and unity of ideas. But to a great extent Protagoras has the
+ best of the argument and represents the better mind of man.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ For example: (1) one of the noblest statements to be found in antiquity
+ about the preventive nature of punishment is put into his mouth; (2) he is
+ clearly right also in maintaining that virtue can be taught (which
+ Socrates himself, at the end of the Dialogue, is disposed to concede); and
+ also (3) in his explanation of the phenomenon that good fathers have bad
+ sons; (4) he is right also in observing that the virtues are not like the
+ arts, gifts or attainments of special individuals, but the common property
+ of all: this, which in all ages has been the strength and weakness of
+ ethics and politics, is deeply seated in human nature; (5) there is a sort
+ of half-truth in the notion that all civilized men are teachers of virtue;
+ and more than a half-truth (6) in ascribing to man, who in his outward
+ conditions is more helpless than the other animals, the power of
+ self-improvement; (7) the religious allegory should be noticed, in which
+ the arts are said to be given by Prometheus (who stole them), whereas
+ justice and reverence and the political virtues could only be imparted by
+ Zeus; (8) in the latter part of the Dialogue, when Socrates is arguing
+ that 'pleasure is the only good,' Protagoras deems it more in accordance
+ with his character to maintain that 'some pleasures only are good;' and
+ admits that 'he, above all other men, is bound to say "that wisdom and
+ knowledge are the highest of human things."'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There is no reason to suppose that in all this Plato is depicting an
+ imaginary Protagoras; he seems to be showing us the teaching of the
+ Sophists under the milder aspect under which he once regarded them. Nor is
+ there any reason to doubt that Socrates is equally an historical
+ character, paradoxical, ironical, tiresome, but seeking for the unity of
+ virtue and knowledge as for a precious treasure; willing to rest this even
+ on a calculation of pleasure, and irresistible here, as everywhere in
+ Plato, in his intellectual superiority.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The aim of Socrates, and of the Dialogue, is to show the unity of virtue.
+ In the determination of this question the identity of virtue and knowledge
+ is found to be involved. But if virtue and knowledge are one, then virtue
+ can be taught; the end of the Dialogue returns to the beginning. Had
+ Protagoras been allowed by Plato to make the Aristotelian distinction, and
+ say that virtue is not knowledge, but is accompanied with knowledge; or to
+ point out with Aristotle that the same quality may have more than one
+ opposite; or with Plato himself in the Phaedo to deny that good is a mere
+ exchange of a greater pleasure for a less&mdash;the unity of virtue and
+ the identity of virtue and knowledge would have required to be proved by
+ other arguments.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The victory of Socrates over Protagoras is in every way complete when
+ their minds are fairly brought together. Protagoras falls before him after
+ two or three blows. Socrates partially gains his object in the first part
+ of the Dialogue, and completely in the second. Nor does he appear at any
+ disadvantage when subjected to 'the question' by Protagoras. He succeeds
+ in making his two 'friends,' Prodicus and Hippias, ludicrous by the way;
+ he also makes a long speech in defence of the poem of Simonides, after the
+ manner of the Sophists, showing, as Alcibiades says, that he is only
+ pretending to have a bad memory, and that he and not Protagoras is really
+ a master in the two styles of speaking; and that he can undertake, not one
+ side of the argument only, but both, when Protagoras begins to break down.
+ Against the authority of the poets with whom Protagoras has ingeniously
+ identified himself at the commencement of the Dialogue, Socrates sets up
+ the proverbial philosophers and those masters of brevity the
+ Lacedaemonians. The poets, the Laconizers, and Protagoras are satirized at
+ the same time.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Not having the whole of this poem before us, it is impossible for us to
+ answer certainly the question of Protagoras, how the two passages of
+ Simonides are to be reconciled. We can only follow the indications given
+ by Plato himself. But it seems likely that the reconcilement offered by
+ Socrates is a caricature of the methods of interpretation which were
+ practised by the Sophists&mdash;for the following reasons: (1) The
+ transparent irony of the previous interpretations given by Socrates. (2)
+ The ludicrous opening of the speech in which the Lacedaemonians are
+ described as the true philosophers, and Laconic brevity as the true form
+ of philosophy, evidently with an allusion to Protagoras' long speeches.
+ (3) The manifest futility and absurdity of the explanation of (Greek),
+ which is hardly consistent with the rational interpretation of the rest of
+ the poem. The opposition of (Greek) and (Greek) seems also intended to
+ express the rival doctrines of Socrates and Protagoras, and is a facetious
+ commentary on their differences. (4) The general treatment in Plato both
+ of the Poets and the Sophists, who are their interpreters, and whom he
+ delights to identify with them. (5) The depreciating spirit in which
+ Socrates speaks of the introduction of the poets as a substitute for
+ original conversation, which is intended to contrast with Protagoras'
+ exaltation of the study of them&mdash;this again is hardly consistent with
+ the serious defence of Simonides. (6) the marked approval of Hippias, who
+ is supposed at once to catch the familiar sound, just as in the previous
+ conversation Prodicus is represented as ready to accept any distinctions
+ of language however absurd. At the same time Hippias is desirous of
+ substituting a new interpretation of his own; as if the words might really
+ be made to mean anything, and were only to be regarded as affording a
+ field for the ingenuity of the interpreter.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This curious passage is, therefore, to be regarded as Plato's satire on
+ the tedious and hypercritical arts of interpretation which prevailed in
+ his own day, and may be compared with his condemnation of the same arts
+ when applied to mythology in the Phaedrus, and with his other parodies,
+ e.g. with the two first speeches in the Phaedrus and with the Menexenus.
+ Several lesser touches of satire may be observed, such as the claim of
+ philosophy advanced for the Lacedaemonians, which is a parody of the
+ claims advanced for the Poets by Protagoras; the mistake of the Laconizing
+ set in supposing that the Lacedaemonians are a great nation because they
+ bruise their ears; the far-fetched notion, which is 'really too bad,' that
+ Simonides uses the Lesbian (?) word, (Greek), because he is addressing a
+ Lesbian. The whole may also be considered as a satire on those who spin
+ pompous theories out of nothing. As in the arguments of the Euthydemus and
+ of the Cratylus, the veil of irony is never withdrawn; and we are left in
+ doubt at last how far in this interpretation of Simonides Socrates is
+ 'fooling,' how far he is in earnest.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ All the interests and contrasts of character in a great dramatic work like
+ the Protagoras are not easily exhausted. The impressiveness of the scene
+ should not be lost upon us, or the gradual substitution of Socrates in the
+ second part for Protagoras in the first. The characters to whom we are
+ introduced at the beginning of the Dialogue all play a part more or less
+ conspicuous towards the end. There is Alcibiades, who is compelled by the
+ necessity of his nature to be a partisan, lending effectual aid to
+ Socrates; there is Critias assuming the tone of impartiality; Callias,
+ here as always inclining to the Sophists, but eager for any intellectual
+ repast; Prodicus, who finds an opportunity for displaying his distinctions
+ of language, which are valueless and pedantic, because they are not based
+ on dialectic; Hippias, who has previously exhibited his superficial
+ knowledge of natural philosophy, to which, as in both the Dialogues called
+ by his name, he now adds the profession of an interpreter of the Poets.
+ The two latter personages have been already damaged by the mock heroic
+ description of them in the introduction. It may be remarked that
+ Protagoras is consistently presented to us throughout as the teacher of
+ moral and political virtue; there is no allusion to the theories of
+ sensation which are attributed to him in the Theaetetus and elsewhere, or
+ to his denial of the existence of the gods in a well-known fragment
+ ascribed to him; he is the religious rather than the irreligious teacher
+ in this Dialogue. Also it may be observed that Socrates shows him as much
+ respect as is consistent with his own ironical character; he admits that
+ the dialectic which has overthrown Protagoras has carried himself round to
+ a conclusion opposed to his first thesis. The force of argument,
+ therefore, and not Socrates or Protagoras, has won the day.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But is Socrates serious in maintaining (1) that virtue cannot be taught;
+ (2) that the virtues are one; (3) that virtue is the knowledge of
+ pleasures and pains present and future? These propositions to us have an
+ appearance of paradox&mdash;they are really moments or aspects of the
+ truth by the help of which we pass from the old conventional morality to a
+ higher conception of virtue and knowledge. That virtue cannot be taught is
+ a paradox of the same sort as the profession of Socrates that he knew
+ nothing. Plato means to say that virtue is not brought to a man, but must
+ be drawn out of him; and cannot be taught by rhetorical discourses or
+ citations from the poets. The second question, whether the virtues are one
+ or many, though at first sight distinct, is really a part of the same
+ subject; for if the virtues are to be taught, they must be reducible to a
+ common principle; and this common principle is found to be knowledge.
+ Here, as Aristotle remarks, Socrates and Plato outstep the truth&mdash;they
+ make a part of virtue into the whole. Further, the nature of this
+ knowledge, which is assumed to be a knowledge of pleasures and pains,
+ appears to us too superficial and at variance with the spirit of Plato
+ himself. Yet, in this, Plato is only following the historical Socrates as
+ he is depicted to us in Xenophon's Memorabilia. Like Socrates, he finds on
+ the surface of human life one common bond by which the virtues are united,&mdash;their
+ tendency to produce happiness,&mdash;though such a principle is afterwards
+ repudiated by him.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It remains to be considered in what relation the Protagoras stands to the
+ other Dialogues of Plato. That it is one of the earlier or purely Socratic
+ works&mdash;perhaps the last, as it is certainly the greatest of them&mdash;is
+ indicated by the absence of any allusion to the doctrine of reminiscence;
+ and also by the different attitude assumed towards the teaching and
+ persons of the Sophists in some of the later Dialogues. The Charmides,
+ Laches, Lysis, all touch on the question of the relation of knowledge to
+ virtue, and may be regarded, if not as preliminary studies or sketches of
+ the more important work, at any rate as closely connected with it. The Io
+ and the lesser Hippias contain discussions of the Poets, which offer a
+ parallel to the ironical criticism of Simonides, and are conceived in a
+ similar spirit. The affinity of the Protagoras to the Meno is more
+ doubtful. For there, although the same question is discussed, 'whether
+ virtue can be taught,' and the relation of Meno to the Sophists is much
+ the same as that of Hippocrates, the answer to the question is supplied
+ out of the doctrine of ideas; the real Socrates is already passing into
+ the Platonic one. At a later stage of the Platonic philosophy we shall
+ find that both the paradox and the solution of it appear to have been
+ retracted. The Phaedo, the Gorgias, and the Philebus offer further
+ corrections of the teaching of the Protagoras; in all of them the doctrine
+ that virtue is pleasure, or that pleasure is the chief or only good, is
+ distinctly renounced.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Thus after many preparations and oppositions, both of the characters of
+ men and aspects of the truth, especially of the popular and philosophical
+ aspect; and after many interruptions and detentions by the way, which, as
+ Theodorus says in the Theaetetus, are quite as agreeable as the argument,
+ we arrive at the great Socratic thesis that virtue is knowledge. This is
+ an aspect of the truth which was lost almost as soon as it was found; and
+ yet has to be recovered by every one for himself who would pass the limits
+ of proverbial and popular philosophy. The moral and intellectual are
+ always dividing, yet they must be reunited, and in the highest conception
+ of them are inseparable. The thesis of Socrates is not merely a hasty
+ assumption, but may be also deemed an anticipation of some 'metaphysic of
+ the future,' in which the divided elements of human nature are reconciled.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ <a name="link2H_4_0002" id="link2H_4_0002">
+ <!-- H2 anchor --> </a>
+ </p>
+ <div style="height: 4em;">
+ <br /><br /><br /><br />
+ </div>
+ <h2>
+ PROTAGORAS
+ </h2>
+ <p>
+ PERSONS OF THE DIALOGUE: Socrates, who is the narrator of the Dialogue to
+ his Companion. Hippocrates, Alcibiades and Critias. Protagoras, Hippias
+ and Prodicus (Sophists). Callias, a wealthy Athenian.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ SCENE: The House of Callias.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ COMPANION: Where do you come from, Socrates? And yet I need hardly ask the
+ question, for I know that you have been in chase of the fair Alcibiades. I
+ saw him the day before yesterday; and he had got a beard like a man,&mdash;and
+ he is a man, as I may tell you in your ear. But I thought that he was
+ still very charming.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ SOCRATES: What of his beard? Are you not of Homer's opinion, who says
+ </p>
+<pre xml:space="preserve">
+ 'Youth is most charming when the beard first appears'?
+</pre>
+ <p>
+ And that is now the charm of Alcibiades.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ COMPANION: Well, and how do matters proceed? Have you been visiting him,
+ and was he gracious to you?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ SOCRATES: Yes, I thought that he was very gracious; and especially to-day,
+ for I have just come from him, and he has been helping me in an argument.
