The Republic by Plato Part 2 - Full Audiobook

“The Republic” is one of Plato’s most important works, composed as a Socratic dialogue exploring the meaning of justice, the role of the philosopher in society, and the concept of the ideal state. Through the discussions led by Socrates, Plato lays out his vision for a society governed by philosopher-kings and addresses fundamental questions about morality, human nature, and the structure of a just society.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Book six of the Republic by Plato read by Bumniefeld,
and thus Klaukhan, after the argument has gone a weary way,
the true and the false philosophers have at length appeared
in view. I do not think, he said, that the
way could have been shortened. I suppose not, I said,

(00:20):
And yet I believe that we might have had a
better view of both of them if the discussion could
have been confined to this one subject, and if there
were not many other questions awaiting us, which he who
desires to see in what respect the life of the
just difference from that of the unjust, must consider. And
what is the next question? He asked, Surely, I said,

(00:43):
the one which follows next in order. Inasmuch as philosophers
only are able to grasp the eternal and the unchangeable,
and those who wander in the region of the many
and variable are not philosophers, I must ask you which
of the two classes should be the rulers of our state?
How can we rightly answer that question? Whichever of the
two are best able to guard the laws and institutions

(01:05):
of our state? Let them be our guardians. Very good? Neither,
I said, Can there be any question that the guardian
who is to keep anything should have eyes rather than
no eyes. There can be no question of that. And
are not those who are verily and indeed wanting in
the knowledge of the true being of each thing, and
who have in their souls no clear pattern, and are unable,

(01:29):
as with a painter's eye, to look at the absolute
truth and to the original to repair, and having perfect
vision of the other world, to order the laws about beauty, goodness,
justice in this if not already ordered, and to guard
to preserve the order of them? Are not such persons,
I ask, simply blind? Truly, he replied, they are much

(01:50):
in that condition. And shall they be our guardians when
there are others who, besides being their equals in experience,
and falling short of them in no particular virtue, also
know the very truth of each thing. But there can
be no reason, he said, for rejecting those who have
this greatest of all great qualities. They must always have
the first place, unless they fail in some other respect. Suppose, then,

(02:14):
I said that we determine how far they can unite
this and the other excellences by all means. In the
first place, as we began by observing the nature of
the philosopher has to be ascertained. We must come to
an understanding about him. And when we have done so, then,
if I am not mistaken, we shall also acknowledge that

(02:36):
such an union of qualities is possible, and that those
in whom they are united, and those only, should be
rulers at the state. What do you mean, Let us
suppose that philosophical minds always love knowledge of a sort
which shows them the eternal nature, not varying from generation
and corruption. Agreed? And further, I said, let us agree

(02:59):
that they are lovers of all true being. There is
no part, whether greater or less, or more or less honorable,
which they are willing to renounce, as we said before,
of the lover and the man of ambition true. And
if they are to be what we were describing, is
there not another quality which they should also possess? What quality? Truthfulness?

(03:21):
They will never intentionally receive into their mind of falsehood,
which is their detestation, and they will love the truth. Yes,
that may be safely affirmed of them. Maybe, my friend,
I replied, is not the word say, rather must be affirmed.
For he whose nature is amorous of anything cannot help

(03:41):
loving all that belongs or is akin to the object
of his affections, Right, he said, And is there anything
more akin to wisdom than truth? How can there be?
Can the same nature be a lover of wisdom and
a lover of falsehood? Never? The true lover of learning,
then must from his early youth, as far as in
him lies desire all truth assuredly. But then again, as

(04:07):
we know by experience, he whose desires are strong in
one direction will have them weaker in others. They will
be like a stream which has been drawn off into
another channel. True, he whose desires are drawn towards knowledge
in every form, will be absorbed in the pleasures of
the soul, and will hardly feel bodily pleasure. I mean,

(04:27):
if he be a true philosopher and not a sham one,
For that is most certain. Such an one is sure
to be temperate, and the reverse of comfortess, for the
motives which make another man desirous of having and spending
have no place in his character. Very true. Another criterion
of the philosophical nature has also to be considered. And

(04:47):
what is that there should be no secret corner of illiberality.
Nothing can be more antagonistic than meanness to a soul
which is ever longing after the whole of things, both
divine and human. Most true, he replied, Then, how can
he who has magnificence of mind and is the spectator
of all time and all existence think much of human life?

(05:10):
He cannot, or can such an one account death? Fearful No. Indeed,
then the cowardly and mean nature has no part in
true philosophy, certainly not. Or again, can he who is
harmoniously constituted, who is not covetous or mean, or a
boaster or a coward? Can he, I say, ever, be

(05:31):
unjust or hard in his dealings? Impossible? Then you will
soon observe whether a man is just and gentle or
rude and unsociable. These are the signs which distinguish, even
in youth, the philosophical nature from the unphilosophical true There
is another point which should be remarked, What point whether

(05:52):
he has or has not a pleasure in learning? For
no one will love that which gives him pain, and
in which, after much toil, makes little progress. Certainly not.
And again, if he is forgetful and retains nothing of
what he learns, will he not be an empty vessel?
That is certain? Laboring in vain, he must end in

(06:13):
hating himself and his fruitless occupation. Yes, then a soul
which forgets cannot be ranked among genuine philosophic natures. We
must insist that the philosopher should have a good memory, certainly,
and once more, the inharmonious and unseemly nature can only
tend to disproportion, undoubtedly, And do you consider truth to

(06:35):
be akin to proportion or to disproportion to proportion? Then,
besides other qualities, we must try to find a naturally
well proportioned and gracious mind which will move spontaneously towards
the true being of everything. Certainly, well, and do not
all these qualities which we have been enumerting go together?

(06:56):
And are they not in a manner necessary to assus,
which is to have a full and perfect participation of being?
They are absolutely necessary, he replied, And must not that
be a blameless study which he can only pursue who
has the gift of a good memory and is quick
to learn, Noble, gracious, the friend of truth, justice, courage, temperance,

(07:19):
who are his kindred? The god of jealousy himself, he said,
can find no fault with such a study, And to
men like him, I said, when perfected by years and education,
and to these only you will entrust the state. Here
Adamantus interposed and said, to these statements, Socrates, no one
can offer a reply. But when you talk in this way,

(07:42):
a strange feeling passes over the minds of your hearers.
They fancy that they are let us stray a little
at each step in the argument, owing to their own
want of skill in asking and answering questions. These littles accumulate,
and at the end of the discussion they are found
to have sustained a mighty overthrow, and all their former
notions appear to be turned upside down. And as unskillful

(08:04):
players of drafts are at last shut up by their
more skillful adversaries and have no peace to move, so
they too find themselves shut up at last, for they
have nothing to say in this new game, of which
words are the counters, And yet all the time they
are in the right. The observation is suggested to me
by what is now occurring. For any one of us

(08:27):
might say that, although in words he is not able
to meet you at each step of the argument, he
sees as a fact that the votaries of philosophy, when
they carry on the study not only in youth as
a part of education, but as the pursuit of their
maturer years, must of them become strange monsters, not to

(08:47):
say ut her rogues, and that those who may be
considered the best of them are made useless to the
world by the very study which you extol. Well, and
do you think that those who say so are wrong?
I cannot tell, he replied, But I should like to
know what is your opinion? Here my answer, I am

(09:08):
of opinion that they are quite right. Then how can
you be justified in saying that cities will not cease
from evil until philosophers rule in them, when philosophers are
acknowledged by us to be of no use to them.
You ask a question, I said, to which a reply
can only be given in a parab Yes, Socrates, and

(09:28):
that is the way of speaking to which you are
not at all accustomed. I suppose I perceive, I said,
that you are vastly amused at having plunged me into
such a hopeless discussion. But now hear the parable, and
then you will be still more amused at the meagerness
of my imagination. For the manner in which the best

(09:49):
men are treated in their own states is so grievous
that no single thing on earth is comparable to it.
And therefore, if I am to plead their cause, I
must have recourse to and put together a figure made
up of many things, like the fabulous unions of goats
and stags which are found in pictures. Imagine that a
fleet or a ship in which there is a captain

(10:11):
who is taller and stronger than any of the crew,
but he is a little deaf and has a similar
infirmity in sight, and his knowledge of navigation is not
much better. The sailors are quarreling with one another about
the steering. Every one is of opinion that he has
a right to steer, though he has never learned the
art of navigation, and cannot tell who taught him or

(10:31):
when he learned, and will further assert that it cannot
be taught, and they are ready to cut in pieces
anyone who says the contrary. They throng about the captain,
begging and praying him to commit the helm to them,
And if at any time they do not prevail, but
others are preferred to them, they kill the others or
throw them overboard, And, having first chained up the noble

(10:54):
captain's senses with drink or some narcotic drug, they mutiny
and take possession of the ship and make free with
the stores. Thus eating and drinking. They proceed on their
voyage in such a manner as might be expected of them,
Him who is their partisan and cleverly aid them in
their plot for getting the ship out of the captain's

(11:14):
hands into their own, whether by force or persuasion. They
compliment with the name of sailor pilot able seamen, and
abuse the other sort of man, whom they call a
good for nothing but that the true pilot must pay
attention to the year and seasons, and sky and stars
and winds, and whatever else belongs to his art if

(11:36):
he intends to be really qualified for the command of
a ship, and that he must and will be the steerer,
whether other people like or not. The possibility of this
union of authority with the steerer's art has never seriously
entered into their thoughts or been made part of their calling.
Now in vessels which are in the state of mutiny,
and by sailors who are mutineers, how would the true

(11:59):
pilot be regarded, will he not be called by them
a prater, a star gazer, a good for nothing? Of course,
said Adeimantus. Then you will hardly need, I said, to
hear the interpretation of the figure which describes the true
philosopher in his relation to the state. For you understand
already certainly. Then suppose you now take this parable to

(12:23):
the gentleman who is surprised at finding that philosophers have
no honor in their cities. Explain it to him, and
try to convince him that their having honor would be
far more extraordinary. I will say to him that in
deeming the best votaries of philosophy to be useless to
the rest of the world, he is right. But also
tell them to attribute their uselessness to the fault of

(12:45):
those who will not use them, and not to themselves.
The pilot should not humbly beg the sailors to be
commanded by him. That is not the order of nature.
Neither are the wise to go to the doors of
the rich. The ingenious author of this saying told a lie.
But the truth is that when a man is ill,
whether he be rich or poor, to the physician, he

(13:08):
must go. And he who wants to be governed to
him who is able to govern. The ruler, who is
good for anything, ought not to beg his subjects to
be ruled by him. Although the present governors of mankind
are of a different stamp, they may be justly compared
to the mutinous sailors, and the true helmsmen, to those
who are called by them good for nothings. And Stargazer

(13:30):
precisely so he said, for these reasons, and among men
like these, philosophy, the noblest pursuit of all, is not
likely to be much esteemed by those of the opposite faction.
Not that the greatest and most lasting injury is done
to her by her opponents, but by her own professing followers,
the same of whom you suppose the accuser to say

(13:53):
that the greater number of them are errant rogues, and
the best are useless, in which opinion I agreed, Yes,
And the reason why the good are useless has now
been explained true. Then shall we proceed to show that
the corruption of the majority is also unavoidable, and that
this is not to be laid to the charge of
philosophy any more than the other. By all means, And

(14:16):
let us ask and answer in turn. First going back
to the description of the gentle and noble nature, Truth,
as you will remember, was his leader, whom we followed
always and in all things. Failing in this, he was
an impostor and had no part or lot in true philosophy. Yes,
that was said, well, and is not this one quality

(14:38):
to mention no others? Greatly at variance with present notions
of him? Certainly he said, And have we not a
right to say in his defense that the true lover
of knowledge is always striving after being, that is his nature.
He will not rest in the multiplicity of individuals, which
is in appearance only, but will go on the keen edge,

(15:00):
will not be blunted, nor the force of his desire abates,
until he have attained the knowledge of the true nature
of every essence, by a sympathetic and kindred power in
the soul, and by that power drawing near and mingling
and becoming incorporate with very being. Having begotten mind and truth,
he will have knowledge, and will live and grow truly.