+ But shall I tell you a strange thing? I paid no attention to him, and
+ several times I quite forgot that he was present.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ COMPANION: What is the meaning of this? Has anything happened between you
+ and him? For surely you cannot have discovered a fairer love than he is;
+ certainly not in this city of Athens.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ SOCRATES: Yes, much fairer.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ COMPANION: What do you mean&mdash;a citizen or a foreigner?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ SOCRATES: A foreigner.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ COMPANION: Of what country?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ SOCRATES: Of Abdera.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ COMPANION: And is this stranger really in your opinion a fairer love than
+ the son of Cleinias?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ SOCRATES: And is not the wiser always the fairer, sweet friend?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ COMPANION: But have you really met, Socrates, with some wise one?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ SOCRATES: Say rather, with the wisest of all living men, if you are
+ willing to accord that title to Protagoras.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ COMPANION: What! Is Protagoras in Athens?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ SOCRATES: Yes; he has been here two days.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ COMPANION: And do you just come from an interview with him?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ SOCRATES: Yes; and I have heard and said many things.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ COMPANION: Then, if you have no engagement, suppose that you sit down and
+ tell me what passed, and my attendant here shall give up his place to you.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ SOCRATES: To be sure; and I shall be grateful to you for listening.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ COMPANION: Thank you, too, for telling us.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ SOCRATES: That is thank you twice over. Listen then:&mdash;
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Last night, or rather very early this morning, Hippocrates, the son of
+ Apollodorus and the brother of Phason, gave a tremendous thump with his
+ staff at my door; some one opened to him, and he came rushing in and
+ bawled out: Socrates, are you awake or asleep?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I knew his voice, and said: Hippocrates, is that you? and do you bring any
+ news?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Good news, he said; nothing but good.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Delightful, I said; but what is the news? and why have you come hither at
+ this unearthly hour?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He drew nearer to me and said: Protagoras is come.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, I replied; he came two days ago: have you only just heard of his
+ arrival?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, by the gods, he said; but not until yesterday evening.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ At the same time he felt for the truckle-bed, and sat down at my feet, and
+ then he said: Yesterday quite late in the evening, on my return from Oenoe
+ whither I had gone in pursuit of my runaway slave Satyrus, as I meant to
+ have told you, if some other matter had not come in the way;&mdash;on my
+ return, when we had done supper and were about to retire to rest, my
+ brother said to me: Protagoras is come. I was going to you at once, and
+ then I thought that the night was far spent. But the moment sleep left me
+ after my fatigue, I got up and came hither direct.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I, who knew the very courageous madness of the man, said: What is the
+ matter? Has Protagoras robbed you of anything?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He replied, laughing: Yes, indeed he has, Socrates, of the wisdom which he
+ keeps from me.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But, surely, I said, if you give him money, and make friends with him, he
+ will make you as wise as he is himself.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Would to heaven, he replied, that this were the case! He might take all
+ that I have, and all that my friends have, if he pleased. But that is why
+ I have come to you now, in order that you may speak to him on my behalf;
+ for I am young, and also I have never seen nor heard him; (when he visited
+ Athens before I was but a child;) and all men praise him, Socrates; he is
+ reputed to be the most accomplished of speakers. There is no reason why we
+ should not go to him at once, and then we shall find him at home. He
+ lodges, as I hear, with Callias the son of Hipponicus: let us start.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I replied: Not yet, my good friend; the hour is too early. But let us rise
+ and take a turn in the court and wait about there until day-break; when
+ the day breaks, then we will go. For Protagoras is generally at home, and
+ we shall be sure to find him; never fear.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Upon this we got up and walked about in the court, and I thought that I
+ would make trial of the strength of his resolution. So I examined him and
+ put questions to him. Tell me, Hippocrates, I said, as you are going to
+ Protagoras, and will be paying your money to him, what is he to whom you
+ are going? and what will he make of you? If, for example, you had thought
+ of going to Hippocrates of Cos, the Asclepiad, and were about to give him
+ your money, and some one had said to you: You are paying money to your
+ namesake Hippocrates, O Hippocrates; tell me, what is he that you give him
+ money? how would you have answered?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I should say, he replied, that I gave money to him as a physician.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And what will he make of you?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A physician, he said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And if you were resolved to go to Polycleitus the Argive, or Pheidias the
+ Athenian, and were intending to give them money, and some one had asked
+ you: What are Polycleitus and Pheidias? and why do you give them this
+ money?&mdash;how would you have answered?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I should have answered, that they were statuaries.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And what will they make of you?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ A statuary, of course.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well now, I said, you and I are going to Protagoras, and we are ready to
+ pay him money on your behalf. If our own means are sufficient, and we can
+ gain him with these, we shall be only too glad; but if not, then we are to
+ spend the money of your friends as well. Now suppose, that while we are
+ thus enthusiastically pursuing our object some one were to say to us: Tell
+ me, Socrates, and you Hippocrates, what is Protagoras, and why are you
+ going to pay him money,&mdash;how should we answer? I know that Pheidias
+ is a sculptor, and that Homer is a poet; but what appellation is given to
+ Protagoras? how is he designated?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ They call him a Sophist, Socrates, he replied.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then we are going to pay our money to him in the character of a Sophist?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Certainly.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But suppose a person were to ask this further question: And how about
+ yourself? What will Protagoras make of you, if you go to see him?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He answered, with a blush upon his face (for the day was just beginning to
+ dawn, so that I could see him): Unless this differs in some way from the
+ former instances, I suppose that he will make a Sophist of me.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ By the gods, I said, and are you not ashamed at having to appear before
+ the Hellenes in the character of a Sophist?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Indeed, Socrates, to confess the truth, I am.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But you should not assume, Hippocrates, that the instruction of Protagoras
+ is of this nature: may you not learn of him in the same way that you
+ learned the arts of the grammarian, or musician, or trainer, not with the
+ view of making any of them a profession, but only as a part of education,
+ and because a private gentleman and freeman ought to know them?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Just so, he said; and that, in my opinion, is a far truer account of the
+ teaching of Protagoras.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I said: I wonder whether you know what you are doing?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And what am I doing?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You are going to commit your soul to the care of a man whom you call a
+ Sophist. And yet I hardly think that you know what a Sophist is; and if
+ not, then you do not even know to whom you are committing your soul and
+ whether the thing to which you commit yourself be good or evil.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I certainly think that I do know, he replied.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then tell me, what do you imagine that he is?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I take him to be one who knows wise things, he replied, as his name
+ implies.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And might you not, I said, affirm this of the painter and of the carpenter
+ also: Do not they, too, know wise things? But suppose a person were to ask
+ us: In what are the painters wise? We should answer: In what relates to
+ the making of likenesses, and similarly of other things. And if he were
+ further to ask: What is the wisdom of the Sophist, and what is the
+ manufacture over which he presides?&mdash;how should we answer him?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ How should we answer him, Socrates? What other answer could there be but
+ that he presides over the art which makes men eloquent?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, I replied, that is very likely true, but not enough; for in the
+ answer a further question is involved: Of what does the Sophist make a man
+ talk eloquently? The player on the lyre may be supposed to make a man talk
+ eloquently about that which he makes him understand, that is about playing
+ the lyre. Is not that true?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then about what does the Sophist make him eloquent? Must not he make him
+ eloquent in that which he understands?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, that may be assumed.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And what is that which the Sophist knows and makes his disciple know?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Indeed, he said, I cannot tell.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then I proceeded to say: Well, but are you aware of the danger which you
+ are incurring? If you were going to commit your body to some one, who
+ might do good or harm to it, would you not carefully consider and ask the
+ opinion of your friends and kindred, and deliberate many days as to
+ whether you should give him the care of your body? But when the soul is in
+ question, which you hold to be of far more value than the body, and upon
+ the good or evil of which depends the well-being of your all,&mdash;about
+ this you never consulted either with your father or with your brother or
+ with any one of us who are your companions. But no sooner does this
+ foreigner appear, than you instantly commit your soul to his keeping. In
+ the evening, as you say, you hear of him, and in the morning you go to
+ him, never deliberating or taking the opinion of any one as to whether you
+ ought to intrust yourself to him or not;&mdash;you have quite made up your
+ mind that you will at all hazards be a pupil of Protagoras, and are
+ prepared to expend all the property of yourself and of your friends in
+ carrying out at any price this determination, although, as you admit, you
+ do not know him, and have never spoken with him: and you call him a
+ Sophist, but are manifestly ignorant of what a Sophist is; and yet you are
+ going to commit yourself to his keeping.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When he heard me say this, he replied: No other inference, Socrates, can
+ be drawn from your words.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I proceeded: Is not a Sophist, Hippocrates, one who deals wholesale or
+ retail in the food of the soul? To me that appears to be his nature.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And what, Socrates, is the food of the soul?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Surely, I said, knowledge is the food of the soul; and we must take care,
+ my friend, that the Sophist does not deceive us when he praises what he
+ sells, like the dealers wholesale or retail who sell the food of the body;
+ for they praise indiscriminately all their goods, without knowing what are
+ really beneficial or hurtful: neither do their customers know, with the
+ exception of any trainer or physician who may happen to buy of them. In
+ like manner those who carry about the wares of knowledge, and make the
+ round of the cities, and sell or retail them to any customer who is in
+ want of them, praise them all alike; though I should not wonder, O my
+ friend, if many of them were really ignorant of their effect upon the
+ soul; and their customers equally ignorant, unless he who buys of them
+ happens to be a physician of the soul. If, therefore, you have
+ understanding of what is good and evil, you may safely buy knowledge of
+ Protagoras or of any one; but if not, then, O my friend, pause, and do not
+ hazard your dearest interests at a game of chance. For there is far
+ greater peril in buying knowledge than in buying meat and drink: the one
+ you purchase of the wholesale or retail dealer, and carry them away in
+ other vessels, and before you receive them into the body as food, you may
+ deposit them at home and call in any experienced friend who knows what is
+ good to be eaten or drunken, and what not, and how much, and when; and
+ then the danger of purchasing them is not so great. But you cannot buy the
+ wares of knowledge and carry them away in another vessel; when you have
+ paid for them you must receive them into the soul and go your way, either
+ greatly harmed or greatly benefited; and therefore we should deliberate
+ and take counsel with our elders; for we are still young&mdash;too young
+ to determine such a matter. And now let us go, as we were intending, and
+ hear Protagoras; and when we have heard what he has to say, we may take
+ counsel of others; for not only is Protagoras at the house of Callias, but
+ there is Hippias of Elis, and, if I am not mistaken, Prodicus of Ceos, and
+ several other wise men.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To this we agreed, and proceeded on our way until we reached the vestibule
+ of the house; and there we stopped in order to conclude a discussion which
+ had arisen between us as we were going along; and we stood talking in the
+ vestibule until we had finished and come to an understanding. And I think
+ that the door-keeper, who was a eunuch, and who was probably annoyed at
+ the great inroad of the Sophists, must have heard us talking. At any rate,
+ when we knocked at the door, and he opened and saw us, he grumbled: They
+ are Sophists&mdash;he is not at home; and instantly gave the door a hearty
+ bang with both his hands. Again we knocked, and he answered without
+ opening: Did you not hear me say that he is not at home, fellows? But, my
+ friend, I said, you need not be alarmed; for we are not Sophists, and we
+ are not come to see Callias, but we want to see Protagoras; and I must
+ request you to announce us. At last, after a good deal of difficulty, the
+ man was persuaded to open the door.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When we entered, we found Protagoras taking a walk in the cloister; and
+ next to him, on one side, were walking Callias, the son of Hipponicus, and
+ Paralus, the son of Pericles, who, by the mother's side, is his
+ half-brother, and Charmides, the son of Glaucon. On the other side of him
+ were Xanthippus, the other son of Pericles, Philippides, the son of
+ Philomelus; also Antimoerus of Mende, who of all the disciples of
+ Protagoras is the most famous, and intends to make sophistry his
+ profession. A train of listeners followed him; the greater part of them
+ appeared to be foreigners, whom Protagoras had brought with him out of the
+ various cities visited by him in his journeys, he, like Orpheus,
+ attracting them his voice, and they following (Compare Rep.). I should
+ mention also that there were some Athenians in the company. Nothing
+ delighted me more than the precision of their movements: they never got
+ into his way at all; but when he and those who were with him turned back,
+ then the band of listeners parted regularly on either side; he was always
+ in front, and they wheeled round and took their places behind him in
+ perfect order.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ After him, as Homer says (Od.), 'I lifted up my eyes and saw' Hippias the
+ Elean sitting in the opposite cloister on a chair of state, and around him
+ were seated on benches Eryximachus, the son of Acumenus, and Phaedrus the
+ Myrrhinusian, and Andron the son of Androtion, and there were strangers
+ whom he had brought with him from his native city of Elis, and some
+ others: they were putting to Hippias certain physical and astronomical
+ questions, and he, ex cathedra, was determining their several questions to
+ them, and discoursing of them.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Also, 'my eyes beheld Tantalus (Od.);' for Prodicus the Cean was at
+ Athens: he had been lodged in a room which, in the days of Hipponicus, was
+ a storehouse; but, as the house was full, Callias had cleared this out and
+ made the room into a guest-chamber. Now Prodicus was still in bed, wrapped
+ up in sheepskins and bedclothes, of which there seemed to be a great heap;
+ and there was sitting by him on the couches near, Pausanias of the deme of
+ Cerameis, and with Pausanias was a youth quite young, who is certainly
+ remarkable for his good looks, and, if I am not mistaken, is also of a
+ fair and gentle nature. I thought that I heard him called Agathon, and my
+ suspicion is that he is the beloved of Pausanias. There was this youth,
+ and also there were the two Adeimantuses, one the son of Cepis, and the
+ other of Leucolophides, and some others. I was very anxious to hear what
+ Prodicus was saying, for he seems to me to be an all-wise and inspired
+ man; but I was not able to get into the inner circle, and his fine deep
+ voice made an echo in the room which rendered his words inaudible.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ No sooner had we entered than there followed us Alcibiades the beautiful,
+ as you say, and I believe you; and also Critias the son of Callaeschrus.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ On entering we stopped a little, in order to look about us, and then
+ walked up to Protagoras, and I said: Protagoras, my friend Hippocrates and
+ I have come to see you.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Do you wish, he said, to speak with me alone, or in the presence of the
+ company?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Whichever you please, I said; you shall determine when you have heard the
+ purpose of our visit.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And what is your purpose? he said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I must explain, I said, that my friend Hippocrates is a native Athenian;
+ he is the son of Apollodorus, and of a great and prosperous house, and he
+ is himself in natural ability quite a match for anybody of his own age. I
+ believe that he aspires to political eminence; and this he thinks that
+ conversation with you is most likely to procure for him. And now you can
+ determine whether you would wish to speak to him of your teaching alone or
+ in the presence of the company.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Thank you, Socrates, for your consideration of me. For certainly a
+ stranger finding his way into great cities, and persuading the flower of
+ the youth in them to leave company of their kinsmen or any other
+ acquaintances, old or young, and live with him, under the idea that they
+ will be improved by his conversation, ought to be very cautious; great
+ jealousies are aroused by his proceedings, and he is the subject of many
+ enmities and conspiracies. Now the art of the Sophist is, as I believe, of
+ great antiquity; but in ancient times those who practised it, fearing this
+ odium, veiled and disguised themselves under various names, some under
+ that of poets, as Homer, Hesiod, and Simonides, some, of hierophants and
+ prophets, as Orpheus and Musaeus, and some, as I observe, even under the
+ name of gymnastic-masters, like Iccus of Tarentum, or the more recently
+ celebrated Herodicus, now of Selymbria and formerly of Megara, who is a
+ first-rate Sophist. Your own Agathocles pretended to be a musician, but
+ was really an eminent Sophist; also Pythocleides the Cean; and there were
+ many others; and all of them, as I was saying, adopted these arts as veils
+ or disguises because they were afraid of the odium which they would incur.
+ But that is not my way, for I do not believe that they effected their
+ purpose, which was to deceive the government, who were not blinded by
+ them; and as to the people, they have no understanding, and only repeat
+ what their rulers are pleased to tell them. Now to run away, and to be
+ caught in running away, is the very height of folly, and also greatly
+ increases the exasperation of mankind; for they regard him who runs away
+ as a rogue, in addition to any other objections which they have to him;
+ and therefore I take an entirely opposite course, and acknowledge myself
+ to be a Sophist and instructor of mankind; such an open acknowledgement
+ appears to me to be a better sort of caution than concealment. Nor do I
+ neglect other precautions, and therefore I hope, as I may say, by the
+ favour of heaven that no harm will come of the acknowledgment that I am a
+ Sophist. And I have been now many years in the profession&mdash;for all my
+ years when added up are many: there is no one here present of whom I might
+ not be the father. Wherefore I should much prefer conversing with you, if
+ you want to speak with me, in the presence of the company.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ As I suspected that he would like to have a little display and
+ glorification in the presence of Prodicus and Hippias, and would gladly
+ show us to them in the light of his admirers, I said: But why should we
+ not summon Prodicus and Hippias and their friends to hear us?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Very good, he said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Suppose, said Callias, that we hold a council in which you may sit and
+ discuss.&mdash;This was agreed upon, and great delight was felt at the
+ prospect of hearing wise men talk; we ourselves took the chairs and
+ benches, and arranged them by Hippias, where the other benches had been
+ already placed. Meanwhile Callias and Alcibiades got Prodicus out of bed
+ and brought in him and his companions.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When we were all seated, Protagoras said: Now that the company are
+ assembled, Socrates, tell me about the young man of whom you were just now
+ speaking.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I replied: I will begin again at the same point, Protagoras, and tell you
+ once more the purport of my visit: this is my friend Hippocrates, who is
+ desirous of making your acquaintance; he would like to know what will
+ happen to him if he associates with you. I have no more to say.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Protagoras answered: Young man, if you associate with me, on the very
+ first day you will return home a better man than you came, and better on
+ the second day than on the first, and better every day than you were on
+ the day before.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When I heard this, I said: Protagoras, I do not at all wonder at hearing
+ you say this; even at your age, and with all your wisdom, if any one were
+ to teach you what you did not know before, you would become better no
+ doubt: but please to answer in a different way&mdash;I will explain how by
+ an example. Let me suppose that Hippocrates, instead of desiring your
+ acquaintance, wished to become acquainted with the young man Zeuxippus of
+ Heraclea, who has lately been in Athens, and he had come to him as he has
+ come to you, and had heard him say, as he has heard you say, that every
+ day he would grow and become better if he associated with him: and then
+ suppose that he were to ask him, 'In what shall I become better, and in
+ what shall I grow?'&mdash;Zeuxippus would answer, 'In painting.' And
+ suppose that he went to Orthagoras the Theban, and heard him say the same
+ thing, and asked him, 'In what shall I become better day by day?' he would
+ reply, 'In flute-playing.' Now I want you to make the same sort of answer
+ to this young man and to me, who am asking questions on his account. When
+ you say that on the first day on which he associates with you he will
+ return home a better man, and on every day will grow in like manner,&mdash;in
+ what, Protagoras, will he be better? and about what?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When Protagoras heard me say this, he replied: You ask questions fairly,
+ and I like to answer a question which is fairly put. If Hippocrates comes
+ to me he will not experience the sort of drudgery with which other
+ Sophists are in the habit of insulting their pupils; who, when they have
+ just escaped from the arts, are taken and driven back into them by these
+ teachers, and made to learn calculation, and astronomy, and geometry, and
+ music (he gave a look at Hippias as he said this); but if he comes to me,
+ he will learn that which he comes to learn. And this is prudence in
+ affairs private as well as public; he will learn to order his own house in
+ the best manner, and he will be able to speak and act for the best in the
+ affairs of the state.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Do I understand you, I said; and is your meaning that you teach the art of
+ politics, and that you promise to make men good citizens?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ That, Socrates, is exactly the profession which I make.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then, I said, you do indeed possess a noble art, if there is no mistake
+ about this; for I will freely confess to you, Protagoras, that I have a
+ doubt whether this art is capable of being taught, and yet I know not how
+ to disbelieve your assertion. And I ought to tell you why I am of opinion
+ that this art cannot be taught or communicated by man to man. I say that
+ the Athenians are an understanding people, and indeed they are esteemed to
+ be such by the other Hellenes. Now I observe that when we are met together
+ in the assembly, and the matter in hand relates to building, the builders
+ are summoned as advisers; when the question is one of ship-building, then
+ the ship-wrights; and the like of other arts which they think capable of
+ being taught and learned. And if some person offers to give them advice
+ who is not supposed by them to have any skill in the art, even though he
+ be good-looking, and rich, and noble, they will not listen to him, but
+ laugh and hoot at him, until either he is clamoured down and retires of
+ himself; or if he persist, he is dragged away or put out by the constables
+ at the command of the prytanes. This is their way of behaving about
+ professors of the arts. But when the question is an affair of state, then
+ everybody is free to have a say&mdash;carpenter, tinker, cobbler, sailor,
+ passenger; rich and poor, high and low&mdash;any one who likes gets up,
+ and no one reproaches him, as in the former case, with not having learned,
+ and having no teacher, and yet giving advice; evidently because they are
+ under the impression that this sort of knowledge cannot be taught. And not
+ only is this true of the state, but of individuals; the best and wisest of
+ our citizens are unable to impart their political wisdom to others: as for
+ example, Pericles, the father of these young men, who gave them excellent
+ instruction in all that could be learned from masters, in his own
+ department of politics neither taught them, nor gave them teachers; but
+ they were allowed to wander at their own free will in a sort of hope that
+ they would light upon virtue of their own accord. Or take another example:
+ there was Cleinias the younger brother of our friend Alcibiades, of whom
+ this very same Pericles was the guardian; and he being in fact under the
+ apprehension that Cleinias would be corrupted by Alcibiades, took him
+ away, and placed him in the house of Ariphron to be educated; but before
+ six months had elapsed, Ariphron sent him back, not knowing what to do
+ with him. And I could mention numberless other instances of persons who
+ were good themselves, and never yet made any one else good, whether friend
+ or stranger. Now I, Protagoras, having these examples before me, am
+ inclined to think that virtue cannot be taught. But then again, when I
+ listen to your words, I waver; and am disposed to think that there must be
+ something in what you say, because I know that you have great experience,
+ and learning, and invention. And I wish that you would, if possible, show
+ me a little more clearly that virtue can be taught. Will you be so good?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ That I will, Socrates, and gladly. But what would you like? Shall I, as an
+ elder, speak to you as younger men in an apologue or myth, or shall I
+ argue out the question?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To this several of the company answered that he should choose for himself.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well, then, he said, I think that the myth will be more interesting.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Once upon a time there were gods only, and no mortal creatures. But when
+ the time came that these also should be created, the gods fashioned them
+ out of earth and fire and various mixtures of both elements in the
+ interior of the earth; and when they were about to bring them into the
+ light of day, they ordered Prometheus and Epimetheus to equip them, and to
+ distribute to them severally their proper qualities. Epimetheus said to
+ Prometheus: 'Let me distribute, and do you inspect.' This was agreed, and
+ Epimetheus made the distribution. There were some to whom he gave strength
+ without swiftness, while he equipped the weaker with swiftness; some he
+ armed, and others he left unarmed; and devised for the latter some other
+ means of preservation, making some large, and having their size as a
+ protection, and others small, whose nature was to fly in the air or burrow
+ in the ground; this was to be their way of escape. Thus did he compensate
+ them with the view of preventing any race from becoming extinct. And when
+ he had provided against their destruction by one another, he contrived
+ also a means of protecting them against the seasons of heaven; clothing
+ them with close hair and thick skins sufficient to defend them against the
+ winter cold and able to resist the summer heat, so that they might have a
+ natural bed of their own when they wanted to rest; also he furnished them
+ with hoofs and hair and hard and callous skins under their feet. Then he
+ gave them varieties of food,&mdash;herb of the soil to some, to others
+ fruits of trees, and to others roots, and to some again he gave other
+ animals as food. And some he made to have few young ones, while those who
+ were their prey were very prolific; and in this manner the race was
+ preserved. Thus did Epimetheus, who, not being very wise, forgot that he
+ had distributed among the brute animals all the qualities which he had to
+ give,&mdash;and when he came to man, who was still unprovided, he was
+ terribly perplexed. Now while he was in this perplexity, Prometheus came
+ to inspect the distribution, and he found that the other animals were
+ suitably furnished, but that man alone was naked and shoeless, and had
+ neither bed nor arms of defence. The appointed hour was approaching when
+ man in his turn was to go forth into the light of day; and Prometheus, not
+ knowing how he could devise his salvation, stole the mechanical arts of
+ Hephaestus and Athene, and fire with them (they could neither have been
+ acquired nor used without fire), and gave them to man. Thus man had the
+ wisdom necessary to the support of life, but political wisdom he had not;
+ for that was in the keeping of Zeus, and the power of Prometheus did not
+ extend to entering into the citadel of heaven, where Zeus dwelt, who
+ moreover had terrible sentinels; but he did enter by stealth into the
+ common workshop of Athene and Hephaestus, in which they used to practise
+ their favourite arts, and carried off Hephaestus' art of working by fire,
+ and also the art of Athene, and gave them to man. And in this way man was
+ supplied with the means of life. But Prometheus is said to have been
+ afterwards prosecuted for theft, owing to the blunder of Epimetheus.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Now man, having a share of the divine attributes, was at first the only
+ one of the animals who had any gods, because he alone was of their
+ kindred; and he would raise altars and images of them. He was not long in
+ inventing articulate speech and names; and he also constructed houses and
+ clothes and shoes and beds, and drew sustenance from the earth. Thus
+ provided, mankind at first lived dispersed, and there were no cities. But
+ the consequence was that they were destroyed by the wild beasts, for they
+ were utterly weak in comparison of them, and their art was only sufficient
+ to provide them with the means of life, and did not enable them to carry
+ on war against the animals: food they had, but not as yet the art of
+ government, of which the art of war is a part. After a while the desire of
+ self-preservation gathered them into cities; but when they were gathered
+ together, having no art of government, they evil intreated one another,
+ and were again in process of dispersion and destruction. Zeus feared that
+ the entire race would be exterminated, and so he sent Hermes to them,
+ bearing reverence and justice to be the ordering principles of cities and
+ the bonds of friendship and conciliation. Hermes asked Zeus how he should
+ impart justice and reverence among men:&mdash;Should he distribute them as
+ the arts are distributed; that is to say, to a favoured few only, one
+ skilled individual having enough of medicine or of any other art for many
+ unskilled ones? 'Shall this be the manner in which I am to distribute
+ justice and reverence among men, or shall I give them to all?' 'To all,'
+ said Zeus; 'I should like them all to have a share; for cities cannot
+ exist, if a few only share in the virtues, as in the arts. And further,
+ make a law by my order, that he who has no part in reverence and justice
+ shall be put to death, for he is a plague of the state.'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And this is the reason, Socrates, why the Athenians and mankind in
+ general, when the question relates to carpentering or any other mechanical
+ art, allow but a few to share in their deliberations; and when any one
+ else interferes, then, as you say, they object, if he be not of the
+ favoured few; which, as I reply, is very natural. But when they meet to
+ deliberate about political virtue, which proceeds only by way of justice
+ and wisdom, they are patient enough of any man who speaks of them, as is
+ also natural, because they think that every man ought to share in this
+ sort of virtue, and that states could not exist if this were otherwise. I
+ have explained to you, Socrates, the reason of this phenomenon.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And that you may not suppose yourself to be deceived in thinking that all
+ men regard every man as having a share of justice or honesty and of every
+ other political virtue, let me give you a further proof, which is this. In
+ other cases, as you are aware, if a man says that he is a good
+ flute-player, or skilful in any other art in which he has no skill, people
+ either laugh at him or are angry with him, and his relations think that he
+ is mad and go and admonish him; but when honesty is in question, or some
+ other political virtue, even if they know that he is dishonest, yet, if
+ the man comes publicly forward and tells the truth about his dishonesty,
+ then, what in the other case was held by them to be good sense, they now
+ deem to be madness. They say that all men ought to profess honesty whether
+ they are honest or not, and that a man is out of his mind who says
+ anything else. Their notion is, that a man must have some degree of
+ honesty; and that if he has none at all he ought not to be in the world.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I have been showing that they are right in admitting every man as a
+ counsellor about this sort of virtue, as they are of opinion that every
+ man is a partaker of it. And I will now endeavour to show further that
+ they do not conceive this virtue to be given by nature, or to grow
+ spontaneously, but to be a thing which may be taught; and which comes to a
+ man by taking pains. No one would instruct, no one would rebuke, or be
+ angry with those whose calamities they suppose to be due to nature or
+ chance; they do not try to punish or to prevent them from being what they
+ are; they do but pity them. Who is so foolish as to chastise or instruct
+ the ugly, or the diminutive, or the feeble? And for this reason. Because
+ he knows that good and evil of this kind is the work of nature and of
+ chance; whereas if a man is wanting in those good qualities which are
+ attained by study and exercise and teaching, and has only the contrary
+ evil qualities, other men are angry with him, and punish and reprove him&mdash;of
+ these evil qualities one is impiety, another injustice, and they may be
+ described generally as the very opposite of political virtue. In such
+ cases any man will be angry with another, and reprimand him,&mdash;clearly
+ because he thinks that by study and learning, the virtue in which the
+ other is deficient may be acquired. If you will think, Socrates, of the
+ nature of punishment, you will see at once that in the opinion of mankind
+ virtue may be acquired; no one punishes the evil-doer under the notion, or
+ for the reason, that he has done wrong,&mdash;only the unreasonable fury
+ of a beast acts in that manner. But he who desires to inflict rational
+ punishment does not retaliate for a past wrong which cannot be undone; he
+ has regard to the future, and is desirous that the man who is punished,
+ and he who sees him punished, may be deterred from doing wrong again. He
+ punishes for the sake of prevention, thereby clearly implying that virtue
+ is capable of being taught. This is the notion of all who retaliate upon
+ others either privately or publicly. And the Athenians, too, your own
+ citizens, like other men, punish and take vengeance on all whom they
+ regard as evil doers; and hence, we may infer them to be of the number of
+ those who think that virtue may be acquired and taught. Thus far,
+ Socrates, I have shown you clearly enough, if I am not mistaken, that your
+ countrymen are right in admitting the tinker and the cobbler to advise
+ about politics, and also that they deem virtue to be capable of being
+ taught and acquired.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There yet remains one difficulty which has been raised by you about the
+ sons of good men. What is the reason why good men teach their sons the
+ knowledge which is gained from teachers, and make them wise in that, but
+ do nothing towards improving them in the virtues which distinguish
+ themselves? And here, Socrates, I will leave the apologue and resume the
+ argument. Please to consider: Is there or is there not some one quality of
+ which all the citizens must be partakers, if there is to be a city at all?
+ In the answer to this question is contained the only solution of your
+ difficulty; there is no other. For if there be any such quality, and this
+ quality or unity is not the art of the carpenter, or the smith, or the
+ potter, but justice and temperance and holiness and, in a word, manly
+ virtue&mdash;if this is the quality of which all men must be partakers,
+ and which is the very condition of their learning or doing anything else,
+ and if he who is wanting in this, whether he be a child only or a grown-up
+ man or woman, must be taught and punished, until by punishment he becomes
+ better, and he who rebels against instruction and punishment is either
+ exiled or condemned to death under the idea that he is incurable&mdash;if
+ what I am saying be true, good men have their sons taught other things and
+ not this, do consider how extraordinary their conduct would appear to be.