(15:23):
And then not till then will he cease from his travail.
Nothing he said can be more just than such a
description of him, And will the love of a lie
be any part of a philosopher's nature, will he not
utterly hate a lie? He will? And when truth is
the captain, we cannot suspect any evil of the band

(15:45):
which he leads impossible. Justice and health of mind will
be of the company, and temperance will follow after true.
He replied, neither is there any reason why I should
again set in array the philosopher's virtues, as you will,
doubtless remember that courage, magnificence, apprehension, memory were his natural gifts.

(16:06):
And you objected that although no one can deny what
I then said, still, if you leave words and look
at facts, the persons who are thus described, are some
of them manifestly useless, and the greater number utterly depraved.
We were then led to inquire into the grounds of
these accusations, and have now arrived at the point of

(16:27):
asking why are the majority bad? Which question of necessity
brought us back to the examination and definition of the
true philosopher exactly? And we have next to consider the
corruptions of the philosophic nature. Why so many are spoiled
and so few escaped spoiling. I am speaking of those
who were said to be useless, but not wicked. And

(16:49):
when we have done with them, we will speak of
the imitators of philosophy. What manner of men are they
who aspire after a profession which is above them and
of which they are unworthy? And then, by their manifold
inconsistencies bring upon philosophy and upon all philosophers that universal
reprobation of which we speak. What are these corruptions, he said,

(17:13):
I will see if I can explain them to you.
Every one will admit that a nature, having in perfection
all the qualities which we require in a philosopher, is
a rare plant, which is seldom seen among men. Rare, indeed,
And what numberless and powerful causes tend to destroy these
rare natures? What causes? In the first place, there are

(17:36):
their own virtues, their courage, temperance, and the rest of them,
every one of which praiseworthy qualities. And this is a
most singular circumstance, destroys and distracts from philosophy the soul,
which is the possessor of them. That is very singular,
he replied. Then there are all the ordinary goods of life, beauty, wealth, strength, rank,

(18:00):
and great connections in the state, you understand the sort
of thing. These also have a corrupting and distracting effect.
I understand, but I should like to know more precisely
what you mean about them. Grasp the truth as a whole,
I said, And in the right way, you will then
have no difficulty in apprehending the preceding remarks, and they

(18:21):
will no longer appear strange to you. And how am
I to do so? He asked, why? I said, We
know that all germs or seeds, whether vegetable or animal,
when they fail to meet with proper nutriment, or climate
or soul in proportion to their vigor, are all the
more sensitive to the want of a suitable environment. For

(18:42):
evil is a greater enemy to what is good than
to what is not. Very true, there is reason in
supposing that the finest natures, when under alien conditions, receive
more injury than the inferior, because the contrast is greater. Certainly,
and may we not say, adamantus, the most gifted minds,
when they are ill educated, become pre eminently bad. Do

(19:06):
not great crimes and the spirit of pure evils spring
out of a fullness of nature ruined by education, rather
than from any inferiority, whereas weak natures are scarcely capable
of any very great good or very great evil. There,
I think you are right. And our philosopher follows the
same analogy. He is like a plant, which, having proper nurture,

(19:29):
must necessarily grow and mature into all virtue. But if
sowed and planted in an alien soil, becomes the most
noxious of all weeds, unless he be preserved by some
divine power. Do you really think, as people so often
say that our youth are corrupted by sophists, or that

(19:49):
private teachers of the art corrupt them in any degree
worth speaking of? Are not the public who say these
things the greatest of all sophists? And do they not
educate to perfection young and old men and women alike,
and fashion them after their own hearts. When is this accomplished,
he said, when they meet together and the world sits

(20:09):
down at an assembly, or in a court of law,
or a theater, or a camp, or in any other
popular resort, and there is a great uproar, and they
praise some things which are being said or done, and
blame other things equally, exaggerating both shouting and clapping their hands,
And the echo of the rocks, and the place in
which they are assembled redoubles the sound of the praise

(20:32):
or blame At such a time, will not a young
man's heart, as they say, leap within him? Will any
private training enable him to stand firm against the overwhelming
flood of popular opinion? Or will he be carried away
by the stream? Will he not have the notions of
good and evil which the public in general have? He

(20:52):
will do as they do, and as they are such?
Will he be, yes, Socrates, necessity will compel him. And
yet I said, there is a still greater necessity which
has not been mentioned. What is that the gentle force
of a tainterer, or confiscation or death, which, as you
are aware, these new sophists and educators who are the

(21:15):
public apply when their words are powerless. Indeed they do,
and in right good earners. Now, what opinion of any
other sophist or any private person can be expected to
overcome in such an unequal contest? None, he replied, No. Indeed,
I said, even to make the attempt is a great
piece of folly. There neither is, nor has been, nor

(21:38):
is ever likely to be, any different type of character
which has had no other training in virtue, but that
which is supplied by public opinion. I speak, my friend,
of human virtue. Only what is more than human, as
the proverb says, is not included. For I would not
have you ignorant that in the present evil state of governments,
whatever is saved and comes to good is saved by

(22:01):
the power of God, as we may truly say, I
quite ascent, he replied, Then let me crave your assent
also to a further observation. What are you going to say,
Why that all those mercenary individuals whom the many call
so sophists, and whom they deem to be their adversaries,
do in fact teach nothing but the opinion of the many,

(22:24):
that is to say, the opinions of their assemblies. And
this is their wisdom. I might compare them to a
man who should study the tempers and desires of a mighty,
strong beast who is fed by him. He would learn
how to approach and handle him. Also at what times
and from what causes he is dangerous or the reverse,
And what is the meaning of his several cries, and

(22:46):
by what sounds when another utters them he is soothed
or infuriated. And you may suppose further, that when by
continually attending upon him, he has become perfect in all
this he calls is knowledge wisdom, and makes of it
a system or art, which he proceeds to teach, although

(23:06):
he has no real notion of what he means by
the principles or passions of which he is speaking, but
calls this honorable and that dishonorable, or good, or evil,
or just or unjust, all in accordance with the tastes
and tempers of the great brute. Good he pronounces to
be that in which the beast delights, and evil to
be that which he dislikes. And he can give no

(23:29):
other account of them, except that the just and noble
are the necessary, Having never himself seen, and having no
power of explaining to others the nature of either, or
the difference between them, which is immense by heaven. Would
not such an one be a rare educator? Indeed he would?
And in what way does he who thinks that wisdom

(23:49):
is the discernment of the tempers and tastes of the
motley multitude, whether in painting or music, or finally in politics,
differ from him whom I have been describing. For whether
man consorts with the many and exhibits to them his
poem or other work of art, or the service which
he has done the state, making them his judges. When

(24:10):
he is not obliged the so called necessity of Diomede
will oblige him to produce whatever they praise. And yet
the reasons are utterly ludicrous, which they give in confirmation
of their own notions about the honorable and good? Did
you ever hear any of them which were not? No?
Nor am I likely to hear. You recognize the truth

(24:32):
of what I have been saying. Let me ask you
to consider further whether the world will ever be induced
to believe in the existence of absolute beauty rather than
of the many beautiful, or of the absolute in each
kind rather than the many in each kind. Certainly not.
Then the world cannot possibly be a philosopher. Impossible, and

(24:53):
therefore philosophers must inevitably fall under the censure of the world.
They must, and of individual You will to consort with
the mob and seek to please them, that is evident.
Then do you see any way in which the philosopher
can be preserved in his calling to the end? And
remember what we were saying of him that he wants

(25:13):
to have quickness and memory, and courage and magnificence. These
were admitted by us to be the true philosopher's gifts. Yes,
will not such an one from his early childhood be
at all things, first among all, especially if his bodily
endowments are like his mental ones, certainly, he said, And
his friends and fellow citizens will want to use him

(25:34):
as he gets older for their own purposes, no question
falling at his feet. They will make requests to him,
and do him honor and flatter him, because they want
to get into their hands now the power which he
will one day possess. That often happens, he said. And
what wo a man such as he is be likely
to do under such circumstances, especially if he be a

(25:56):
citizen of a great city, rich and noble, and a
tall proper Will he not be full of boundless aspiration,
fancy himself able to manage the affairs of hellenes and
of barbarians, And having got such notions into his head,
will he not dilate and elevate himself in the fullness
of vain pomp and senseless pride. To be sure he

(26:17):
will now when he is in this state of mind.
If someone gently comes to him and tells him that
he is a fool and must get understanding which can
only be got by slaving for it? Do you think
that under such adverse circumstances he will be easily induced
to listen? Far otherwise, And even if there be some

(26:38):
one who, through inherent goodness or natural reasonableness, has had
his eyes open, the little land is humbled and taken
captive by philosophy. How will his friends behave when they
think that they are likely to lose the advantage which
they are hoping to reap from his companionship? Will they
not do and say anything to prevent him from yielding

(26:58):
to his better nature and to render his teacher powerless?
Using to this end private intrigues as well as public prosecutions.
There can be no doubt of it. And how can
one who is this circumstanced ever become a philosopher? Impossible? Then,
were we not right in saying that even the fairy
qualities which make a man a philosopher may, if he

(27:21):
be ill educated, divert him from philosophy no less than
riches and their accompaniments and the other so called goods
of life. We were quite right. Thus, my excellent friend,
is brought about all that bruin and failure which I
have been describing of the nature's best adapted to the
best of all pursuits. They are natures which we maintain

(27:43):
to be rare at any time, this being the class
out of which come the men who are the authors
of the greatest evil to states and individuals, and also
of the greatest good when the tide carries them in
that direction. But a small man never was the doer
of any great thing, either to individuals or to states.
That is most true, he said. And so Philosophy is

(28:05):
left desolate, with her marriage right incomplete, for her own
have fallen away and forsaken her. And while they are
leading a false and unbecoming life, other unworthy persons, seeing
that she has no kinsman to be her protectors, enter
in and dishonor her, and fasten upon her the reproaches which,

(28:26):
as you say, her reproofs Utter, who affirm of her
votaries that some are good for nothing, and that the
greater number deserve the severest punishment. That is certainly what
people say. Yes, and what else would you expect, I said,
when you think of the puny creatures, who, seeing this
land open to them, a land well stocked with fair

(28:47):
names and showy titles, like prisoners running out of prison
into a sanctuary, take a leap out of their trades
into philosophy, those who doing so being probably the cleverest
hands at their own miserable craft. For although philosophy be
in this evil case, still there remains a dignity about
her which is not to be found in the arts.