+ For we have shown that they think virtue capable of being taught and
+ cultivated both in private and public; and, notwithstanding, they have
+ their sons taught lesser matters, ignorance of which does not involve the
+ punishment of death: but greater things, of which the ignorance may cause
+ death and exile to those who have no training or knowledge of them&mdash;aye,
+ and confiscation as well as death, and, in a word, may be the ruin of
+ families&mdash;those things, I say, they are supposed not to teach them,&mdash;not
+ to take the utmost care that they should learn. How improbable is this,
+ Socrates!
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Education and admonition commence in the first years of childhood, and
+ last to the very end of life. Mother and nurse and father and tutor are
+ vying with one another about the improvement of the child as soon as ever
+ he is able to understand what is being said to him: he cannot say or do
+ anything without their setting forth to him that this is just and that is
+ unjust; this is honourable, that is dishonourable; this is holy, that is
+ unholy; do this and abstain from that. And if he obeys, well and good; if
+ not, he is straightened by threats and blows, like a piece of bent or
+ warped wood. At a later stage they send him to teachers, and enjoin them
+ to see to his manners even more than to his reading and music; and the
+ teachers do as they are desired. And when the boy has learned his letters
+ and is beginning to understand what is written, as before he understood
+ only what was spoken, they put into his hands the works of great poets,
+ which he reads sitting on a bench at school; in these are contained many
+ admonitions, and many tales, and praises, and encomia of ancient famous
+ men, which he is required to learn by heart, in order that he may imitate
+ or emulate them and desire to become like them. Then, again, the teachers
+ of the lyre take similar care that their young disciple is temperate and
+ gets into no mischief; and when they have taught him the use of the lyre,
+ they introduce him to the poems of other excellent poets, who are the
+ lyric poets; and these they set to music, and make their harmonies and
+ rhythms quite familiar to the children's souls, in order that they may
+ learn to be more gentle, and harmonious, and rhythmical, and so more
+ fitted for speech and action; for the life of man in every part has need
+ of harmony and rhythm. Then they send them to the master of gymnastic, in
+ order that their bodies may better minister to the virtuous mind, and that
+ they may not be compelled through bodily weakness to play the coward in
+ war or on any other occasion. This is what is done by those who have the
+ means, and those who have the means are the rich; their children begin to
+ go to school soonest and leave off latest. When they have done with
+ masters, the state again compels them to learn the laws, and live after
+ the pattern which they furnish, and not after their own fancies; and just
+ as in learning to write, the writing-master first draws lines with a style
+ for the use of the young beginner, and gives him the tablet and makes him
+ follow the lines, so the city draws the laws, which were the invention of
+ good lawgivers living in the olden time; these are given to the young man,
+ in order to guide him in his conduct whether he is commanding or obeying;
+ and he who transgresses them is to be corrected, or, in other words,
+ called to account, which is a term used not only in your country, but also
+ in many others, seeing that justice calls men to account. Now when there
+ is all this care about virtue private and public, why, Socrates, do you
+ still wonder and doubt whether virtue can be taught? Cease to wonder, for
+ the opposite would be far more surprising.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But why then do the sons of good fathers often turn out ill? There is
+ nothing very wonderful in this; for, as I have been saying, the existence
+ of a state implies that virtue is not any man's private possession. If so&mdash;and
+ nothing can be truer&mdash;then I will further ask you to imagine, as an
+ illustration, some other pursuit or branch of knowledge which may be
+ assumed equally to be the condition of the existence of a state. Suppose
+ that there could be no state unless we were all flute-players, as far as
+ each had the capacity, and everybody was freely teaching everybody the
+ art, both in private and public, and reproving the bad player as freely
+ and openly as every man now teaches justice and the laws, not concealing
+ them as he would conceal the other arts, but imparting them&mdash;for all
+ of us have a mutual interest in the justice and virtue of one another, and
+ this is the reason why every one is so ready to teach justice and the
+ laws;&mdash;suppose, I say, that there were the same readiness and
+ liberality among us in teaching one another flute-playing, do you imagine,
+ Socrates, that the sons of good flute-players would be more likely to be
+ good than the sons of bad ones? I think not. Would not their sons grow up
+ to be distinguished or undistinguished according to their own natural
+ capacities as flute-players, and the son of a good player would often turn
+ out to be a bad one, and the son of a bad player to be a good one, all
+ flute-players would be good enough in comparison of those who were
+ ignorant and unacquainted with the art of flute-playing? In like manner I
+ would have you consider that he who appears to you to be the worst of
+ those who have been brought up in laws and humanities, would appear to be
+ a just man and a master of justice if he were to be compared with men who
+ had no education, or courts of justice, or laws, or any restraints upon
+ them which compelled them to practise virtue&mdash;with the savages, for
+ example, whom the poet Pherecrates exhibited on the stage at the last
+ year's Lenaean festival. If you were living among men such as the
+ man-haters in his Chorus, you would be only too glad to meet with
+ Eurybates and Phrynondas, and you would sorrowfully long to revisit the
+ rascality of this part of the world. You, Socrates, are discontented, and
+ why? Because all men are teachers of virtue, each one according to his
+ ability; and you say Where are the teachers? You might as well ask, Who
+ teaches Greek? For of that too there will not be any teachers found. Or
+ you might ask, Who is to teach the sons of our artisans this same art
+ which they have learned of their fathers? He and his fellow-workmen have
+ taught them to the best of their ability,&mdash;but who will carry them
+ further in their arts? And you would certainly have a difficulty,
+ Socrates, in finding a teacher of them; but there would be no difficulty
+ in finding a teacher of those who are wholly ignorant. And this is true of
+ virtue or of anything else; if a man is better able than we are to promote
+ virtue ever so little, we must be content with the result. A teacher of
+ this sort I believe myself to be, and above all other men to have the
+ knowledge which makes a man noble and good; and I give my pupils their
+ money's-worth, and even more, as they themselves confess. And therefore I
+ have introduced the following mode of payment:&mdash;When a man has been
+ my pupil, if he likes he pays my price, but there is no compulsion; and if
+ he does not like, he has only to go into a temple and take an oath of the
+ value of the instructions, and he pays no more than he declares to be
+ their value.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Such is my Apologue, Socrates, and such is the argument by which I
+ endeavour to show that virtue may be taught, and that this is the opinion
+ of the Athenians. And I have also attempted to show that you are not to
+ wonder at good fathers having bad sons, or at good sons having bad
+ fathers, of which the sons of Polycleitus afford an example, who are the
+ companions of our friends here, Paralus and Xanthippus, but are nothing in
+ comparison with their father; and this is true of the sons of many other
+ artists. As yet I ought not to say the same of Paralus and Xanthippus
+ themselves, for they are young and there is still hope of them.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Protagoras ended, and in my ear
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ 'So charming left his voice, that I the while Thought him still speaking;
+ still stood fixed to hear (Borrowed by Milton, "Paradise Lost".).'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ At length, when the truth dawned upon me, that he had really finished, not
+ without difficulty I began to collect myself, and looking at Hippocrates,
+ I said to him: O son of Apollodorus, how deeply grateful I am to you for
+ having brought me hither; I would not have missed the speech of Protagoras
+ for a great deal. For I used to imagine that no human care could make men
+ good; but I know better now. Yet I have still one very small difficulty
+ which I am sure that Protagoras will easily explain, as he has already
+ explained so much. If a man were to go and consult Pericles or any of our
+ great speakers about these matters, he might perhaps hear as fine a
+ discourse; but then when one has a question to ask of any of them, like
+ books, they can neither answer nor ask; and if any one challenges the
+ least particular of their speech, they go ringing on in a long harangue,
+ like brazen pots, which when they are struck continue to sound unless some
+ one puts his hand upon them; whereas our friend Protagoras can not only
+ make a good speech, as he has already shown, but when he is asked a
+ question he can answer briefly; and when he asks he will wait and hear the
+ answer; and this is a very rare gift. Now I, Protagoras, want to ask of
+ you a little question, which if you will only answer, I shall be quite
+ satisfied. You were saying that virtue can be taught;&mdash;that I will
+ take upon your authority, and there is no one to whom I am more ready to
+ trust. But I marvel at one thing about which I should like to have my mind
+ set at rest. You were speaking of Zeus sending justice and reverence to
+ men; and several times while you were speaking, justice, and temperance,
+ and holiness, and all these qualities, were described by you as if
+ together they made up virtue. Now I want you to tell me truly whether
+ virtue is one whole, of which justice and temperance and holiness are
+ parts; or whether all these are only the names of one and the same thing:
+ that is the doubt which still lingers in my mind.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There is no difficulty, Socrates, in answering that the qualities of which
+ you are speaking are the parts of virtue which is one.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And are they parts, I said, in the same sense in which mouth, nose, and
+ eyes, and ears, are the parts of a face; or are they like the parts of
+ gold, which differ from the whole and from one another only in being
+ larger or smaller?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I should say that they differed, Socrates, in the first way; they are
+ related to one another as the parts of a face are related to the whole
+ face.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And do men have some one part and some another part of virtue? Or if a man
+ has one part, must he also have all the others?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ By no means, he said; for many a man is brave and not just, or just and
+ not wise.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You would not deny, then, that courage and wisdom are also parts of
+ virtue?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Most undoubtedly they are, he answered; and wisdom is the noblest of the
+ parts.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And they are all different from one another? I said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And has each of them a distinct function like the parts of the face;&mdash;the
+ eye, for example, is not like the ear, and has not the same functions; and
+ the other parts are none of them like one another, either in their
+ functions, or in any other way? I want to know whether the comparison
+ holds concerning the parts of virtue. Do they also differ from one another
+ in themselves and in their functions? For that is clearly what the simile
+ would imply.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, Socrates, you are right in supposing that they differ.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then, I said, no other part of virtue is like knowledge, or like justice,
+ or like courage, or like temperance, or like holiness?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ No, he answered.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well then, I said, suppose that you and I enquire into their natures. And
+ first, you would agree with me that justice is of the nature of a thing,
+ would you not? That is my opinion: would it not be yours also?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Mine also, he said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And suppose that some one were to ask us, saying, 'O Protagoras, and you,
+ Socrates, what about this thing which you were calling justice, is it just
+ or unjust?'&mdash;and I were to answer, just: would you vote with me or
+ against me?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ With you, he said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Thereupon I should answer to him who asked me, that justice is of the
+ nature of the just: would not you?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, he said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And suppose that he went on to say: 'Well now, is there also such a thing
+ as holiness?'&mdash;we should answer, 'Yes,' if I am not mistaken?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, he said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Which you would also acknowledge to be a thing&mdash;should we not say so?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He assented.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ 'And is this a sort of thing which is of the nature of the holy, or of the
+ nature of the unholy?' I should be angry at his putting such a question,
+ and should say, 'Peace, man; nothing can be holy if holiness is not holy.'
+ What would you say? Would you not answer in the same way?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Certainly, he said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And then after this suppose that he came and asked us, 'What were you
+ saying just now? Perhaps I may not have heard you rightly, but you seemed
+ to me to be saying that the parts of virtue were not the same as one
+ another.' I should reply, 'You certainly heard that said, but not, as you
+ imagine, by me; for I only asked the question; Protagoras gave the
+ answer.' And suppose that he turned to you and said, 'Is this true,
+ Protagoras? and do you maintain that one part of virtue is unlike another,
+ and is this your position?'&mdash;how would you answer him?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I could not help acknowledging the truth of what he said, Socrates.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well then, Protagoras, we will assume this; and now supposing that he
+ proceeded to say further, 'Then holiness is not of the nature of justice,
+ nor justice of the nature of holiness, but of the nature of unholiness;
+ and holiness is of the nature of the not just, and therefore of the
+ unjust, and the unjust is the unholy': how shall we answer him? I should
+ certainly answer him on my own behalf that justice is holy, and that
+ holiness is just; and I would say in like manner on your behalf also, if
+ you would allow me, that justice is either the same with holiness, or very
+ nearly the same; and above all I would assert that justice is like
+ holiness and holiness is like justice; and I wish that you would tell me
+ whether I may be permitted to give this answer on your behalf, and whether
+ you would agree with me.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He replied, I cannot simply agree, Socrates, to the proposition that
+ justice is holy and that holiness is just, for there appears to me to be a
+ difference between them. But what matter? if you please I please; and let
+ us assume, if you will I, that justice is holy, and that holiness is just.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Pardon me, I replied; I do not want this 'if you wish' or 'if you will'
+ sort of conclusion to be proven, but I want you and me to be proven: I
+ mean to say that the conclusion will be best proven if there be no 'if.'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well, he said, I admit that justice bears a resemblance to holiness, for
+ there is always some point of view in which everything is like every other
+ thing; white is in a certain way like black, and hard is like soft, and
+ the most extreme opposites have some qualities in common; even the parts
+ of the face which, as we were saying before, are distinct and have
+ different functions, are still in a certain point of view similar, and one
+ of them is like another of them. And you may prove that they are like one
+ another on the same principle that all things are like one another; and
+ yet things which are like in some particular ought not to be called alike,
+ nor things which are unlike in some particular, however slight, unlike.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And do you think, I said in a tone of surprise, that justice and holiness
+ have but a small degree of likeness?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Certainly not; any more than I agree with what I understand to be your
+ view.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well, I said, as you appear to have a difficulty about this, let us take
+ another of the examples which you mentioned instead. Do you admit the
+ existence of folly?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I do.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And is not wisdom the very opposite of folly?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ That is true, he said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And when men act rightly and advantageously they seem to you to be
+ temperate?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, he said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And temperance makes them temperate?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Certainly.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And they who do not act rightly act foolishly, and in acting thus are not
+ temperate?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I agree, he said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then to act foolishly is the opposite of acting temperately?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He assented.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And foolish actions are done by folly, and temperate actions by
+ temperance?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He agreed.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And that is done strongly which is done by strength, and that which is
+ weakly done, by weakness?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He assented.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And that which is done with swiftness is done swiftly, and that which is
+ done with slowness, slowly?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He assented again.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And that which is done in the same manner, is done by the same; and that
+ which is done in an opposite manner by the opposite?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He agreed.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Once more, I said, is there anything beautiful?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To which the only opposite is the ugly?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There is no other.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And is there anything good?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There is.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To which the only opposite is the evil?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There is no other.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And there is the acute in sound?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ True.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To which the only opposite is the grave?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There is no other, he said, but that.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then every opposite has one opposite only and no more?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He assented.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then now, I said, let us recapitulate our admissions. First of all we
+ admitted that everything has one opposite and not more than one?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We did so.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And we admitted also that what was done in opposite ways was done by
+ opposites?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And that which was done foolishly, as we further admitted, was done in the
+ opposite way to that which was done temperately?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And that which was done temperately was done by temperance, and that which
+ was done foolishly by folly?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He agreed.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And that which is done in opposite ways is done by opposites?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And one thing is done by temperance, and quite another thing by folly?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And in opposite ways?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Certainly.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And therefore by opposites:&mdash;then folly is the opposite of
+ temperance?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Clearly.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And do you remember that folly has already been acknowledged by us to be
+ the opposite of wisdom?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He assented.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And we said that everything has only one opposite?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then, Protagoras, which of the two assertions shall we renounce? One says
+ that everything has but one opposite; the other that wisdom is distinct
+ from temperance, and that both of them are parts of virtue; and that they
+ are not only distinct, but dissimilar, both in themselves and in their
+ functions, like the parts of a face. Which of these two assertions shall
+ we renounce? For both of them together are certainly not in harmony; they
+ do not accord or agree: for how can they be said to agree if everything is
+ assumed to have only one opposite and not more than one, and yet folly,
+ which is one, has clearly the two opposites&mdash;wisdom and temperance?