(29:08):
And many are thus attracted by her. Whose natures are imperfect,
and whose souls are maimed and disfigured by their meannesses,
as their bodies are by their trades and crafts. Is
not this unavoidable? Yes? Are they not? Exactly like a
bald little tinker who has just got out of durance
and come into a fortune. He takes a bath and

(29:29):
puts on a new coat, and is decked out as
a bridegroom going to marry his master's daughter who is
left poor and desolate, a most exact parallel. What will
be the issue of such marriages? Will they not be
vile and bastard? There can be no question of it.
And when the persons who are unworthy of education approach

(29:50):
philosophy and make an alliance with her, who is in
a rank above them. What sort of ideas and opinions
are likely to be generated? Will they not be softist,
captivating to the ear, having nothing in them genuine or
worthy of or akin to true wisdom? No doubt he said.
Then aramanas I said, the worthy disciples of philosophy will

(30:12):
be but a small remnants. Perchance some noble and well
educated person detained by exile in her service, who, with
the absence of corrupting influences, remains devoted to her, or
some lofty souled board in a mean city, the politics
of which he condemns and neglects. And there may be
a gifted few who leave the arts which they justly despise,

(30:34):
and come to her or peradventure, there are some who
are restrained by our frintaeages bridle. For everything in the
life of Taiji's conspire to divert him from philosophy, but
ill health kept him away from politics. My own case
of the internal sign is hardly worth mentioning, for rarely,
if ever, have such a monitor been given to any

(30:55):
other man. Those who belong to this small class have
tasted how sweet and blessed a possession philosophy is, and
have also seen enough of the madness of the multitude,
And they know that no politician is honest, nor is
there any champion of justice at whose side they may
fight and be saved. Such an one may be compared

(31:16):
to a man who has fallen among wild beasts. He
will not join in the wickedness of his fellows, but
neither is he able singly to resist all their fierce natures.
And therefore, seeing that he would be of no use
to the state or to his friends, and reflecting that
he would have to throw away his life without doing
any good, either to himself or others, he holds his

(31:36):
peace and goes his own way. He is like one who,
in the storm of dust and sleet which the driving
wind hurries along, retires under the shelter of a wall, and,
seeing the rest of mankind full of wickedness, he is
content if only he can live his own life, and
be pure from evil or unrighteousness, and depart in peace

(31:57):
and good will with bright hopes, yes, he said, and
he will have done a great work before he departs,
A great work, yes, but not the greatest unless he
finds a state suitable to him. For in a state
which is suitable to him, he will have a larger
growth than be the savior of his country as well
as of himself. The causes why Philosophy is in such

(32:19):
an evil name have now been sufficiently explained. The injustice
of the charges against her has been shown. Is there
anything more which you wish to say? Nothing more on
that subject, he replied, But I should like to know
which of the governments now existing is, in your opinion,
the one adapted to her. Not any of them, I said,

(32:40):
And that is precisely the accusation which I bring against them.
Not one of them is worthy of the philosophic nature.
And hence that nature is warped and estranged, as the
exotic seed which is sown in a foreign land becomes
denaturalized and is wont to be overpowered and to lose
itself in the new soil. Even so this growth of philosophy,

(33:02):
instead of persisting, degenerates and receives another character. But if
philosophy ever finds in the state that perfection which she
herself is, then will be seen that she is in
truth divine, and that all other things, whether natures of men,
or institutions are but human. And now I know that

(33:24):
you are going to ask what that state is. No,
he said, there you are wrong, for I was going
to ask another question, whether it is the state of
which we are the founders and inventors, or some other Yes,
I replied ours in most respects. But you may remember
my saying before that some living authority would always be

(33:46):
required in the state, having the same idea of the
constitution which guided you when as a legislator you were
laying down the laws. That was said, He replied, yes,
but not in a satisfactory manner, You who frightened us
by interposing objections which certainly showed that the discussion would
be long and difficult. And what still remains is the

(34:08):
reverse of easy. What is their remaining the question? How
the study of philosophy may be so ordered as not
to be the ruin of the state. All great attempts
are attended with risk. Hard is the good? As men say? Still,
he said, let the point be cleared up, and the
inquiry will then be complete. I shall not be hinted,

(34:31):
I said, by any want of will, But if at
all by a want of power my zeal, you may
see for yourselves, and please to remark in what I
am about to say, how boldly and unhesitatingly I declare
that states should pursue philosophy, not as they do now,
but in a different spirit, in what manner at present

(34:52):
I said, the students of philosophy are quite young, beginning
when they are hardly past childhood. They devote only the
times aimed from money making and housekeeping to such pursuits.
And even those of them who are reputed to have
most of the philosophic spirit, when they come within sight
of the great difficulty of the subject I mean dialectic,
take themselves off in after life. When invited by someone else,

(35:16):
they may perhaps go and hear a lecture, And after
this they make much ado, for philosophy is not considered
by them to be their proper business. At last, when
they grow old, in most cases they are extinguished, more
truly than Heraclidus's son, inasmuch as they never light up again.
Heraclidas said that the sun was extinguished every evening and

(35:37):
be lighted every morning. But what ought to be their
course just the opposite. In childhood and youth, their study
and what philosophy they learn should be suited to their
tender years. During this period, when they are growing up
towards manhood, the chief and special care should be given
to their bodies, that they may have them to use
in the service of philosophy. As life advances and the

(36:00):
intellect begins to mature, let them increase the gymnastics of
the soul. But when the strength of our citizens fails
and is past civil and military duties, then let them
rage at will and engage in no serious labor, as
we intend them to live happily here and to crown
this life with a similar happiness in another. How truly

(36:20):
in earnest you are, Socrates, he said, I am sure
of that, And yet most of your hearers, if I
am not mistaken, are likely to be still more earnest
in their opposition to you, and will never be convinced. Trisymachus,
least of all, do not make a quarrel, I said
between Trysymachus and me, who have recently become friends, Although

(36:41):
indeed we will never enemies, for I shall go on
striving to the utmost until I either convert him and
other men, or do something which may profit them against
the day when they live again, and hold the like
discourse in another state of existence. You are speaking of
a time which is not very near. Rather, I reply
of a time which is as nothing in comparison with eternity. Nevertheless,

(37:05):
I do not wonder that the many refuse to believe,
for they have never seen that of which we are
now speaking realized. They have seen only a conventional imitation
of philosophy, consisting of words artificially brought together, not like
these of ours, having a natural unity, but a human
being who, in word and work is perfectly molded, as

(37:26):
far as he can be, into the proportion and likeness
of virtue. Such a man ruling in a city which
bears the same image. They have never yet seen, neither
one nor many of them. Do you think that they
ever did? No? Indeed, no, my friend, And they have seldom,
if ever heard free and noble sentiments such as men

(37:47):
utter when they are earnestly and by every means in
their power, seeking after truth for the sake of knowledge,
while they look coldly on the subtleties of controversy of
which the end is opinioned and strife. Whether they meet
with them in the courts of law or in society,
they are strangers. He said to the words of which
you speak. And this was what we foresaw, and this

(38:09):
was the reason why truth forced us to admit, not
without fear and hesitation, that neither cities, nor states, nor
individuals will ever attain perfection until the small class of philosophers,
whom we termed useless but not corrupt, are providentially compelled,
whether they will or not, to take care of the state,

(38:30):
and until a like necessity be laid on the state
to obey them, or until kings, or if not kings,
the sons of kings or princes are divinely inspired with
a true love of true philosophy. That either or both
of these alternatives are impossible. I see no reason to affirm.

(38:51):
If they were so, we might indeed be justly ridiculed
as dreamers and visionaries. Am I not right? Quite right?
If they, in the countless ages of the past, or
at the present hour, in some foreign clime which is
far away and beyond darken, the perfected philosopher is, or
has been, or hereafter shall be compelled by a superior

(39:14):
power to have the charge of the state. We are
ready to assert to the death that this our constitution
has been and is yeay, and will be whenever the
muse of philosophy is queen. There is no impossibility in
all this that there is difficulty. We acknowledge ourselves. My
opinion agrees with yours, he said, But do you mean

(39:36):
to say that this is not the opinion of the multitude.
I should imagine not, he replied, Oh, my friend, I said,
do not attack the multitude. They will change their minds,
if not in an aggressive spirit, but gently, and with
the view of soothing them and removing their dislike of
over education. You show them your philosophers as they really are,

(40:00):
and describe, as you were just now doing, their character
and profession. And then mankind will see that he of
whom you are speaking is not such as they supposed.
If they view him in this new light, they will
surely change their notion of him. And answer in another strain,
who can be at enmity with one who loves him,
who that is himself gentle and free from envy, will

(40:23):
be jealous of one in whom there is no jealousy. Nay,
let me answer for you that in a few this
harsh temper may be found, but not in the majority
of mankind. I quite agree with you, he said, and
do you not also think as I do that the
harsh feeling which the many entertain towards philosophy originates in

(40:44):
the pretenders who rush in uninvited, and are always abusing
them and finding fault with them, who make persons instead
of things the theme of their conversation. And nothing can
be more unbecoming in philosophers than this. It is most
unbecoming for he Adimantus, whose mind is fixed upon true being,
has surely no time to look down upon the affairs

(41:06):
of earth, or to be filled with malice and envy
contending against men. His eye is ever directed towards things
fixed and immutable, which he sees, neither injuring nor injured
by one another, but all in order, moving according to reason.
These he imitates, and to these he will, as far
as he can conform himself. Can a man help imitating