+ Is not that true, Protagoras? What else would you say?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He assented, but with great reluctance.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then temperance and wisdom are the same, as before justice and holiness
+ appeared to us to be nearly the same. And now, Protagoras, I said, we must
+ finish the enquiry, and not faint. Do you think that an unjust man can be
+ temperate in his injustice?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I should be ashamed, Socrates, he said, to acknowledge this, which
+ nevertheless many may be found to assert.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And shall I argue with them or with you? I replied.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I would rather, he said, that you should argue with the many first, if you
+ will.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Whichever you please, if you will only answer me and say whether you are
+ of their opinion or not. My object is to test the validity of the
+ argument; and yet the result may be that I who ask and you who answer may
+ both be put on our trial.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Protagoras at first made a show of refusing, as he said that the argument
+ was not encouraging; at length, he consented to answer.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Now then, I said, begin at the beginning and answer me. You think that
+ some men are temperate, and yet unjust?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, he said; let that be admitted.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And temperance is good sense?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And good sense is good counsel in doing injustice?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Granted.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If they succeed, I said, or if they do not succeed?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ If they succeed.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And you would admit the existence of goods?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And is the good that which is expedient for man?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, indeed, he said: and there are some things which may be inexpedient,
+ and yet I call them good.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I thought that Protagoras was getting ruffled and excited; he seemed to be
+ setting himself in an attitude of war. Seeing this, I minded my business,
+ and gently said:&mdash;
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When you say, Protagoras, that things inexpedient are good, do you mean
+ inexpedient for man only, or inexpedient altogether? and do you call the
+ latter good?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Certainly not the last, he replied; for I know of many things&mdash;meats,
+ drinks, medicines, and ten thousand other things, which are inexpedient
+ for man, and some which are expedient; and some which are neither
+ expedient nor inexpedient for man, but only for horses; and some for oxen
+ only, and some for dogs; and some for no animals, but only for trees; and
+ some for the roots of trees and not for their branches, as for example,
+ manure, which is a good thing when laid about the roots of a tree, but
+ utterly destructive if thrown upon the shoots and young branches; or I may
+ instance olive oil, which is mischievous to all plants, and generally most
+ injurious to the hair of every animal with the exception of man, but
+ beneficial to human hair and to the human body generally; and even in this
+ application (so various and changeable is the nature of the benefit), that
+ which is the greatest good to the outward parts of a man, is a very great
+ evil to his inward parts: and for this reason physicians always forbid
+ their patients the use of oil in their food, except in very small
+ quantities, just enough to extinguish the disagreeable sensation of smell
+ in meats and sauces.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When he had given this answer, the company cheered him. And I said:
+ Protagoras, I have a wretched memory, and when any one makes a long speech
+ to me I never remember what he is talking about. As then, if I had been
+ deaf, and you were going to converse with me, you would have had to raise
+ your voice; so now, having such a bad memory, I will ask you to cut your
+ answers shorter, if you would take me with you.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ What do you mean? he said: how am I to shorten my answers? shall I make
+ them too short?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Certainly not, I said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But short enough?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, I said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Shall I answer what appears to me to be short enough, or what appears to
+ you to be short enough?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I have heard, I said, that you can speak and teach others to speak about
+ the same things at such length that words never seemed to fail, or with
+ such brevity that no one could use fewer of them. Please therefore, if you
+ talk with me, to adopt the latter or more compendious method.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Socrates, he replied, many a battle of words have I fought, and if I had
+ followed the method of disputation which my adversaries desired, as you
+ want me to do, I should have been no better than another, and the name of
+ Protagoras would have been nowhere.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I saw that he was not satisfied with his previous answers, and that he
+ would not play the part of answerer any more if he could help; and I
+ considered that there was no call upon me to continue the conversation; so
+ I said: Protagoras, I do not wish to force the conversation upon you if
+ you had rather not, but when you are willing to argue with me in such a
+ way that I can follow you, then I will argue with you. Now you, as is said
+ of you by others and as you say of yourself, are able to have discussions
+ in shorter forms of speech as well as in longer, for you are a master of
+ wisdom; but I cannot manage these long speeches: I only wish that I could.
+ You, on the other hand, who are capable of either, ought to speak shorter
+ as I beg you, and then we might converse. But I see that you are
+ disinclined, and as I have an engagement which will prevent my staying to
+ hear you at greater length (for I have to be in another place), I will
+ depart; although I should have liked to have heard you.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Thus I spoke, and was rising from my seat, when Callias seized me by the
+ right hand, and in his left hand caught hold of this old cloak of mine. He
+ said: We cannot let you go, Socrates, for if you leave us there will be an
+ end of our discussions: I must therefore beg you to remain, as there is
+ nothing in the world that I should like better than to hear you and
+ Protagoras discourse. Do not deny the company this pleasure.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Now I had got up, and was in the act of departure. Son of Hipponicus, I
+ replied, I have always admired, and do now heartily applaud and love your
+ philosophical spirit, and I would gladly comply with your request, if I
+ could. But the truth is that I cannot. And what you ask is as great an
+ impossibility to me, as if you bade me run a race with Crison of Himera,
+ when in his prime, or with some one of the long or day course runners. To
+ such a request I should reply that I would fain ask the same of my own
+ legs; but they refuse to comply. And therefore if you want to see Crison
+ and me in the same stadium, you must bid him slacken his speed to mine,
+ for I cannot run quickly, and he can run slowly. And in like manner if you
+ want to hear me and Protagoras discoursing, you must ask him to shorten
+ his answers, and keep to the point, as he did at first; if not, how can
+ there be any discussion? For discussion is one thing, and making an
+ oration is quite another, in my humble opinion.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But you see, Socrates, said Callias, that Protagoras may fairly claim to
+ speak in his own way, just as you claim to speak in yours.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Here Alcibiades interposed, and said: That, Callias, is not a true
+ statement of the case. For our friend Socrates admits that he cannot make
+ a speech&mdash;in this he yields the palm to Protagoras: but I should be
+ greatly surprised if he yielded to any living man in the power of holding
+ and apprehending an argument. Now if Protagoras will make a similar
+ admission, and confess that he is inferior to Socrates in argumentative
+ skill, that is enough for Socrates; but if he claims a superiority in
+ argument as well, let him ask and answer&mdash;not, when a question is
+ asked, slipping away from the point, and instead of answering, making a
+ speech at such length that most of his hearers forget the question at
+ issue (not that Socrates is likely to forget&mdash;I will be bound for
+ that, although he may pretend in fun that he has a bad memory). And
+ Socrates appears to me to be more in the right than Protagoras; that is my
+ view, and every man ought to say what he thinks.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ When Alcibiades had done speaking, some one&mdash;Critias, I believe&mdash;went
+ on to say: O Prodicus and Hippias, Callias appears to me to be a partisan
+ of Protagoras: and this led Alcibiades, who loves opposition, to take the
+ other side. But we should not be partisans either of Socrates or of
+ Protagoras; let us rather unite in entreating both of them not to break up
+ the discussion.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Prodicus added: That, Critias, seems to me to be well said, for those who
+ are present at such discussions ought to be impartial hearers of both the
+ speakers; remembering, however, that impartiality is not the same as
+ equality, for both sides should be impartially heard, and yet an equal
+ meed should not be assigned to both of them; but to the wiser a higher
+ meed should be given, and a lower to the less wise. And I as well as
+ Critias would beg you, Protagoras and Socrates, to grant our request,
+ which is, that you will argue with one another and not wrangle; for
+ friends argue with friends out of good-will, but only adversaries and
+ enemies wrangle. And then our meeting will be delightful; for in this way
+ you, who are the speakers, will be most likely to win esteem, and not
+ praise only, among us who are your audience; for esteem is a sincere
+ conviction of the hearers' souls, but praise is often an insincere
+ expression of men uttering falsehoods contrary to their conviction. And
+ thus we who are the hearers will be gratified and not pleased; for
+ gratification is of the mind when receiving wisdom and knowledge, but
+ pleasure is of the body when eating or experiencing some other bodily
+ delight. Thus spoke Prodicus, and many of the company applauded his words.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Hippias the sage spoke next. He said: All of you who are here present I
+ reckon to be kinsmen and friends and fellow-citizens, by nature and not by
+ law; for by nature like is akin to like, whereas law is the tyrant of
+ mankind, and often compels us to do many things which are against nature.
+ How great would be the disgrace then, if we, who know the nature of
+ things, and are the wisest of the Hellenes, and as such are met together
+ in this city, which is the metropolis of wisdom, and in the greatest and
+ most glorious house of this city, should have nothing to show worthy of
+ this height of dignity, but should only quarrel with one another like the
+ meanest of mankind! I do pray and advise you, Protagoras, and you,
+ Socrates, to agree upon a compromise. Let us be your peacemakers. And do
+ not you, Socrates, aim at this precise and extreme brevity in discourse,
+ if Protagoras objects, but loosen and let go the reins of speech, that
+ your words may be grander and more becoming to you. Neither do you,
+ Protagoras, go forth on the gale with every sail set out of sight of land
+ into an ocean of words, but let there be a mean observed by both of you.
+ Do as I say. And let me also persuade you to choose an arbiter or overseer
+ or president; he will keep watch over your words and will prescribe their
+ proper length.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This proposal was received by the company with universal approval; Callias
+ said that he would not let me off, and they begged me to choose an
+ arbiter. But I said that to choose an umpire of discourse would be
+ unseemly; for if the person chosen was inferior, then the inferior or
+ worse ought not to preside over the better; or if he was equal, neither
+ would that be well; for he who is our equal will do as we do, and what
+ will be the use of choosing him? And if you say, 'Let us have a better
+ then,'&mdash;to that I answer that you cannot have any one who is wiser
+ than Protagoras. And if you choose another who is not really better, and
+ whom you only say is better, to put another over him as though he were an
+ inferior person would be an unworthy reflection on him; not that, as far
+ as I am concerned, any reflection is of much consequence to me. Let me
+ tell you then what I will do in order that the conversation and discussion
+ may go on as you desire. If Protagoras is not disposed to answer, let him
+ ask and I will answer; and I will endeavour to show at the same time how,
+ as I maintain, he ought to answer: and when I have answered as many
+ questions as he likes to ask, let him in like manner answer me; and if he
+ seems to be not very ready at answering the precise question asked of him,
+ you and I will unite in entreating him, as you entreated me, not to spoil
+ the discussion. And this will require no special arbiter&mdash;all of you
+ shall be arbiters.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This was generally approved, and Protagoras, though very much against his
+ will, was obliged to agree that he would ask questions; and when he had
+ put a sufficient number of them, that he would answer in his turn those
+ which he was asked in short replies. He began to put his questions as
+ follows:&mdash;
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I am of opinion, Socrates, he said, that skill in poetry is the principal
+ part of education; and this I conceive to be the power of knowing what
+ compositions of the poets are correct, and what are not, and how they are
+ to be distinguished, and of explaining when asked the reason of the
+ difference. And I propose to transfer the question which you and I have
+ been discussing to the domain of poetry; we will speak as before of
+ virtue, but in reference to a passage of a poet. Now Simonides says to
+ Scopas the son of Creon the Thessalian:
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ 'Hardly on the one hand can a man become truly good, built four-square in
+ hands and feet and mind, a work without a flaw.'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Do you know the poem? or shall I repeat the whole?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ There is no need, I said; for I am perfectly well acquainted with the ode,&mdash;I
+ have made a careful study of it.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Very well, he said. And do you think that the ode is a good composition,
+ and true?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, I said, both good and true.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But if there is a contradiction, can the composition be good or true?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ No, not in that case, I replied.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And is there not a contradiction? he asked. Reflect.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well, my friend, I have reflected.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And does not the poet proceed to say, 'I do not agree with the word of
+ Pittacus, albeit the utterance of a wise man: Hardly can a man be good'?
+ Now you will observe that this is said by the same poet.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I know it.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And do you think, he said, that the two sayings are consistent?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, I said, I think so (at the same time I could not help fearing that
+ there might be something in what he said). And you think otherwise?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Why, he said, how can he be consistent in both? First of all, premising as
+ his own thought, 'Hardly can a man become truly good'; and then a little
+ further on in the poem, forgetting, and blaming Pittacus and refusing to
+ agree with him, when he says, 'Hardly can a man be good,' which is the
+ very same thing. And yet when he blames him who says the same with
+ himself, he blames himself; so that he must be wrong either in his first
+ or his second assertion.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Many of the audience cheered and applauded this. And I felt at first giddy
+ and faint, as if I had received a blow from the hand of an expert boxer,
+ when I heard his words and the sound of the cheering; and to confess the
+ truth, I wanted to get time to think what the meaning of the poet really
+ was. So I turned to Prodicus and called him. Prodicus, I said, Simonides
+ is a countryman of yours, and you ought to come to his aid. I must appeal
+ to you, like the river Scamander in Homer, who, when beleaguered by
+ Achilles, summons the Simois to aid him, saying:
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ 'Brother dear, let us both together stay the force of the hero (Il.).'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And I summon you, for I am afraid that Protagoras will make an end of
+ Simonides. Now is the time to rehabilitate Simonides, by the application
+ of your philosophy of synonyms, which enables you to distinguish 'will'
+ and 'wish,' and make other charming distinctions like those which you drew
+ just now. And I should like to know whether you would agree with me; for I
+ am of opinion that there is no contradiction in the words of Simonides.
+ And first of all I wish that you would say whether, in your opinion,
+ Prodicus, 'being' is the same as 'becoming.'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Not the same, certainly, replied Prodicus.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Did not Simonides first set forth, as his own view, that 'Hardly can a man
+ become truly good'?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Quite right, said Prodicus.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And then he blames Pittacus, not, as Protagoras imagines, for repeating
+ that which he says himself, but for saying something different from
+ himself. Pittacus does not say as Simonides says, that hardly can a man
+ become good, but hardly can a man be good: and our friend Prodicus would
+ maintain that being, Protagoras, is not the same as becoming; and if they
+ are not the same, then Simonides is not inconsistent with himself. I dare
+ say that Prodicus and many others would say, as Hesiod says,
+ </p>
+<pre xml:space="preserve">
+ 'On the one hand, hardly can a man become good,
+ For the gods have made virtue the reward of toil,
+ But on the other hand, when you have climbed the height,
+ Then, to retain virtue, however difficult the acquisition, is easy
+ &mdash;(Works and Days).'
+</pre>
+ <p>
+ Prodicus heard and approved; but Protagoras said: Your correction,
+ Socrates, involves a greater error than is contained in the sentence which
+ you are correcting.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Alas! I said, Protagoras; then I am a sorry physician, and do but
+ aggravate a disorder which I am seeking to cure.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Such is the fact, he said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ How so? I asked.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The poet, he replied, could never have made such a mistake as to say that
+ virtue, which in the opinion of all men is the hardest of all things, can
+ be easily retained.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well, I said, and how fortunate are we in having Prodicus among us, at the
+ right moment; for he has a wisdom, Protagoras, which, as I imagine, is
+ more than human and of very ancient date, and may be as old as Simonides
+ or even older. Learned as you are in many things, you appear to know
+ nothing of this; but I know, for I am a disciple of his. And now, if I am
+ not mistaken, you do not understand the word 'hard' (chalepon) in the
+ sense which Simonides intended; and I must correct you, as Prodicus
+ corrects me when I use the word 'awful' (deinon) as a term of praise. If I
+ say that Protagoras or any one else is an 'awfully' wise man, he asks me
+ if I am not ashamed of calling that which is good 'awful'; and then he
+ explains to me that the term 'awful' is always taken in a bad sense, and
+ that no one speaks of being 'awfully' healthy or wealthy, or of 'awful'
+ peace, but of 'awful' disease, 'awful' war, 'awful' poverty, meaning by
+ the term 'awful,' evil. And I think that Simonides and his countrymen the
+ Ceans, when they spoke of 'hard' meant 'evil,' or something which you do
+ not understand. Let us ask Prodicus, for he ought to be able to answer
+ questions about the dialect of Simonides. What did he mean, Prodicus, by
+ the term 'hard'?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Evil, said Prodicus.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And therefore, I said, Prodicus, he blames Pittacus for saying, 'Hard is
+ the good,' just as if that were equivalent to saying, Evil is the good.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, he said, that was certainly his meaning; and he is twitting Pittacus
+ with ignorance of the use of terms, which in a Lesbian, who has been
+ accustomed to speak a barbarous language, is natural.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Do you hear, Protagoras, I asked, what our friend Prodicus is saying? And
+ have you an answer for him?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You are entirely mistaken, Prodicus, said Protagoras; and I know very well
+ that Simonides in using the word 'hard' meant what all of us mean, not
+ evil, but that which is not easy&mdash;that which takes a great deal of
+ trouble: of this I am positive.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I said: I also incline to believe, Protagoras, that this was the meaning
+ of Simonides, of which our friend Prodicus was very well aware, but he
+ thought that he would make fun, and try if you could maintain your thesis;
+ for that Simonides could never have meant the other is clearly proved by
+ the context, in which he says that God only has this gift. Now he cannot
+ surely mean to say that to be good is evil, when he afterwards proceeds to
+ say that God only has this gift, and that this is the attribute of him and
+ of no other. For if this be his meaning, Prodicus would impute to
+ Simonides a character of recklessness which is very unlike his countrymen.
+ And I should like to tell you, I said, what I imagine to be the real
+ meaning of Simonides in this poem, if you will test what, in your way of
+ speaking, would be called my skill in poetry; or if you would rather, I
+ will be the listener.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To this proposal Protagoras replied: As you please;&mdash;and Hippias,
+ Prodicus, and the others told me by all means to do as I proposed.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then now, I said, I will endeavour to explain to you my opinion about this
+ poem of Simonides. There is a very ancient philosophy which is more
+ cultivated in Crete and Lacedaemon than in any other part of Hellas, and
+ there are more philosophers in those countries than anywhere else in the
+ world. This, however, is a secret which the Lacedaemonians deny; and they
+ pretend to be ignorant, just because they do not wish to have it thought
+ that they rule the world by wisdom, like the Sophists of whom Protagoras
+ was speaking, and not by valour of arms; considering that if the reason of
+ their superiority were disclosed, all men would be practising their
+ wisdom. And this secret of theirs has never been discovered by the
+ imitators of Lacedaemonian fashions in other cities, who go about with
+ their ears bruised in imitation of them, and have the caestus bound on
+ their arms, and are always in training, and wear short cloaks; for they
+ imagine that these are the practices which have enabled the Lacedaemonians
+ to conquer the other Hellenes. Now when the Lacedaemonians want to unbend
+ and hold free conversation with their wise men, and are no longer
+ satisfied with mere secret intercourse, they drive out all these
+ laconizers, and any other foreigners who may happen to be in their
+ country, and they hold a philosophical seance unknown to strangers; and
+ they themselves forbid their young men to go out into other cities&mdash;in
+ this they are like the Cretans&mdash;in order that they may not unlearn
+ the lessons which they have taught them. And in Lacedaemon and Crete not
+ only men but also women have a pride in their high cultivation. And hereby
+ you may know that I am right in attributing to the Lacedaemonians this
+ excellence in philosophy and speculation: If a man converses with the most
+ ordinary Lacedaemonian, he will find him seldom good for much in general
+ conversation, but at any point in the discourse he will be darting out
+ some notable saying, terse and full of meaning, with unerring aim; and the
+ person with whom he is talking seems to be like a child in his hands. And
+ many of our own age and of former ages have noted that the true
+ Lacedaemonian type of character has the love of philosophy even stronger
+ than the love of gymnastics; they are conscious that only a perfectly
+ educated man is capable of uttering such expressions. Such were Thales of
+ Miletus, and Pittacus of Mitylene, and Bias of Priene, and our own Solon,
+ and Cleobulus the Lindian, and Myson the Chenian; and seventh in the
+ catalogue of wise men was the Lacedaemonian Chilo. All these were lovers
+ and emulators and disciples of the culture of the Lacedaemonians, and any
+ one may perceive that their wisdom was of this character; consisting of
+ short memorable sentences, which they severally uttered. And they met
+ together and dedicated in the temple of Apollo at Delphi, as the
+ first-fruits of their wisdom, the far-famed inscriptions, which are in all
+ men's mouths&mdash;'Know thyself,' and 'Nothing too much.'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Why do I say all this? I am explaining that this Lacedaemonian brevity was
+ the style of primitive philosophy. Now there was a saying of Pittacus
+ which was privately circulated and received the approbation of the wise,
+ 'Hard is it to be good.' And Simonides, who was ambitious of the fame of
+ wisdom, was aware that if he could overthrow this saying, then, as if he
+ had won a victory over some famous athlete, he would carry off the palm
+ among his contemporaries. And if I am not mistaken, he composed the entire
+ poem with the secret intention of damaging Pittacus and his saying.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Let us all unite in examining his words, and see whether I am speaking the
+ truth. Simonides must have been a lunatic, if, in the very first words of
+ the poem, wanting to say only that to become good is hard, he inserted
+ (Greek) 'on the one hand' ('on the one hand to become good is hard');
+ there would be no reason for the introduction of (Greek), unless you
+ suppose him to speak with a hostile reference to the words of Pittacus.
+ Pittacus is saying 'Hard is it to be good,' and he, in refutation of this
+ thesis, rejoins that the truly hard thing, Pittacus, is to become good,
+ not joining 'truly' with 'good,' but with 'hard.' Not, that the hard thing
+ is to be truly good, as though there were some truly good men, and there
+ were others who were good but not truly good (this would be a very simple
+ observation, and quite unworthy of Simonides); but you must suppose him to
+ make a trajection of the word 'truly' (Greek), construing the saying of
+ Pittacus thus (and let us imagine Pittacus to be speaking and Simonides
+ answering him): 'O my friends,' says Pittacus, 'hard is it to be good,'
+ and Simonides answers, 'In that, Pittacus, you are mistaken; the
+ difficulty is not to be good, but on the one hand, to become good,
+ four-square in hands and feet and mind, without a flaw&mdash;that is hard
+ truly.' This way of reading the passage accounts for the insertion of
+ (Greek) 'on the one hand,' and for the position at the end of the clause
+ of the word 'truly,' and all that follows shows this to be the meaning. A
+ great deal might be said in praise of the details of the poem, which is a
+ charming piece of workmanship, and very finished, but such minutiae would
+ be tedious. I should like, however, to point out the general intention of
+ the poem, which is certainly designed in every part to be a refutation of
+ the saying of Pittacus. For he speaks in what follows a little further on
+ as if he meant to argue that although there is a difficulty in becoming
+ good, yet this is possible for a time, and only for a time. But having
+ become good, to remain in a good state and be good, as you, Pittacus,
+ affirm, is not possible, and is not granted to man; God only has this
+ blessing; 'but man cannot help being bad when the force of circumstances
+ overpowers him.' Now whom does the force of circumstance overpower in the
+ command of a vessel?&mdash;not the private individual, for he is always
+ overpowered; and as one who is already prostrate cannot be overthrown, and
+ only he who is standing upright but not he who is prostrate can be laid
+ prostrate, so the force of circumstances can only overpower him who, at
+ some time or other, has resources, and not him who is at all times
+ helpless. The descent of a great storm may make the pilot helpless, or the
+ severity of the season the husbandman or the physician; for the good may
+ become bad, as another poet witnesses:&mdash;
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ 'The good are sometimes good and sometimes bad.'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But the bad does not become bad; he is always bad. So that when the force
+ of circumstances overpowers the man of resources and skill and virtue,
+ then he cannot help being bad. And you, Pittacus, are saying, 'Hard is it
+ to be good.' Now there is a difficulty in becoming good; and yet this is
+ possible: but to be good is an impossibility&mdash;
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ 'For he who does well is the good man, and he who does ill is the bad.'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But what sort of doing is good in letters? and what sort of doing makes a
+ man good in letters? Clearly the knowing of them. And what sort of
+ well-doing makes a man a good physician? Clearly the knowledge of the art
+ of healing the sick. 'But he who does ill is the bad.' Now who becomes a
+ bad physician? Clearly he who is in the first place a physician, and in
+ the second place a good physician; for he may become a bad one also: but
+ none of us unskilled individuals can by any amount of doing ill become
+ physicians, any more than we can become carpenters or anything of that
+ sort; and he who by doing ill cannot become a physician at all, clearly
+ cannot become a bad physician. In like manner the good may become
+ deteriorated by time, or toil, or disease, or other accident (the only
+ real doing ill is to be deprived of knowledge), but the bad man will never
+ become bad, for he is always bad; and if he were to become bad, he must
+ previously have been good. Thus the words of the poem tend to show that on
+ the one hand a man cannot be continuously good, but that he may become
+ good and may also become bad; and again that
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ 'They are the best for the longest time whom the gods love.'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ All this relates to Pittacus, as is further proved by the sequel. For he
+ adds:&mdash;
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ 'Therefore I will not throw away my span of life to no purpose in
+ searching after the impossible, hoping in vain to find a perfectly
+ faultless man among those who partake of the fruit of the broad-bosomed
+ earth: if I find him, I will send you word.'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ (this is the vehement way in which he pursues his attack upon Pittacus
+ throughout the whole poem):
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ 'But him who does no evil, voluntarily I praise and love;&mdash;not even
+ the gods war against necessity.'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ All this has a similar drift, for Simonides was not so ignorant as to say
+ that he praised those who did no evil voluntarily, as though there were
+ some who did evil voluntarily. For no wise man, as I believe, will allow
+ that any human being errs voluntarily, or voluntarily does evil and
+ dishonourable actions; but they are very well aware that all who do evil
+ and dishonourable things do them against their will. And Simonides never
+ says that he praises him who does no evil voluntarily; the word
+ 'voluntarily' applies to himself. For he was under the impression that a
+ good man might often compel himself to love and praise another, and to be
+ the friend and approver of another; and that there might be an involuntary
+ love, such as a man might feel to an unnatural father or mother, or
+ country, or the like. Now bad men, when their parents or country have any
+ defects, look on them with malignant joy, and find fault with them and
+ expose and denounce them to others, under the idea that the rest of
+ mankind will be less likely to take themselves to task and accuse them of
+ neglect; and they blame their defects far more than they deserve, in order
+ that the odium which is necessarily incurred by them may be increased: but
+ the good man dissembles his feelings, and constrains himself to praise
+ them; and if they have wronged him and he is angry, he pacifies his anger
+ and is reconciled, and compels himself to love and praise his own flesh
+ and blood. And Simonides, as is probable, considered that he himself had
+ often had to praise and magnify a tyrant or the like, much against his
+ will, and he also wishes to imply to Pittacus that he does not censure him
+ because he is censorious.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ 'For I am satisfied' he says, 'when a man is neither bad nor very stupid;
+ and when he knows justice (which is the health of states), and is of sound
+ mind, I will find no fault with him, for I am not given to finding fault,
+ and there are innumerable fools'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ (implying that if he delighted in censure he might have abundant
+ opportunity of finding fault).
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ 'All things are good with which evil is unmingled.'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In these latter words he does not mean to say that all things are good
+ which have no evil in them, as you might say 'All things are white which
+ have no black in them,' for that would be ridiculous; but he means to say
+ that he accepts and finds no fault with the moderate or intermediate
+ state.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ ('I do not hope' he says, 'to find a perfectly blameless man among those
+ who partake of the fruits of the broad-bosomed earth (if I find him, I
+ will send you word); in this sense I praise no man. But he who is
+ moderately good, and does no evil, is good enough for me, who love and
+ approve every one')
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ (and here observe that he uses a Lesbian word, epainemi (approve), because
+ he is addressing Pittacus,
+ </p>
+<pre xml:space="preserve">
+ 'Who love and APPROVE every one VOLUNTARILY, who does no evil:'
+</pre>
+ <p>
+ and that the stop should be put after 'voluntarily'); 'but there are some
+ whom I involuntarily praise and love. And you, Pittacus, I would never
+ have blamed, if you had spoken what was moderately good and true; but I do
+ blame you because, putting on the appearance of truth, you are speaking
+ falsely about the highest matters.'&mdash;And this, I said, Prodicus and
+ Protagoras, I take to be the meaning of Simonides in this poem.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Hippias said: I think, Socrates, that you have given a very good
+ explanation of the poem; but I have also an excellent interpretation of my
+ own which I will propound to you, if you will allow me.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Nay, Hippias, said Alcibiades; not now, but at some other time. At present
+ we must abide by the compact which was made between Socrates and
+ Protagoras, to the effect that as long as Protagoras is willing to ask,
+ Socrates should answer; or that if he would rather answer, then that
+ Socrates should ask.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I said: I wish Protagoras either to ask or answer as he is inclined; but I
+ would rather have done with poems and odes, if he does not object, and
+ come back to the question about which I was asking you at first,
+ Protagoras, and by your help make an end of that. The talk about the poets
+ seems to me like a commonplace entertainment to which a vulgar company
+ have recourse; who, because they are not able to converse or amuse one
+ another, while they are drinking, with the sound of their own voices and
+ conversation, by reason of their stupidity, raise the price of flute-girls
+ in the market, hiring for a great sum the voice of a flute instead of
+ their own breath, to be the medium of intercourse among them: but where
+ the company are real gentlemen and men of education, you will see no
+ flute-girls, nor dancing-girls, nor harp-girls; and they have no nonsense
+ or games, but are contented with one another's conversation, of which
+ their own voices are the medium, and which they carry on by turns and in
+ an orderly manner, even though they are very liberal in their potations.