(41:28):
that with which he holds reverential converse impossible? And the philosopher,
holding converse with a divine order, becomes orderly and divine
as far as the nature of man allows. But like
every one else, he will suffer from detraction, of course,
and if a necessity be laid upon him of fashioning
not only himself, but human nature generally, whether in states

(41:50):
or individuals, into that which he beholds elsewhere. Will he
think you be an unskillful artificer of justice, temperance, and
every civil virtue? Anything but unskillful? And if the world
perceives that what we are saying about him is the truth,
will they be angry with philosophy? Will they disbelieve us

(42:10):
when we tell them that no state can be happy
which is not designed by artists who imitate the heavenly pattern?
They will not be angry if they understand. But how
will they draw out the plan of which you are speaking.
They will begin by taking the state and the manners
of men, from which, as from a tablet, they will
rub out the picture and leave a clean surface. This

(42:32):
is no easy task, but whether easy or not, herein
will neither difference between them and every other legislator. They
will have nothing to do either with individual or state,
and will inscribe no laws until they have either found
or themselves made a clean surface. They will be very right,
he said. Having effected this, they will proceed to trace

(42:54):
an outline of the Constitution, no doubt, And when they
are filling in the work. As I conceive, they will
often turn their eyes upwards and downwards. I mean that
they will first look at absolute justice and beauty and temperance,
and again at the human copy, and will mingle and
tamper the various elements of life into the image of
a man. And this they will conceive according to that

(43:17):
other image, which, when existing among men, Homer calls the
form and likeness of God. Very true, he said, and
one feature they will erase, and another they will put in,
until they have made the ways of men as far
as possible, agreeable to the ways of God. Indeed, he said,
in no way could they make a fairer picture. And

(43:38):
now I said, are we beginning to persuade those whom
you described as rushing at us with might and main?
That the painter of constitutions is such an one as
we are praising, at whom they were so very indignant,
because to his hands we committed the state. And are
they growing a little calmer at what they have just heard?
Much calmer? If there is any so in them? Why

(44:01):
where can they still find any ground for objection? Will
they doubt that the philosopher is a lover of truth
and being? They would not be so unreasonable, or that
his nature, being such as we have delineated, is akin
to the highest good. Neither can they doubt this. But
again will they tell us that such a nature placed
under favorable circumstances will not be perfectly good and wise

(44:24):
if any ever was, or will they prefer those whom
we have rejected? Surely not? Then will they still be
angry at our saying that until philosophers bear rule, states
and individuals will have no rest from evil, nor will
this our imaginary state ever be realized. I think that
they will be less angry. Shall we assume that they

(44:46):
are not only less angry, but quite gentle, and that
they have been converted, and for very shame if for
no other reason cannot refuse to come to terms by
all mean he said, then let us suppose that the
reconciliation has affected. Will any one deny the other point?
That there may be sons of kings or princes who

(45:06):
are by nature philosophers, surely no man, And when they
come into being, will any one say that they must
of necessity be destroyed? That they can hardly be saved
is not denied even by us, But that in the
whole course of ages, no single one of them can escape.
Who will venture to affirm this? Oh? Indeed, But said I,

(45:27):
one is enough. Let there be one man who has
a city obedient to his will, and he might bring
into existence the ideal polity about which the world is
so incredulous. Yes, one is enough. The ruler may impose
the laws and institutions which we have been describing, and
the citizens may possibly be willing to obey them. Certainly,

(45:48):
and that others should approve of what we approve is
no miracle or impossibility, I think not. But we have
sufficiently shown in what has preceded that all this, if
only possible, is assuredly for the best we have. And
now we say not only that our laws, if they
could be enacted, would be for the best, but also

(46:09):
that the enactment of them, though difficult, is not impossible,
very good. And so, with pain and toil we have
reached the end of one subject. But Moore, remains to
be discussed, how and by what studies and pursuits will
the saviors of the Constitution be created, and at what
ages are they to apply themselves to their several studies. Certainly,

(46:32):
I omitted the troublesome business of the possession of women
and the procreation of children, and the appointment of rulers,
because I knew that the perfect state would be eyed
with jealousy and was difficult of attainment. But that piece
of cleverness was not of much service to me, for
I had to discuss them all the same. The women
and children are not disposed of, but the other question

(46:54):
of the rulers must be investigated. From the beginning, we
were saying, as you will remember, that they were to
be lovers of their country, tried by the test of
pleasures and pains, and neither in hardships, nor in dangers,
nor in any other critical moment, were to lose their patriotism.
He was to be rejected who failed, But he who
always came forth pure like gold tried in the refiner's fire,

(47:18):
was to be made a ruler, and to receive honors
and rewards in life and after death. This was the
sort of thing which was being said. And then the
argument turned aside and veiled her face, not liking to
stir the question which has now risen. I perfectly remember,
he said, Yes, my friend, I said, And I then
shrank from hazarding the bold word. But now let me

(47:42):
dare to say that the perfect guardian must be a philosopher. Yes,
he said, let that be affirmed, And do not suppose
that there will be many of them. For the gifts
which were deemed by us to be essential rarely grow together.
They are mostly found in shreds and patchet. What do
you mean, he said, you are aware? I replied that

(48:04):
quick intelligence, memory, sagacity, cleverness, and similar qualities do not
often grow together, and that persons who possess them, and
are at the same time high spirited and magnanimous, are
not so constituted by nature as to live orderly and
in a peaceful and settled manner. They are driven any
way by their impulses, and all solid principle goes out

(48:27):
of them. Very true, he said. On the other hand,
those steadfast natures, which can better be depended upon, which
in a battle are impregnable to fear and immovable, are
equally immovable when there is anything to be learned. They
are always in a torpid state, and are apt to
yawn and go to sleep over any intellectual toil. Quite true,

(48:47):
And yet we are saying that both qualities are necessary
in those to whom the higher education is to be imparted,
and who are to share in any office or command. Certainly,
he said, and will they be a class which is
rarely found? Yes? Indeed, then the aspirants must not only
be tested in those labors and dangers and pleasures which

(49:07):
we mentioned before, But there is another kind of probation
which we did not mention. He must be exercised also
in many kinds of knowledge, to see whether the soul
will be able to endure the highest of all or
will faint under them, as in any other studies and exercises. Yes,
he said, you are quite right in testing him. But
what do you mean by the highest of all knowledge?

(49:30):
You may remember, I said, we divided the soul into
three parts, and distinguished the several natures of justice, temperance, courage,
and wisdom. Indeed, he said, if I had forgotten, I
should not deserve to hear more. And do you remember
the word of caution which preceded the discussion of them
to what do you refer? We were saying, if I

(49:53):
am not mistaken, that he who wanted to see them
in their perfect beauty must take a longer and more
securitous way At the end of which they would appear,
but that we could add on a popular exposition of
them on a level with the discussion which had preceded.
And you replied that such an exposition would be enough
for you, And so the inquiry was continued in what

(50:15):
to me seemed to be a very inaccurate manner. Whether
you were satisfied or not, it is for you to say, yes,
he said, I thought, and others thought, that you gave
us a fair measure of truth. But my friend, I said,
a measure of such things which in any degree falls
short of the whole truth is not fair measure. For
nothing imperfect is the measure of anything. Although persons are

(50:38):
too apt to be contented and think that they need
search no further, not an uncommon case when people are indolent, yes,
I said, And there cannot be any worse fault in
a guardian of the state and of the laws. True.
The guardian, then, I said, must be required to take
the longer circuit, and toil at learning as well as
at gymnastics, or he will never reach the highest knowledge

(51:00):
of all, which, as we were just now saying, is
his proper calling. What he said, is there a knowledge
still higher than this, higher than justice and the other virtues. Yes,
I said, there is, and of the virtues too. We
must behold not the outline, merely, as at present, nothing
short of the most finished picture should satisfy us. When

(51:21):
little things are elaborated with an infinity of pains in
order that they may appear in their full beauty and
utmost clearness. How ridiculous that we should not think the
highest truth worthy of attaining the highest accuracy of right
noble thoughts. But do you suppose that we shall refrain
from asking you what is this highest knowledge? Nay, I said,

(51:42):
ask if you will. But I am certain that you
have heard the answer many times. And now you either
do not understand me, or, as I rather think, you
are disposed to be troublesome. For you have often been
told that the idea of good is the highest knowledge,
and that all things become useful and advantageous only by
their use of this. You could hardly be ignorant that

(52:05):
of this I was about to speak, concerning which, as
you have often heard me say, we know so little,
and without which any other knowledge or possession of any
kind will profit us nothing. Do you think that the
possession of all other things is of any value if
we do not possess the good or the knowledge of
all other things, if we have no knowledge of beauty

(52:25):
and goodness, assuredly not. You are further aware that most
people affirm pleasure to be the good, but the finer
sort of wits say it is knowledge. Yes, And you
are aware too that the latter cannot explain what they
mean by knowledge, and are obliged, after all, to say
knowledge of the good? How ridiculous, Yes, that they should

(52:47):
begin by reproaching us with our ignorance of the good,
and then presume our knowledge of it. For the good
they define a me knowledge of the good, just as
if we understood them when they use the term good.
This is, of course ridiculous, most true, he said, And
those who make pleasure their good are in equal perplexity,
for they are compelled to admit that there are bad

(53:10):
pleasures as well as good, certainly, and therefore to acknowledge
that bad and good are the same. True. There can
be no doubt about the numerous difficulties in which this
question is involved. There can be none. Further, do we
not see that many are willing to do, or to have,
or to seem to be what is just and honorable

(53:31):
without the reality. But no one is satisfied with the
appearance of good. The reality is what they seek. In
the case of the good, appearance is despised by everyone.
Very true, he said, of this, then, which every soul
of man pursues and makes the end of all his actions,
having a presentiment that there is such an end, and

(53:52):
yet hesitating because neither knowing the nature, nor having the
same assurance of this as of other things, and therefore
losing whatever good there is in other things. Of a
principle such and so great as this ought the best
bed in our state, to whom everything is entrusted to
be in the darkness of ignorance. Certainly not, he said,

(54:13):
I am sure. I said that he who does not
know how the beautiful and the just are likewise good,
will be but a sorry guardian of them. And I
suspect that no one who is ignorant of the good
will have a true knowledge of them. That he said,
is a shrewd suspicion of yours. And if we only

(54:33):
have a guardian who has this knowledge, our state will
be perfectly ordered. Of course, he replied, but I wish
that you would tell me whether you conceive this supreme
principle of the good to be knowledge or pleasure, or
different from either, Ay, I said, I knew all along
that a fastidious gentleman like you would not be contented

(54:55):
with the thoughts of other people about these matters, True, Socrates,
But I must that one who like you has passed
a lifetime in the study of philosophy should not be
always repeating the opinions of others and never telling his own. Well,
but has anyone a right to say positively what he
does not know? Not, he said, with the assurance of

(55:15):
positive certainty. He has no right to do that. But
he may say what he thinks as a matter of opinion.
And do you not know I said that all mere
opinions are bad, and the best of them blind. You
would not deny that these who have any true notion
without intelligence are only like blind men who feel their
way along the road. Very true, And do you wish

(55:38):
to behold what is blind and crooked and base, when
others will tell you of brightness and beauty? Still I
must implore you, Socrates, said Glaucon, not to turn away
just as you are reaching the goal. If you will
only give such an explanation of the good as you
have already given of justice and temperance and the other virtues,
we shall be satisfied, Yes, my friend, and I shall

(56:01):
be at least equally satisfied. But I cannot help fearing
that I shall fail, and that my indiscreet zeal will
bring ridicule upon me. No, sweet sirs, let us not
at present ask what is the actual nature of the good.
For to reach what is now in my thoughts would
be an effort too great for me. But of the

(56:21):
child of the good, who is likest him, I would
fain speak if I could be sure that you wish
to hear. Otherwise, not by all means, he said, tell
us about the child, and you shall remain in our
debt for the account of the parent. I do indeed wish,
I replied, that I could pay, and you receive the
account of the parent, and not as now of the offspring.