+ And a company like this of ours, and men such as we profess to be, do not
+ require the help of another's voice, or of the poets whom you cannot
+ interrogate about the meaning of what they are saying; people who cite
+ them declaring, some that the poet has one meaning, and others that he has
+ another, and the point which is in dispute can never be decided. This sort
+ of entertainment they decline, and prefer to talk with one another, and
+ put one another to the proof in conversation. And these are the models
+ which I desire that you and I should imitate. Leaving the poets, and
+ keeping to ourselves, let us try the mettle of one another and make proof
+ of the truth in conversation. If you have a mind to ask, I am ready to
+ answer; or if you would rather, do you answer, and give me the opportunity
+ of resuming and completing our unfinished argument.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I made these and some similar observations; but Protagoras would not
+ distinctly say which he would do. Thereupon Alcibiades turned to Callias,
+ and said:&mdash;Do you think, Callias, that Protagoras is fair in refusing
+ to say whether he will or will not answer? for I certainly think that he
+ is unfair; he ought either to proceed with the argument, or distinctly
+ refuse to proceed, that we may know his intention; and then Socrates will
+ be able to discourse with some one else, and the rest of the company will
+ be free to talk with one another.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I think that Protagoras was really made ashamed by these words of
+ Alcibiades, and when the prayers of Callias and the company were
+ superadded, he was at last induced to argue, and said that I might ask and
+ he would answer.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ So I said: Do not imagine, Protagoras, that I have any other interest in
+ asking questions of you but that of clearing up my own difficulties. For I
+ think that Homer was very right in saying that
+ </p>
+<pre xml:space="preserve">
+ 'When two go together, one sees before the other (Il.),'
+</pre>
+ <p>
+ for all men who have a companion are readier in deed, word, or thought;
+ but if a man
+ </p>
+<pre xml:space="preserve">
+ 'Sees a thing when he is alone,'
+</pre>
+ <p>
+ he goes about straightway seeking until he finds some one to whom he may
+ show his discoveries, and who may confirm him in them. And I would rather
+ hold discourse with you than with any one, because I think that no man has
+ a better understanding of most things which a good man may be expected to
+ understand, and in particular of virtue. For who is there, but you?&mdash;who
+ not only claim to be a good man and a gentleman, for many are this, and
+ yet have not the power of making others good&mdash;whereas you are not
+ only good yourself, but also the cause of goodness in others. Moreover
+ such confidence have you in yourself, that although other Sophists conceal
+ their profession, you proclaim in the face of Hellas that you are a
+ Sophist or teacher of virtue and education, and are the first who demanded
+ pay in return. How then can I do otherwise than invite you to the
+ examination of these subjects, and ask questions and consult with you? I
+ must, indeed. And I should like once more to have my memory refreshed by
+ you about the questions which I was asking you at first, and also to have
+ your help in considering them. If I am not mistaken the question was this:
+ Are wisdom and temperance and courage and justice and holiness five names
+ of the same thing? or has each of the names a separate underlying essence
+ and corresponding thing having a peculiar function, no one of them being
+ like any other of them? And you replied that the five names were not the
+ names of the same thing, but that each of them had a separate object, and
+ that all these objects were parts of virtue, not in the same way that the
+ parts of gold are like each other and the whole of which they are parts,
+ but as the parts of the face are unlike the whole of which they are parts
+ and one another, and have each of them a distinct function. I should like
+ to know whether this is still your opinion; or if not, I will ask you to
+ define your meaning, and I shall not take you to task if you now make a
+ different statement. For I dare say that you may have said what you did
+ only in order to make trial of me.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I answer, Socrates, he said, that all these qualities are parts of virtue,
+ and that four out of the five are to some extent similar, and that the
+ fifth of them, which is courage, is very different from the other four, as
+ I prove in this way: You may observe that many men are utterly
+ unrighteous, unholy, intemperate, ignorant, who are nevertheless
+ remarkable for their courage.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Stop, I said; I should like to think about that. When you speak of brave
+ men, do you mean the confident, or another sort of nature?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, he said; I mean the impetuous, ready to go at that which others are
+ afraid to approach.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In the next place, you would affirm virtue to be a good thing, of which
+ good thing you assert yourself to be a teacher.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, he said; I should say the best of all things, if I am in my right
+ mind.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And is it partly good and partly bad, I said, or wholly good?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Wholly good, and in the highest degree.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Tell me then; who are they who have confidence when diving into a well?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I should say, the divers.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And the reason of this is that they have knowledge?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, that is the reason.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And who have confidence when fighting on horseback&mdash;the skilled
+ horseman or the unskilled?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The skilled.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And who when fighting with light shields&mdash;the peltasts or the
+ nonpeltasts?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The peltasts. And that is true of all other things, he said, if that is
+ your point: those who have knowledge are more confident than those who
+ have no knowledge, and they are more confident after they have learned
+ than before.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And have you not seen persons utterly ignorant, I said, of these things,
+ and yet confident about them?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, he said, I have seen such persons far too confident.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And are not these confident persons also courageous?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ In that case, he replied, courage would be a base thing, for the men of
+ whom we are speaking are surely madmen.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then who are the courageous? Are they not the confident?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, he said; to that statement I adhere.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And those, I said, who are thus confident without knowledge are really not
+ courageous, but mad; and in that case the wisest are also the most
+ confident, and being the most confident are also the bravest, and upon
+ that view again wisdom will be courage.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Nay, Socrates, he replied, you are mistaken in your remembrance of what
+ was said by me. When you asked me, I certainly did say that the courageous
+ are the confident; but I was never asked whether the confident are the
+ courageous; if you had asked me, I should have answered 'Not all of them':
+ and what I did answer you have not proved to be false, although you
+ proceeded to show that those who have knowledge are more courageous than
+ they were before they had knowledge, and more courageous than others who
+ have no knowledge, and were then led on to think that courage is the same
+ as wisdom. But in this way of arguing you might come to imagine that
+ strength is wisdom. You might begin by asking whether the strong are able,
+ and I should say 'Yes'; and then whether those who know how to wrestle are
+ not more able to wrestle than those who do not know how to wrestle, and
+ more able after than before they had learned, and I should assent. And
+ when I had admitted this, you might use my admissions in such a way as to
+ prove that upon my view wisdom is strength; whereas in that case I should
+ not have admitted, any more than in the other, that the able are strong,
+ although I have admitted that the strong are able. For there is a
+ difference between ability and strength; the former is given by knowledge
+ as well as by madness or rage, but strength comes from nature and a
+ healthy state of the body. And in like manner I say of confidence and
+ courage, that they are not the same; and I argue that the courageous are
+ confident, but not all the confident courageous. For confidence may be
+ given to men by art, and also, like ability, by madness and rage; but
+ courage comes to them from nature and the healthy state of the soul.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I said: You would admit, Protagoras, that some men live well and others
+ ill?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He assented.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And do you think that a man lives well who lives in pain and grief?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He does not.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But if he lives pleasantly to the end of his life, will he not in that
+ case have lived well?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He will.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then to live pleasantly is a good, and to live unpleasantly an evil?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, he said, if the pleasure be good and honourable.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And do you, Protagoras, like the rest of the world, call some pleasant
+ things evil and some painful things good?&mdash;for I am rather disposed
+ to say that things are good in as far as they are pleasant, if they have
+ no consequences of another sort, and in as far as they are painful they
+ are bad.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I do not know, Socrates, he said, whether I can venture to assert in that
+ unqualified manner that the pleasant is the good and the painful the evil.
+ Having regard not only to my present answer, but also to the whole of my
+ life, I shall be safer, if I am not mistaken, in saying that there are
+ some pleasant things which are not good, and that there are some painful
+ things which are good, and some which are not good, and that there are
+ some which are neither good nor evil.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And you would call pleasant, I said, the things which participate in
+ pleasure or create pleasure?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Certainly, he said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then my meaning is, that in as far as they are pleasant they are good; and
+ my question would imply that pleasure is a good in itself.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ According to your favourite mode of speech, Socrates, 'Let us reflect
+ about this,' he said; and if the reflection is to the point, and the
+ result proves that pleasure and good are really the same, then we will
+ agree; but if not, then we will argue.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And would you wish to begin the enquiry? I said; or shall I begin?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You ought to take the lead, he said; for you are the author of the
+ discussion.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ May I employ an illustration? I said. Suppose some one who is enquiring
+ into the health or some other bodily quality of another:&mdash;he looks at
+ his face and at the tips of his fingers, and then he says, Uncover your
+ chest and back to me that I may have a better view:&mdash;that is the sort
+ of thing which I desire in this speculation. Having seen what your opinion
+ is about good and pleasure, I am minded to say to you: Uncover your mind
+ to me, Protagoras, and reveal your opinion about knowledge, that I may
+ know whether you agree with the rest of the world. Now the rest of the
+ world are of opinion that knowledge is a principle not of strength, or of
+ rule, or of command: their notion is that a man may have knowledge, and
+ yet that the knowledge which is in him may be overmastered by anger, or
+ pleasure, or pain, or love, or perhaps by fear,&mdash;just as if knowledge
+ were a slave, and might be dragged about anyhow. Now is that your view? or
+ do you think that knowledge is a noble and commanding thing, which cannot
+ be overcome, and will not allow a man, if he only knows the difference of
+ good and evil, to do anything which is contrary to knowledge, but that
+ wisdom will have strength to help him?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I agree with you, Socrates, said Protagoras; and not only so, but I, above
+ all other men, am bound to say that wisdom and knowledge are the highest
+ of human things.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Good, I said, and true. But are you aware that the majority of the world
+ are of another mind; and that men are commonly supposed to know the things
+ which are best, and not to do them when they might? And most persons whom
+ I have asked the reason of this have said that when men act contrary to
+ knowledge they are overcome by pain, or pleasure, or some of those
+ affections which I was just now mentioning.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, Socrates, he replied; and that is not the only point about which
+ mankind are in error.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Suppose, then, that you and I endeavour to instruct and inform them what
+ is the nature of this affection which they call 'being overcome by
+ pleasure,' and which they affirm to be the reason why they do not always
+ do what is best. When we say to them: Friends, you are mistaken, and are
+ saying what is not true, they would probably reply: Socrates and
+ Protagoras, if this affection of the soul is not to be called 'being
+ overcome by pleasure,' pray, what is it, and by what name would you
+ describe it?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But why, Socrates, should we trouble ourselves about the opinion of the
+ many, who just say anything that happens to occur to them?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I believe, I said, that they may be of use in helping us to discover how
+ courage is related to the other parts of virtue. If you are disposed to
+ abide by our agreement, that I should show the way in which, as I think,
+ our recent difficulty is most likely to be cleared up, do you follow; but
+ if not, never mind.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You are quite right, he said; and I would have you proceed as you have
+ begun.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well then, I said, let me suppose that they repeat their question, What
+ account do you give of that which, in our way of speaking, is termed being
+ overcome by pleasure? I should answer thus: Listen, and Protagoras and I
+ will endeavour to show you. When men are overcome by eating and drinking
+ and other sensual desires which are pleasant, and they, knowing them to be
+ evil, nevertheless indulge in them, would you not say that they were
+ overcome by pleasure? They will not deny this. And suppose that you and I
+ were to go on and ask them again: 'In what way do you say that they are
+ evil,&mdash;in that they are pleasant and give pleasure at the moment, or
+ because they cause disease and poverty and other like evils in the future?
+ Would they still be evil, if they had no attendant evil consequences,
+ simply because they give the consciousness of pleasure of whatever
+ nature?'&mdash;Would they not answer that they are not evil on account of
+ the pleasure which is immediately given by them, but on account of the
+ after consequences&mdash;diseases and the like?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I believe, said Protagoras, that the world in general would answer as you
+ do.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And in causing diseases do they not cause pain? and in causing poverty do
+ they not cause pain;&mdash;they would agree to that also, if I am not
+ mistaken?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Protagoras assented.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then I should say to them, in my name and yours: Do you think them evil
+ for any other reason, except because they end in pain and rob us of other
+ pleasures:&mdash;there again they would agree?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ We both of us thought that they would.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And then I should take the question from the opposite point of view, and
+ say: 'Friends, when you speak of goods being painful, do you not mean
+ remedial goods, such as gymnastic exercises, and military service, and the
+ physician's use of burning, cutting, drugging, and starving? Are these the
+ things which are good but painful?'&mdash;they would assent to me?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He agreed.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ 'And do you call them good because they occasion the greatest immediate
+ suffering and pain; or because, afterwards, they bring health and
+ improvement of the bodily condition and the salvation of states and power
+ over others and wealth?'&mdash;they would agree to the latter alternative,
+ if I am not mistaken?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He assented.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ 'Are these things good for any other reason except that they end in
+ pleasure, and get rid of and avert pain? Are you looking to any other
+ standard but pleasure and pain when you call them good?'&mdash;they would
+ acknowledge that they were not?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I think so, said Protagoras.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ 'And do you not pursue after pleasure as a good, and avoid pain as an
+ evil?'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He assented.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ 'Then you think that pain is an evil and pleasure is a good: and even
+ pleasure you deem an evil, when it robs you of greater pleasures than it
+ gives, or causes pains greater than the pleasure. If, however, you call
+ pleasure an evil in relation to some other end or standard, you will be
+ able to show us that standard. But you have none to show.'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I do not think that they have, said Protagoras.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ 'And have you not a similar way of speaking about pain? You call pain a
+ good when it takes away greater pains than those which it has, or gives
+ pleasures greater than the pains: then if you have some standard other
+ than pleasure and pain to which you refer when you call actual pain a
+ good, you can show what that is. But you cannot.'
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ True, said Protagoras.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Suppose again, I said, that the world says to me: 'Why do you spend many
+ words and speak in many ways on this subject?' Excuse me, friends, I
+ should reply; but in the first place there is a difficulty in explaining
+ the meaning of the expression 'overcome by pleasure'; and the whole
+ argument turns upon this. And even now, if you see any possible way in
+ which evil can be explained as other than pain, or good as other than
+ pleasure, you may still retract. Are you satisfied, then, at having a life
+ of pleasure which is without pain? If you are, and if you are unable to
+ show any good or evil which does not end in pleasure and pain, hear the
+ consequences:&mdash;If what you say is true, then the argument is absurd
+ which affirms that a man often does evil knowingly, when he might abstain,
+ because he is seduced and overpowered by pleasure; or again, when you say
+ that a man knowingly refuses to do what is good because he is overcome at
+ the moment by pleasure. And that this is ridiculous will be evident if
+ only we give up the use of various names, such as pleasant and painful,
+ and good and evil. As there are two things, let us call them by two names&mdash;first,
+ good and evil, and then pleasant and painful. Assuming this, let us go on
+ to say that a man does evil knowing that he does evil. But some one will
+ ask, Why? Because he is overcome, is the first answer. And by what is he
+ overcome? the enquirer will proceed to ask. And we shall not be able to
+ reply 'By pleasure,' for the name of pleasure has been exchanged for that
+ of good. In our answer, then, we shall only say that he is overcome. 'By
+ what?' he will reiterate. By the good, we shall have to reply; indeed we
+ shall. Nay, but our questioner will rejoin with a laugh, if he be one of
+ the swaggering sort, 'That is too ridiculous, that a man should do what he
+ knows to be evil when he ought not, because he is overcome by good. Is
+ that, he will ask, because the good was worthy or not worthy of conquering
+ the evil'? And in answer to that we shall clearly reply, Because it was
+ not worthy; for if it had been worthy, then he who, as we say, was
+ overcome by pleasure, would not have been wrong. 'But how,' he will reply,
+ 'can the good be unworthy of the evil, or the evil of the good'? Is not
+ the real explanation that they are out of proportion to one another,
+ either as greater and smaller, or more and fewer? This we cannot deny. And
+ when you speak of being overcome&mdash;'what do you mean,' he will say,
+ 'but that you choose the greater evil in exchange for the lesser good?'
+ Admitted. And now substitute the names of pleasure and pain for good and
+ evil, and say, not as before, that a man does what is evil knowingly, but
+ that he does what is painful knowingly, and because he is overcome by
+ pleasure, which is unworthy to overcome. What measure is there of the
+ relations of pleasure to pain other than excess and defect, which means
+ that they become greater and smaller, and more and fewer, and differ in
+ degree? For if any one says: 'Yes, Socrates, but immediate pleasure
+ differs widely from future pleasure and pain'&mdash;To that I should
+ reply: And do they differ in anything but in pleasure and pain? There can
+ be no other measure of them. And do you, like a skilful weigher, put into
+ the balance the pleasures and the pains, and their nearness and distance,
+ and weigh them, and then say which outweighs the other. If you weigh
+ pleasures against pleasures, you of course take the more and greater; or
+ if you weigh pains against pains, you take the fewer and the less; or if
+ pleasures against pains, then you choose that course of action in which
+ the painful is exceeded by the pleasant, whether the distant by the near
+ or the near by the distant; and you avoid that course of action in which
+ the pleasant is exceeded by the painful. Would you not admit, my friends,
+ that this is true? I am confident that they cannot deny this.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He agreed with me.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well then, I shall say, if you agree so far, be so good as to answer me a
+ question: Do not the same magnitudes appear larger to your sight when
+ near, and smaller when at a distance? They will acknowledge that. And the
+ same holds of thickness and number; also sounds, which are in themselves
+ equal, are greater when near, and lesser when at a distance. They will
+ grant that also. Now suppose happiness to consist in doing or choosing the
+ greater, and in not doing or in avoiding the less, what would be the
+ saving principle of human life? Would not the art of measuring be the
+ saving principle; or would the power of appearance? Is not the latter that
+ deceiving art which makes us wander up and down and take the things at one
+ time of which we repent at another, both in our actions and in our choice
+ of things great and small? But the art of measurement would do away with
+ the effect of appearances, and, showing the truth, would fain teach the
+ soul at last to find rest in the truth, and would thus save our life.
+ Would not mankind generally acknowledge that the art which accomplishes
+ this result is the art of measurement?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, he said, the art of measurement.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Suppose, again, the salvation of human life to depend on the choice of odd
+ and even, and on the knowledge of when a man ought to choose the greater
+ or less, either in reference to themselves or to each other, and whether
+ near or at a distance; what would be the saving principle of our lives?
+ Would not knowledge?&mdash;a knowledge of measuring, when the question is
+ one of excess and defect, and a knowledge of number, when the question is
+ of odd and even? The world will assent, will they not?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Protagoras himself thought that they would.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well then, my friends, I say to them; seeing that the salvation of human
+ life has been found to consist in the right choice of pleasures and pains,&mdash;in
+ the choice of the more and the fewer, and the greater and the less, and
+ the nearer and remoter, must not this measuring be a consideration of
+ their excess and defect and equality in relation to each other?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This is undeniably true.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And this, as possessing measure, must undeniably also be an art and
+ science?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ They will agree, he said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The nature of that art or science will be a matter of future
+ consideration; but the existence of such a science furnishes a
+ demonstrative answer to the question which you asked of me and Protagoras.
+ At the time when you asked the question, if you remember, both of us were
+ agreeing that there was nothing mightier than knowledge, and that
+ knowledge, in whatever existing, must have the advantage over pleasure and
+ all other things; and then you said that pleasure often got the advantage
+ even over a man who has knowledge; and we refused to allow this, and you
+ rejoined: O Protagoras and Socrates, what is the meaning of being overcome
+ by pleasure if not this?&mdash;tell us what you call such a state:&mdash;if
+ we had immediately and at the time answered 'Ignorance,' you would have
+ laughed at us. But now, in laughing at us, you will be laughing at
+ yourselves: for you also admitted that men err in their choice of
+ pleasures and pains; that is, in their choice of good and evil, from
+ defect of knowledge; and you admitted further, that they err, not only
+ from defect of knowledge in general, but of that particular knowledge
+ which is called measuring. And you are also aware that the erring act
+ which is done without knowledge is done in ignorance. This, therefore, is
+ the meaning of being overcome by pleasure;&mdash;ignorance, and that the
+ greatest. And our friends Protagoras and Prodicus and Hippias declare that
+ they are the physicians of ignorance; but you, who are under the mistaken
+ impression that ignorance is not the cause, and that the art of which I am
+ speaking cannot be taught, neither go yourselves, nor send your children,
+ to the Sophists, who are the teachers of these things&mdash;you take care
+ of your money and give them none; and the result is, that you are the
+ worse off both in public and private life:&mdash;Let us suppose this to be
+ our answer to the world in general: And now I should like to ask you,
+ Hippias, and you, Prodicus, as well as Protagoras (for the argument is to
+ be yours as well as ours), whether you think that I am speaking the truth
+ or not?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ They all thought that what I said was entirely true.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then you agree, I said, that the pleasant is the good, and the painful
+ evil. And here I would beg my friend Prodicus not to introduce his
+ distinction of names, whether he is disposed to say pleasurable,
+ delightful, joyful. However, by whatever name he prefers to call them, I
+ will ask you, most excellent Prodicus, to answer in my sense of the words.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Prodicus laughed and assented, as did the others.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then, my friends, what do you say to this? Are not all actions honourable
+ and useful, of which the tendency is to make life painless and pleasant?
+ The honourable work is also useful and good?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ This was admitted.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then, I said, if the pleasant is the good, nobody does anything under the
+ idea or conviction that some other thing would be better and is also
+ attainable, when he might do the better. And this inferiority of a man to
+ himself is merely ignorance, as the superiority of a man to himself is
+ wisdom.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ They all assented.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And is not ignorance the having a false opinion and being deceived about
+ important matters?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To this also they unanimously assented.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then, I said, no man voluntarily pursues evil, or that which he thinks to
+ be evil. To prefer evil to good is not in human nature; and when a man is
+ compelled to choose one of two evils, no one will choose the greater when
+ he may have the less.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ All of us agreed to every word of this.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well, I said, there is a certain thing called fear or terror; and here,
+ Prodicus, I should particularly like to know whether you would agree with
+ me in defining this fear or terror as expectation of evil.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Protagoras and Hippias agreed, but Prodicus said that this was fear and
+ not terror.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Never mind, Prodicus, I said; but let me ask whether, if our former
+ assertions are true, a man will pursue that which he fears when he is not
+ compelled? Would not this be in flat contradiction to the admission which
+ has been already made, that he thinks the things which he fears to be
+ evil; and no one will pursue or voluntarily accept that which he thinks to
+ be evil?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ That also was universally admitted.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then, I said, these, Hippias and Prodicus, are our premisses; and I would
+ beg Protagoras to explain to us how he can be right in what he said at
+ first. I do not mean in what he said quite at first, for his first
+ statement, as you may remember, was that whereas there were five parts of
+ virtue none of them was like any other of them; each of them had a
+ separate function. To this, however, I am not referring, but to the
+ assertion which he afterwards made that of the five virtues four were
+ nearly akin to each other, but that the fifth, which was courage, differed
+ greatly from the others. And of this he gave me the following proof. He
+ said: You will find, Socrates, that some of the most impious, and
+ unrighteous, and intemperate, and ignorant of men are among the most
+ courageous; which proves that courage is very different from the other
+ parts of virtue. I was surprised at his saying this at the time, and I am
+ still more surprised now that I have discussed the matter with you. So I
+ asked him whether by the brave he meant the confident. Yes, he replied,
+ and the impetuous or goers. (You may remember, Protagoras, that this was
+ your answer.)
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He assented.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Well then, I said, tell us against what are the courageous ready to go&mdash;against
+ the same dangers as the cowards?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ No, he answered.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then against something different?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, he said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then do cowards go where there is safety, and the courageous where there
+ is danger?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes, Socrates, so men say.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Very true, I said. But I want to know against what do you say that the
+ courageous are ready to go&mdash;against dangers, believing them to be
+ dangers, or not against dangers?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ No, said he; the former case has been proved by you in the previous
+ argument to be impossible.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ That, again, I replied, is quite true. And if this has been rightly
+ proven, then no one goes to meet what he thinks to be dangers, since the
+ want of self-control, which makes men rush into dangers, has been shown to
+ be ignorance.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He assented.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And yet the courageous man and the coward alike go to meet that about
+ which they are confident; so that, in this point of view, the cowardly and
+ the courageous go to meet the same things.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And yet, Socrates, said Protagoras, that to which the coward goes is the
+ opposite of that to which the courageous goes; the one, for example, is
+ ready to go to battle, and the other is not ready.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And is going to battle honourable or disgraceful? I said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Honourable, he replied.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And if honourable, then already admitted by us to be good; for all
+ honourable actions we have admitted to be good.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ That is true; and to that opinion I shall always adhere.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ True, I said. But which of the two are they who, as you say, are unwilling
+ to go to war, which is a good and honourable thing?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The cowards, he replied.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And what is good and honourable, I said, is also pleasant?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ It has certainly been acknowledged to be so, he replied.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And do the cowards knowingly refuse to go to the nobler, and pleasanter,
+ and better?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ The admission of that, he replied, would belie our former admissions.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But does not the courageous man also go to meet the better, and
+ pleasanter, and nobler?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ That must be admitted.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And the courageous man has no base fear or base confidence?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ True, he replied.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And if not base, then honourable?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He admitted this.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And if honourable, then good?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But the fear and confidence of the coward or foolhardy or madman, on the
+ contrary, are base?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He assented.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And these base fears and confidences originate in ignorance and
+ uninstructedness?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ True, he said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then as to the motive from which the cowards act, do you call it cowardice
+ or courage?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I should say cowardice, he replied.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And have they not been shown to be cowards through their ignorance of
+ dangers?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Assuredly, he said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And because of that ignorance they are cowards?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He assented.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And the reason why they are cowards is admitted by you to be cowardice?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He again assented.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then the ignorance of what is and is not dangerous is cowardice?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ He nodded assent.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ But surely courage, I said, is opposed to cowardice?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Yes.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Then the wisdom which knows what are and are not dangers is opposed to the
+ ignorance of them?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To that again he nodded assent.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And the ignorance of them is cowardice?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ To that he very reluctantly nodded assent.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And the knowledge of that which is and is not dangerous is courage, and is
+ opposed to the ignorance of these things?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ At this point he would no longer nod assent, but was silent.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ And why, I said, do you neither assent nor dissent, Protagoras?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Finish the argument by yourself, he said.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ I only want to ask one more question, I said. I want to know whether you
+ still think that there are men who are most ignorant and yet most
+ courageous?
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ You seem to have a great ambition to make me answer, Socrates, and
+ therefore I will gratify you, and say, that this appears to me to be
+ impossible consistently with the argument.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ My only object, I said, in continuing the discussion, has been the desire
+ to ascertain the nature and relations of virtue; for if this were clear, I
+ am very sure that the other controversy which has been carried on at great
+ length by both of us&mdash;you affirming and I denying that virtue can be
+ taught&mdash;would also become clear. The result of our discussion appears
+ to me to be singular. For if the argument had a human voice, that voice
+ would be heard laughing at us and saying: 'Protagoras and Socrates, you
+ are strange beings; there are you, Socrates, who were saying that virtue
+ cannot be taught, contradicting yourself now by your attempt to prove that
+ all things are knowledge, including justice, and temperance, and courage,&mdash;which
+ tends to show that virtue can certainly be taught; for if virtue were
+ other than knowledge, as Protagoras attempted to prove, then clearly
+ virtue cannot be taught; but if virtue is entirely knowledge, as you are
+ seeking to show, then I cannot but suppose that virtue is capable of being
+ taught. Protagoras, on the other hand, who started by saying that it might
+ be taught, is now eager to prove it to be anything rather than knowledge;
+ and if this is true, it must be quite incapable of being taught.' Now I,
+ Protagoras, perceiving this terrible confusion of our ideas, have a great
+ desire that they should be cleared up. And I should like to carry on the
+ discussion until we ascertain what virtue is, whether capable of being
+ taught or not, lest haply Epimetheus should trip us up and deceive us in
+ the argument, as he forgot us in the story; I prefer your Prometheus to
+ your Epimetheus, for of him I make use, whenever I am busy about these
+ questions, in Promethean care of my own life. And if you have no
+ objection, as I said at first, I should like to have your help in the
+ enquiry.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ Protagoras replied: Socrates, I am not of a base nature, and I am the last
+ man in the world to be envious. I cannot but applaud your energy and your
+ conduct of an argument. As I have often said, I admire you above all men
+ whom I know, and far above all men of your age; and I believe that you
+ will become very eminent in philosophy. Let us come back to the subject at
+ some future time; at present we had better turn to something else.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ By all means, I said, if that is your wish; for I too ought long since to
+ have kept the engagement of which I spoke before, and only tarried because
+ I could not refuse the request of the noble Callias. So the conversation
+ ended, and we went our way.
+ </p>
+ <p>
+ <br /><br /><br /><br />
+ </p>
+<pre xml:space="preserve">
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Protagoras, by Plato
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PROTAGORAS ***
+
+***** This file should be named 1591-h.htm or 1591-h.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+ http://www.gutenberg.org/1/5/9/1591/
+
+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>