(56:43):
Only take, however, this latter by way of interest, and
at the same time have a care that I do
not render a false account, although I have no intention
of deceiving you. Yes, we will take the care that
we can proceed, Yes, I said, but I must first
come to an un standing with you, and remind you
of what I have mentioned in the course of this discussion,

(57:04):
and at many other times, what the old story. That
there is a many beautiful, and of many good, and
so of other things which we describe and define. To
all of them the term many is applied, true, he said,
And there is an absolute beauty and an absolute good,
And of other things to which the word of many
is applied, there is an absolute, for they may be

(57:27):
brought under a single idea, which is called the essence
of each. Very true, The many, as we say, are
seen but not known, and the ideas are known but
not seen exactly. And what is the organ with which
we see the visible things? The sight? He said? And
with the hearing, I said, we hear, and with the

(57:48):
other senses perceive the other objects of sense. True, But
have you remarked that sight is by far the most
costly and complex piece of workmanship which the artificer of
the senses ever contrived. No, I never have, he said, then,
reflect as the ear or voice, need of any third
or additional nature, in order that the one may be

(58:10):
able to hear, in the other to be heard. Nothing
of the sort, No, indeed, I replied, And the same
is true of most, if not all, the other senses.
You would not say that any of them require such
an addition, certainly not. But you see that without the
addition of some other nature, there is no seeing or
being seen. Ah, how do you mean sight being as

(58:33):
I conceive in the eyes, and he who has eyes
wanting to see color being also present in them. Still,
unless there be a third nature specially adapted to the purpose,
the owner of the eyes will see nothing, and the
colors will be invisible. Of what nature are you speaking
of that which you term light? I replied, true, he said, noble.

(58:54):
Then is the bond which links together sight and visibility,
and great beyond other by no small difference of nature.
For the light is their bond, and the light is
no ignoble thing, nay, the reverse of ignoble, And which
I said of the gods in heaven. What you say
was the lord of this element? Whose is that light

(59:15):
which makes the eye deceived perfectly and the visible to appear?
You mean the Sun, as you and all mankind say.
May not the relation of sight to this deity be
described as follows? How neither sight nor the eye in
which sight resides is the sun. No. Yet, of all
the organs of sense, the eye is the most like

(59:36):
the sun, by far the most. And the power which
the eye possesses is a sort of effluence which is
dispensed from the sun. Exactly. Then, the Sun is not sight,
but the author of sight, who is recognized by sight. True,
he said, And this is he whom I call the
child of good, whom the good begat in his own

(59:57):
likeness to be in the visible world in relation to
sight and the things of sight. What the good is
in the intellectual world in relation to mind and the
things of mind? Will you be a little more explicit?
He said? Why you know? I said that the eyes
when the person directs them towards objects on which the
light of day is no longer shining, but the moon

(01:00:17):
and stars only see dimly and are nearly blind. They
seem to have no clearness of vision in them. Very true.
But when they are directed towards objects on which the
sun shines, they see clearly, and there is sight in them, certainly.
And the soul is like the eye. When resting upon
that on which the truth and being shine, the soul

(01:00:38):
perceives and understands and is radiant with intelligence, But when
turned towards the twilight of becoming and perishing, then she
has opinion only, and goes blinking about, and is first
of one opinion and then of another, and seems to
have no intelligence. Just so, now, that which imparts truth

(01:00:58):
to the nod and the power of knowing to the knower,
is what I would have you term the idea of good,
And this you will deem to be the cause of
science and of truth, in so far as the latter
becomes the subject of knowledge beautiful too, as are both
truth and knowledge, you will be right in esteeming this
other nature as more beautiful than either. And as in

(01:01:20):
the previous instance, light and sight may be truly said
to be like the sun, and yet not to be
the sun, so in this other sphere, science and truth
may be termed to be like the good, but not
the good, the good as a place of honor yet higher.
What a wonder of beauty that must be, He said,
which is the author of science and truth, and yet

(01:01:42):
surpasses them in beauty? For you surely cannot mean to
say that pleasure is the good God forbid, I replied,
But may I ask you to consider the image in
another point of view. In what point of view you
would say, would you not, that the Sun is not
only the author of visibility in all visible things, but

(01:02:02):
of generation and nourishment and growth, though he himself is
not generation. Certainly, in like manner, the good may be
said to be not only the author of knowledge to
all things known, but of their being an essence. And
yet the good is not essence, but far exceeds essence
in dignity and power. Klau Khan said, with a ludicrous earnestness,

(01:02:24):
by the light of heaven. How amazing, yes, I said,
And the exaggeration may be set down to you, for
you made me utter my fancies, and pray continue to
utter them at any rate. Let us hear if there
is anything more to be said about the similitude of
the Sun, Yes, I said, there is a great deal
more than omit. Nothing, however slight. I will do my best,

(01:02:48):
I said, But I should think that a great deal
will have to be omitted. I hope not, he said.
You have to imagine then, that there are two ruling powers,
and that one of them is set over or the
intellectual world, the other over the visible I do not say,
Heaven lest you should fancy I am playing upon the name.
May I suppose that you have this distinction of the

(01:03:09):
visible and intelligible fixed in your mind. I have now
take a line which has been cut into two unequal parts,
and divide each of them again in the same proportion.
And suppose the two main divisions to answer, one to
the visible and the other to the intelligible. And then
compare the subdivisions in respect of their clearness and want

(01:03:29):
of clearness. And you will find that the first section
in the sphere of the visible consists of images, and
by images I mean in the first place shadows, and
in the second place reflections in water, and in solid,
smooth and polished bodies and the like. Do you understand, yes,
I understand. Imagine now the other section, of which this

(01:03:52):
is only the resemblance, to include the animals which we see,
and everything that grows or is made very good. Would
you not admit that both the sections of this division
have different degrees of truth, and that the copy is
to the original, as the sphere of opinion is to
the sphere of knowledge. Most undoubtedly, next proceed to consider

(01:04:12):
the manner in which the sphere of the intellectual is
to be divided in what manner. Thus there are two subdivisions,
in the lower of which the soul uses the figures
given by the former division as images. The enquiry can
only be hypothetical, and instead of going upwards to a principle,
descends to the other end. In the higher of the two,
the soul passes out of hypotheses and goes up to

(01:04:35):
a principle, which is above hypotheses, making no use of images,
as in the former case, but proceeding only in and
through the ideas themselves. I do not quite understand your meaning,
he said, Then I will try again. You will answer
me better when I have made some preliminary remarks. You
are aware that students of geometry, arithmetic, and the kindred

(01:04:58):
sciences assume the odd and the even, and the figures,
and three kinds of angles, and the like in their
several branches of science. These are their hypotheses, which they
and everybody are supposed to know. And therefore they do
not deign to give any account of them, either to
themselves or to others. But they begin with them and
go on until they arrive, at last, and in a

(01:05:20):
consistent manner, at their conclusion. Yes, he said, I know,
and do you not know also, that although they make
use of the visible forms and reason about them, they
are thinking not of these, but of the ideals which
they resemble, not of the figures which they draw, but
of the absolute square and the absolute diameter, and so on.

(01:05:41):
The forms which they draw or make, and which have
shadows and reflections in water of their own, are converted
by them into images. But they are really seeking to
be owe the things themselves, which can only be seen
with the eye of the mind. That is true, and
of this kind I spoke as the intelligible, although in
the search after it, the soul is compelled to use hypotheses,

(01:06:03):
not ascending to a first principle because she is unable
to rise above the region of hypothesis, but employing the
objects of which the shadows below are resemblances in their
turn as images, they having in relation to the shadows
and reflections of them, a greater distinctness and therefore a
higher value. I understand, he said, that you are speaking
of the province of geometry and the sister arts. And

(01:06:26):
when I speak of the other divisions of the intelligible,
you will understand me to speak of that other sort
of knowledge, which reason herself attains by the power of dialectic,
using the hypotheses, not as first principles, but only as hypotheses,
that is to say, as steps and points of departure
into a world which is above hypotheses, in order that

(01:06:47):
she may soar beyond them to the first principle of
the whole, and clinging to this, and then to that
which depends on this, by successive steps, she descends again,
without the aid of any sensible object, from ideas, through ideas,
and in ideas, she ends. I understand you, he replied,
not perfectly, for you seem to be describing a task

(01:07:08):
which is really tremendous. But at any rate, I understand
you to say that knowledge and being which the science
of dialectic contemplates are clearer than the notions of the arts,
as they are termed, which proceed from hypotheses. Only these
are also contemplated by the understanding, and not by the senses. Yet,
because they start from hypotheses and do not ascend to

(01:07:30):
a principle, those who contemplate them appear to you not
to exercise the higher reason upon them. Although when a
first principle is added to them. They are cognizable by
the higher reason and the habit which is concerned with
geometry in the cognate sciences. I suppose that you would
term understanding and not reason, as being intermediate between opinion

(01:07:50):
and reason. You have quite conceived my meaning, I said.
And now, corresponding to these four divisions, let there be
four faculties in the soul, reason answering to the highest,
understanding to the second, faith or conviction to the third,
and perception of shadows to the last. And let there

(01:08:10):
be a scale of them. And let us suppose that
the several faculties have clearness in the same degree that
their objects have truth. I understand, he replied, and give
my assent and accept your arrangement. End of Book six,
Book seven of the Republic by Plato read by Bubnefeld.
And now I said, let me show in a figure

(01:08:33):
how far our nature is enlightened or unenlightened. Behold human
beings living in an underground den which has a mouth
opened towards the lights and reaching all along the dead.
Here they have been from their childhood, and have their
legs and next chained, so that they cannot move and
can only see before them, being prevented by the chains

(01:08:53):
from turning round their heads. Above and behind them, a
fire is blazing at a distance, and between the fire
and the prisoners there is a raised way, and you
will see, if you look how a low wall built
along the way, like the screen which marionette players have
in front of them, over which they show the puppets.
I see, and do you see, I said, men passing

(01:09:16):
along the wall, carrying all sorts of vessels and statues,
and figures of animals made of wood and stone and
various materials which appear over the wall. Some of them
are talking, others silent. You have shown me a strange image,
and they are strange prisoners like ourselves, I replied, And
they see only their own shadows, or the shadows of

(01:09:38):
one another, which the fire throws on the opposite wall
of the cave. True, he said, How could they see
anything but the shadows? If they were never allowed to
move their heads, and of the objects which are being
carried in like manner, they would only see the shadows, Yes,
he said, And if they were able to converse with
one another, would they not suppose that they were naming

(01:10:00):
was actually before them? Very true? And suppose further that
the prison had an echo which came from the other side.
Would they not be sure to fancy when one of
the passers by spoke that the voice which they heard
came from the passing shadow. No question, he replied to them,
I said, the truth would be literally nothing but the

(01:10:21):
shadows of the images, that is certain. And now look
again and see what will naturally follow if the prisoners
are released and disabused of their error. At first, when
any of them is liberated and compelled suddenly to stand
up and turn his neck round and walk and look
towards the light, he will shuffer sharp pains. The glare
will distress him, and he will be unable to see

(01:10:44):
the realities of which in his former state he had
seen the shadows, and then conceived some one saying to
him that what he saw before was an illusion, But
that now, when he is approaching near it a being,
and his eyes turned towards more real existence, he has
a clearer vision. What will be his reply? And you

(01:11:04):
may further imagine that his instructor is pointing to the
objects as they pass, and requiring him to name them.
Will he not be perplexed? Will he not fancy that
the shadows which he formerly saw are truer than the
objects which are now shown to him, far truer. And
if he is compelled to look straight at the lights,
will he not have a pain in his eyes which

(01:11:26):
will make him turn away to take refuge in the
objects of vision which he can see, and which he
will conceive to be in reality clearer than the things
which are now being shown to him. True, he said,
And suppose once more that he is reluctantly dragged up
a steep and rugged assent, and held fast until he
is forced into the presence of the sun himself. Is

(01:11:49):
he not likely to be pained and irritated When he
approaches the light. His eyes will be dazzled, and he
will not be able to see anything at all of
what are now called realities. Not all in a mine,
he said. He will require to grow accustomed to the
sight of the upper world, And first he will see
the shadows best, next the reflections of men and other

(01:12:09):
objects in the water, and then the objects themselves. Then
he will gaze upon the light of the moon and
the stars and the spangled heaven, and he will see
the sky and the stars by night better than the
sun or the light of the sun by day. Certainly,
last of all, he will be able to see the sun,
and not mere reflections of him in the water. But

(01:12:29):
he will see him in his own proper place, and
not in another, and he will contemplate him as he is. Certainly,
he will then proceed to argue that this is he
who gives the season and the years, and is the
guardian of all that is in the visible world, and
in a certain way, the cause of all things which
he and his fellows have been accustomed to behold. Clearly,

(01:12:50):
he said he would first see the sun and then
reason about him. And when he remembered his old habitation
and the wisdom of the den and his fellow prisoners,
do you not suppose that he would felicitate himself or
the change and pity them. Certainly he would, And if
they were in the habit of conferring honors among themselves
on those who were quickest to observe the passing shadows,

(01:13:13):
and to remark which of them went before and which
followed after, and which were to gather, and who were
therefore best able to draw conclusions as to the future,
do you think he would care for such honors and
glories or envy the possessors of them, would he not
say with Homer, better to be the poor servant of
a poor master, and to endure anything, rather than think

(01:13:35):
as they do and live after their manner. Yes, I
think he would rather suffer anything than entertain these false
notions and live in this miserable manner. Imagine, once more,
I said, such an one coming suddenly out of the
sun to be replaced in his old situation, would he
not be certain to have his eyes full of darkness?

(01:13:56):
To be sure? And if there were a contest, and
he had to compete at measuring the shadows with the
prisoners who had never moved out of the den, while
his sight was still weak, and before his eyes had
become steady, and the time which would be needed to
acquire this new habit of sight might be very considerable,
would he not be ridiculous? Men would say of him

(01:14:16):
that up he went, and down he came without his eyes,
and that it was better not even to think of ascending.
And if anyone tried to loose another and lead him
up to the light, let them only catch the offender,
and they would put him to death. No question, This
entire category I said, you may now append, dear Glaucon
to the previous argument. The prison house is the world

(01:14:39):
of sight, the light of the fire is the sun.
And you will not misapprehend me if you interpret the
journey upwards to be the ascent of the soul into
the intellectual world, according to my poor belief, which at
your desire I have expressed. Whether brightly or wrongly, God knows,
but whether true or false, My my opinion is that

(01:15:01):
in the world of knowledge, the idea of good appears
last of all, and is seen only with an effort,
And when seen, is also inferred to be the universal
author of all things beautiful and right, parent of light
and of the Lord of light in this visible world,
and the immediate source of reason and truth in the
intellectual And that this is the power upon which he

(01:15:24):
who would act rationally, either in public or private life,
must have his eye fixed. I agree, he said, as
far as I am able to understand. Moreover, I said,
you must not wonder that those who attain to this
beatific vision are unwilling to dissent to human affairs, for
their souls are ever hastening into the upper world, where

(01:15:45):
they desire to dwell, which desire of theirs is very natural,
if our allegory may be trusted, Yes, very natural. And
is there anything surprising in one who passes from divine
contemplations to the evil state of mann and misbehaving himself
in a ridiculous manner, If while his eyes are blinking,
and before he has become accustomed to the surrounding darkness,

(01:16:08):
he is compelled to fight in courts of law or
in other places about the images or the shadows of
images of justice, and is endeavoring to meet the conceptions
of those who have never yet seen absolute justice. Anything
but surprising, he replied. Anyone who has common sense will
remember that the bewilderments of the eyes are of two kinds,

(01:16:30):
and arise from two causes, neither from coming out of
the light or from going into the light, which is
true of the mind's eye, quite as much as of
the bodily eye. And he who remembers this, when he
sees anyone whose vision is perplexed and weak, will not
be too ready to laugh. He will first ask whether
that soul of man has come out of the brighter
life and is unable to see because unaccustomed to the dark,

(01:16:54):
or having turned from darkness to the day is bedazzled
by excess of light, and he will count the one
unhappy in his condition and state of being, and he
will pity the other. Or if he have a mind
to laugh at the soul which comes from below into
the light, there will be more reason in this than
in the laugh which greets him who returns from above
out of the light into the dead. That he said

(01:17:16):
is a very just distinction. But then, if I am right,
certain professors of education must be wrong when they say
that they can put a knowledge into the soul which
was not there before, like sight into blind eyes. They
undoubtedly say this, he replied, whereas our argument shows that
the power and capacity of learning exists in the soul already,

(01:17:39):
and that just as the eye was unable to turn
from darkness to light without the whole body, so to
the instrument of knowledge can only by the movement of
the whole soul be turned from the world of becoming
into that of being, and learned by degrees to endure
the state of being and of the brightest and best
of being, or in other words, of good very true?

(01:18:01):
And must there not be some art which will affect
conversion in the easiest and quickest manner, not implanting the
faculty of sight, for that exists already, but has been
turned in the wrong direction and is looking away from
the truth. Yes, he said, such an art may be presumed.
And whereas the other so called virtues of the soul
seem to be akin to bodily qualities, for even when

(01:18:24):
they are not originally innate, they can be implanted later
by habit and exercise. The virtue of wisdom, more than
anything else, contains a divine element which always remains, and
by this conversion is rendered useful and profitable, or, on
the other hand, hurtful and useless. Did you never observe
the narrow intelligence flashing from the keen eye of a

(01:18:46):
clever rogue. How eager he is, how clearly his paltry
soul sees the way to his end. He is the
reverse of blind. But his keen eye sight is forced
into the service of evil, and he is mischievous in
proportion to his cleverness. Very true, he said, But what
if there had been a circumcision of such natures in
the days of their youth, and they had been severed

(01:19:09):
from those sensual pleasures such as eating and drinking, which
like leaden weights, were attached to them at their birth,
and which drag them down and turn the vision of
their souls upon the things that are below. If I
say they had been released from these impediments and turned
in the opposite direction, the very same faculty in them
would have seen the truth as keenly as they see

(01:19:31):
what their eyes are turned to. Now. Very likely, yes,
I said. And there is another thing which is likely,
or rather a necessary inference from what has preceded, that
neither the uneducated and uninformed of the truth, nor yet
those who never make an end of their education, will
be able ministers of state. Not the former, because they

(01:19:53):
have no single aim of duty, which is the rule
of all their actions, private as well as public, nor
the latter, as they will not act at all except
upon compulsion, fancying that they are already dwelling apart in
the islands of the blest. Very true, he replied, then,
I said. The business of us, who are the founders

(01:20:13):
of the state, will be to compel the best minds
to attain that knowledge which we have already shown to
be the greatest of all. They must continue to ascend
until they arrive at the good. But when they have
ascended and seen enough, we must not allow them to
do as they do. Now, what do you mean. I
mean that they remain in the upper world. But this

(01:20:35):
must not be allowed. They must be made to descend
among the prisoners in the den and partake of their
labors and honors, whether they are worth having or not.
But is not this injust? He said, ought we to
give them a worse life when they might have a
better You have again forgotten, my friend, I said, the
intention of the legislator, who did not aim to make

(01:20:58):
any one class in the state above the rest, the
happiness was to be in the whole state. And he
held the citizens together by persuasion and necessity, making them
benefactors of the states, and therefore benefactors of one another.
To this, and he created them not to please themselves,
but to be his instruments in binding up the state. True,

(01:21:19):
he said, I had forgotten, observe Glaucar, that there will
be no injustice in compelling our philosophers to have a
care and providence of others. We shall explain to them
that in other states men of their class are not
obliged to share the toils of politics and This is reasonable,
for they grow up at their own sweet will, and
the government would rather not have them. Being self taught,

(01:21:42):
they cannot be expected to show any gratitude for a
culture which they have never received. But we have brought
you into the world to be rulers of the hive kings,
of yourselves and of the other citizens, and have educated
you far better and more perfectly than they have been educated.
And you are better able to share in the double duty. Wherefore,
each of you, when his turn comes, must go down

(01:22:05):
to the general underground abode and get the habit of
seeing in the dark. When you have acquired the habit,
you will see ten thousand times better than the inhabitants
of the den, and you will know what the several
images are and what they represent, because you have seen
the beautiful and just and good in their truth. And
us our state, which is also yours, will be a

(01:22:27):
reality and not a dream only, and will be administered
in a spirit unlike that of other states, in which
men fight with one another about shadows only and are
distracted in the struggle for power, which in their eyes
is a great good. Whereas the truth is that the
state in which the rulers are most reluctant to govern
is always the best and most quietly governed, and the

(01:22:50):
state in which they are most eager the worst. Quite true,
he replied, And will our pupils, when they hear this,
refuse to take their turn at the oils of states,
when they are allowed to spend the greater part of
their time with one another in the heavenly light. Impossible,
he answered, For they are just men, and the commands
which we impose upon them are just. There can be

(01:23:12):
no doubt that every one of them will take office
as a stern necessity, and not after the fashion of
our present rulers of state. Yes, my friend, I said,
and there lies the point. You must contrive for your
future rulers another and a better life than that of
a ruler, and then you may have a well ordered state.
For only in the state which offers this will they rule,

(01:23:35):
who are truly rich, not in silver and gold, but
in virtue and wisdom, which are the true blessings of life.
Whereas if they go to the administration of public affairs
poor and hungering after their own private advantage, thinking that
hence they are to snatch the chief good order, there
can never be for they will be fighting about office,

(01:23:55):
and the civil and domestic brawls which thus arise will
be the ruin of the rulers themselves and of the
whole state. Most true, he replied, And the only life
which looks down upon the life of political ambition is
that of true philosophy. Do you know of any other?
Indeed I do not. And those who govern ought not
to be lovers of the task, for if they are,

(01:24:18):
there will be rival lovers, and they will fight. No question.
Whom then, are these whom we shall compel to be guardians?
Surely they will be the men who are wisest about
affairs of state, and by whom the state is best administered,
and who at the same time have other honors and
another and a better life than that of politics. They

(01:24:38):
are the men, and I will choose them, he replied.
And now shall we consider in what way such guardians
will be produced, and how they are to be brought
from darkness to light, as some are said to have
ascended from the world below to the gods by all means.
The process, I said, is not the turning over of
an oyster shell, an allusion to a game in which

(01:25:00):
two parties fled or pursued, according as an oyster shell
which was thrown into the air, fell with the dark
or light side uppermost. But the turning round of a
soul passing from a day which is little better than night,
to the true day of being, That is the asset
from below which we affirm to be true philosophy. Quite so,
and should we not inquire what sort of knowledge has

(01:25:22):
the power of affecting such a chain? Certainly, what sort
of knowledge is there which would draw the soul from
becoming to being? And another consideration has just occurred to me.
You will remember that our young men are to be
warrior athletes, Yes, that was said. Then this new kind
of knowledge must have an additional quality, what quality? Usefulness

(01:25:45):
in war? Yes? If possible. There were two parts in
our former scheme of education where they or not? Just so?
There was gymnastic which presided over the growth and decay
of the body, and may therefore be regarded as having
to do with generation and corruption. True, then that is
not the knowledge which we are seeking to discover. No,

(01:26:06):
but what do you say of music, which also entered
to a certain extent into our former scheme music? He said,
as you will remember it was the counterpart of gymnastics,
and trained the guardians by the influences of habit by harmony,
making them harmonious by rhythm rhythmical, but not giving them science.
And the words, whether fabulous or possibly true, had kindred

(01:26:28):
elements of rhythm and harmony in them. But in music
there was nothing which tended to that good which you
are now seeking. You are most accurate, I said, in
your recollection. In music there certainly was nothing of the kind.
But what branch of knowledge is there, my dear Glaucon,
which is of the desired nature? Since all the useful

(01:26:49):
arts were reckoned to mean by us? Undoubtedly? And yet
if music and gymnastics are excluded, and the arts are
also excluded, what remains well? I said, there may be
nothing left of our special subjects. And then we shall
have to take something which is not special but of
universal application. What may that be, a something which all

(01:27:11):
arts and sciences and intelligences use in common, and which
everyone first has to learn Among the elements of education?
What is that? The little matter of distinguishing one, two,
and three in a word, number and calculation? Do not
all arts and sciences necessarily partake of them? Bears, then

(01:27:32):
the art of war partakes of them. To be sure,
then Palamedes, whenever he appears in tragedy, proves Agamemnon ridiculously
unfit to be a general. Did you never remark how
he declares that he had invented number, and had numbered
the ships and set in array the ranks of the
army at Troy, which implies that they had never been

(01:27:54):
numbered before. And Agamemnon must be supposed literally to have
been incapable of counting his own How could he if
he was ignorant of number? And if that is true,
what sort of general must he have been? I should
say a very strange one if this was as you say,
Can we deny that a warrior should have a knowledge

(01:28:14):
of arithmetic? Certainly he should, if he is to have
the smallest understanding of military tactics, or indeed, I should
rather say, if he is to be a man at all?
I should like to know whether you have the same
notion which I have of this study? What is your notion?
It appears to me to be a study of the
kind which we are seeking, and which leads naturally to reflection,

(01:28:36):
but never to have been rightly used for the true
use of it is simply to draw the soul towards being.
Will you explain your meaning? He said, I will try,
I said, and I wish you would share the inquiry
with me and say yes or no. When I attempt
to distinguish in my own mind, what branches of knowledge

(01:28:57):
have this attracting power in order that we may have
clearer proof that arithmetic is as I suspect one of them? Explain,
he said, I mean to say that objects of sense
are of two kinds. Some of them do not invite
thought because the sense is an inadequate judge of them,
while in the case of other objects, sense is so
untrustworthy that further inquiry is imperatively demanded. You are clearly referring,

(01:29:21):
he said, to the manner in which the senses are
imposed upon by distance and by painting in light and shade. No,
I said, that is not at all by meaning. Then
what is your meaning? When speaking of uninviting objects, I
mean those which do not pass from one sensation to
the opposite. Inviting objects are those which do. In this

(01:29:42):
latter case, the sense coming upon the object, whether at
a distance or lear, gives no mere vivid idea of
anything in particular than of its opposite. An illustration will
make my meaning clearer. Here are three fingers, a little finger,
a second finger, and a middle finger. Very good. You
may suppose that you have seen quite close. And here

(01:30:03):
comes the point, what is it? Each of them equally
appears a finger, whether seen in the middle or at
the extremity, whether white or black, or thick or thin,
it makes no difference. A finger is a finger or
the same. In these cases a man is not compelled
to ask of thought the question what is a finger?
For the sight never intimates to the mind that a

(01:30:26):
finger is other than a finger. True, And therefore I said,
as we might expect, there is nothing here which invites
or excites intelligence. There is not, he said, But is
this equally true? Of the greatness and smallness of the fingers?
Can sight adequately perceive them? And is no difference made
by the circumstance that one of the fingers is in

(01:30:46):
the middle and another at the extremity? And in like
manner does the touch adequately perceive the qualities of thickness
or thinness, of softness or hardness. And so of the
other senses do they give perfect intimations of such matters,
is not their mode of operation. On this wise, the sense,
which is concerned with the quality of hardness, is necessarily

(01:31:09):
concerned also with the quality of softness, and only intimates
to the soul that the same thing is felt to
be both hard and soft. You are quite right, he said,
And must not the soul be perplexed at this intimation
which the sense gives of a heart which is also soft?
What again, is the meaning of light and heavy? If
that which is light is also heavy, and that which

(01:31:31):
is heavy light, Yes, he said. These intimations which the
soul receives are very curious and required to be explained. Yes,
I said, And in these perplexities the soul naturally summons
to her aid calculation and intelligence, that she may see
whether the several objects announced to her are one or
two true? And if they turn out to be two,

(01:31:54):
is not each of them one and different? Certainly? And
if each is one and both are two, who she
will conceive the two as in a state of division,
For if there were undivided, they could only be conceived
of as one. True. The eye certainly did see both
small and great, but only in a confused manner. They

(01:32:14):
were not distinguished yes, whereas the thinking mind, intending to
light up the chaos, was compelled to reverse the process
and look at small and great as separate and not confused.
Very true? Was not this the beginning of the inquiry
what is great and what is small? Exactly so? And
thus there arose the distinction of the visible and the intelligible?

(01:32:37):
Most true? This was what I meant when I spoke
of impressions which invited the intellect or the reverse. Those
which are simultaneous with opposite impressions invite thought. Those which
are not simultaneous, do not I understand? He said, I
agree with you. And to which class to unity and
number belong I do not know? He replied, Think a little,

(01:33:01):
and you will see that one has proceeded. Will supply
the answer. For if simple unity could be adequately perceived
by the sight or by any other sense, then, as
we were saying in the case of the finger, there
would be nothing to attract towards being. But when there
is some contradiction always present, and one is the reverse
of one and involves the conception of plurality, then thought

(01:33:24):
begins to be aroused within us, and the soul, perplexed
at wanting to arrive at a decision, asks what is
absolute unity? This is the way in which the study
of the one has a power of drawing and converting
the mind to the contemplation of true being. And surely,
he said, this occurs notably in the case of one,
for we see the same thing to be both one

(01:33:46):
and infinite in multitude. Yes, I said, And this being
true of one, must be equally true of all number. Certainly,
And all arithmetic and calculation have to do with number. Yes,
and they appear to lead the mind towards truth, Yes,
in a very remarkable manner. Then this is knowledge of
the kind for which we are seeking, having a double

(01:34:09):
use military and philosophical. For a man of war must
learn the art of number, or he will not know
how to array his troops. And the philosopher also, because
he has to rise out of the sea of change
and lay hold of true being. And therefore he must
be an arithmetician. That is true, And our guardian is
both warrior and philosopher. Certainly, then this is a kind

(01:34:32):
of knowledge which legislation may fitly prescribe. And we must
endeavor to persuade those who are to be the principal
men of our state to go and learn arithmetic, not
as amateurs, but they must carry on the study until
they see the nature of numbers with the mind only,
nor again like merchants or retail traders with a view

(01:34:54):
to buying or selling, but for the sake of their
military use, and of the soul herself, because this will
be the easiest way for her to pass from becoming
to truth and being. That is excellent, yes, I said,
And now having spoken of it, I must add how
charming the science is, and in how many ways it

(01:35:14):
induces to our desired end, if pursued in the spirit
of a philosopher and not of a shopkeeper. How do
you mean? I mean, as I was saying, that arithmetic
has a very great and elevating effect, compelling the soul
to reason about abstract number and rebelling against the introduction
of visible or tangible objects into the arguments. You know

(01:35:36):
how steadily the masters of the art repel and ridicule
anyone who attempts to divide absolute unity when he is calculating.
And if you divide, they multiply, meaning either one that
they integrate the number because they deny the possibility of fractions,
or two that division is regarded by them as a
process of multiplication, for the fractions of one continue to

(01:35:59):
be units, taking care that one shall continue one and
not become lost in fractions. That is very true. Now,
suppose a person were to say to them, oh, my friends,
what are these wonderful numbers about which you are reasoning,
in which, as you say, there is a unity such
as you demand, and each unit is equal, invariable, indivisible.

(01:36:21):
What would they answer? They would answer, as I should
conceive that they were speaking of those numbers which can
only be realized in thought. Then you see that this
knowledge may be truly called necessary, necessitating, as it clearly
does the use of the pure intelligence in the attainment
of pure truth. Yes, that is a much characteristic of it.

(01:36:43):
And have you further observed that those who have a
natural talent for calculation are generally quick at every other
kind of knowledge, and even the dull if they have
had an arithmetical training, although they may derive no other
advantage from it, always become much quicker than they would
otherwise have been very true, he said, And indeed you

(01:37:04):
will not easily find a more difficult study, and not
many as difficult you will not. And for all these reasons,
arithmetic is a kind of knowledge in which the best
nature should be trained, and which must not be given up.
I agree. Plant this then be made one of our
subjects of education. And next we shall inquire whether the

(01:37:25):
kindred science also concerns us. You mean geometry exactly so clearly,
he said, we are concerned with that part of geometry
which relates to war. For in pitching a camp, or
taking up a position, or closing and extending the lines
of an army, or any other military maneuver, whether in
actual battle or on a march, it will make all

(01:37:47):
the difference whether a general is or is not a geometrician. Yes,
I said, but for that purpose a very little of
either geometry or calculation will be enough. The question relates
rather to the greater and more advance danced part of geometry,
whether that tends in any degree to make more easy
the vision of the idea of good And thither, as

(01:38:08):
I was saying, all things tend which compel the soul
to turn her gaze towards that place where is the
full perfection of being, which she ought by all means
to behold true. Then if geometry compels us to view
being it concerns us, if becoming only it does not
concern us. Yes, that is what we assert. Yet anybody

(01:38:31):
who has the least acquaintance with geometry will not deny
that such a conception of the science is in flat
contradiction to the ordinary language of geometricians. How So they
have in view practice only, and are always speaking in
a narrow and ridiculous manner of squaring and extending and
applying and the like. They confuse the necessities of geometry

(01:38:53):
with those of daily life, whereas knowledge is the real
object of the whole science. Certainly, he said, then must
not a further admission be made? What admission that the
knowledge at which geometry aims is knowledge of the eternal
and not of aught, perishing and transient. That he replied,
may be readily allowed and is true. Then, my noble friend,

(01:39:18):
geometry will draw the soul towards truth, and create the
spirit of philosophy, and raise up that which is now
unhappily allowed to fall down. Nothing will be more likely
to have such an effect. Then, nothing shall be more
sternly laid down than that the inhabitants of your fair
city should, by all means learn geometry. Moreover, the science

(01:39:40):
has indirect effects which are not small. Of what kind?
He said. There are the military advantages of which we spoke,
I said, And in all departments of knowledge, as experience proves,
any one who has studied geometry is infinitely quicker of
apprehension than any one who has not. Yes, indeed, there

(01:40:00):
is an infinite difference between them. Then shall we propose
this as a second branch of knowledge which our youth
will study. Let us do so, he replied, And suppose
we make astronomy the third. What do you say, I
am strongly inclined to it, he said. The observation of
the seasons and the months and years is as essential

(01:40:21):
to the general as it is to the farmer or sailor.
I am amused, I said, And your fear of the
world which makes you guard against the appearance of insisting
upon useless studies. And I quite admit the difficulty of
believing that in every man there is an eye of
the soul, which, when by other pursuits lost and dimmed,

(01:40:41):
is by these purified and re illumined, and is more
precious far than ten thousand bodily eyes, For by it
alone is truth. Seen. Now there are two classes of persons.
One class of those who will agree with you and
will take your words as a revelation. It's another class
to whom you will be utterly unmeaning, and who will

(01:41:01):
naturally deem them to be idle tales, for they see
no sort of profit which is to be obtained from them.
And therefore you had better decide at once with which
of the two you are proposing to argue. You will
very likely say with neither, and that your chief aim
in carrying on the argument is your own improvement. At
the same time, you do not grudge to others any

(01:41:24):
benefit which they may receive. I think that I should
prefer to carry on the argument mainly on my own behalf.
Then take a step backward, for we have gone wrong
in the order of the sciences. And what was the mistake?
He said, after plain geometry, I said, we proceeded at
once to solids in revolution, instead of taking solids in themselves.

(01:41:48):
Whereas after the second dimension of the third, which is
concerned with cubes and dimensions of depth, ought to have followed.
That that is true, Socrates, But so little seems to
be known as yet about these subject Why yes, I said,
and for two reasons. In the first place, no government
patronizes them. This leads to a want of energy in

(01:42:09):
the pursuit of them, and they are difficult. In the
second place, students cannot learn them unless they have a director.
But then a director can hardly be found, and even
if he could, as matters now stand, if the students,
who are very conceited, would not attend to him, that, however,
would be otherwise. If the whole state became the director
of these studies and gave honor to them, then disciples

(01:42:31):
would want to come, and there would be continuous and
earnest search, and discoveries would be made. Since, even now,
disregarded as they are by the world and maimed of
their fair proportions, and although none of their votaries can
tell the use of them, still these studies forced their
way by their natural charm, and very likely, if they

(01:42:52):
had the help of the state, they would some day
emerge into light. Yes, he said, there is a remarkable
charm in them. But I do not clearly understand the
change of the order. First, you began with a geometry
of plain surfaces, yes, I said, And you placed astronomy next,
and then you made a step backward. Yes, and I

(01:43:12):
have delayed you by my hurry the ludicrous state of
solid geometry, which in natural order should have followed, made
me pass over this branch and go on to astronomy
or motion of solids. True, then, assuming that the science
now omitted would come into existence if encouraged by the state,
let us go on to astronomy, which will be forth

(01:43:34):
the right order, he replied. And now, Socrates, as you
rebute the volgar manner to which I praised astronomy before
my praise shall be given in your own spirit. For
every one, as I think, must see that astronomy compels
the soul to look upwards and leads us from this
world to another. Every one but myself, I said. To

(01:43:56):
every one else this may be clear, but not to me.
And what then would you say? I should rather say
that those who elevate astronomy into philosophy appear to me
to make us look downwards and not upwards. What do
you mean, he asked you, I replied, have in your
mind a truly sublime conception of our knowledge of the

(01:44:18):
things above? And I dare say that if a person
were to throw his head back and study the fretted ceiling,
you would still think that his mind was the precipient
and not his eyes. And you are very likely right.
And I may be a simpleton, but in my opinion
that knowledge only which is of being and of the unseen,

(01:44:38):
can make the soul look upwards. And whether a man
gapes at the heavens or blinks on the ground seeking
to learn some particular of sense, I would deny that
he can learn, for nothing of that sort is matter
of science. His soul is looking downwards, not upwards, whether
his way to knowledge is by water or by land,
whether he floats or only lies on his back, I acknowledge,

(01:45:01):
he said, the justice of your rebuke. Still I should
like to ascertain how astronomy can be learnt in any
matter more conducive to that knowledge of which we were speaking.
I will tell you, I said, the starry heaven which
we behold is wrought upon a visible ground. And therefore,
although the fairest and most perfect of visible things must

(01:45:22):
necessarily be deemed inferior far to the true motions of
absolute swiftness and absolute slowness, which are relative to each other,
and carry with them that which is contained in them,
in the true number and in every true figure. Now
these are to be apprehended by breason and intelligence, but
not by sight. True, he replied, the spangled heavens should

(01:45:45):
be used as a pattern, and with a view to
that higher knowledge. Their beauty is like the beauty of figures,
or pictures excellently wrought by the hand of Daedalus or
some other great artists, which we may chance to behold.
Any geometrician who saw them would appreciate the exquisiteness of
their workmanship. But he would never dream of thinking that

(01:46:05):
in them he can find the true equal, or the
true double, or the truth of any other proportion. No,
he replied, such an idea would be ridiculous, And will
not a true astronomer have the same feeling when he
looks at the movements of the stars. Will he not
think that heaven and the things in heaven are framed
by the creator of them in the most perfect manner.

(01:46:26):
But he will never imagine that the proportions of night
and day, or of both, to the month, or of
the month, to the year, or of the stars, to
these and to one another, and any other things that
are material and visible, can also be eternal and subject
to no deviation. That would be absurd, And it is
equally absurd to take so much pains in investigating their

(01:46:49):
exact truth. I quite agree, though I never thought of
this before. Then, I said, in astronomy, as in geometry,
we should employ problems, let the heavens alone, if we
would approach the subject in the right way, and so
make the natural gift of reason to be of any
real use. That he said, is a work infinitely beyond

(01:47:11):
our present astronomers. Yes, I said, And there are many
other things which must also have a similar extension given
to them if our legislation is to be of any value.
But can you tell me of any other suitable study? No,
he said, not without thinking motion, I said, as many forms,
and not one. Only two of them are obvious enough

(01:47:34):
even to wits no better than ours. And there are others,
as I imagine, which may be left to wiser person.
But where are the two? There is a second, I said,
which is the counterpart of the one already named. And
what may that be? The second, I said, would seem
relatively to the ears to be what the first is
to the eyes. For I conceive that as the eyes

(01:47:56):
are designed to look up at the stars, so are
the ears to hear harmonious motions. And these are sister sciences,
as the Pythagoreans say, and we glaucon agree with them. Yes,
he replied, But this, I said, is a laborious study,
and therefore we had better go and learn of them,
and they will tell us whether there are any other

(01:48:18):
applications of these sciences. At the same time, we must
not lose sight of our own higher object. What is
that there is a perfection which all knowledge ought to reach,
and which our pupils ought also to attain, and not
to fall short of, as I was saying that they
did in astronomy. For in the science of harmony, as
you probably know, the same thing happens. The teachers of

(01:48:41):
harmony compare the sounds and consonances which are heard only,
and their labor, like that of the astronomers, is in vain. Yes,
by heaven, he said, and tis as good as a
play to hear them talking about their condensed notes, as
they called them. They put their ears close alongside of
the strings, like person catching a sound from their neighbor's wall.

(01:49:02):
One said of them, declaring that they distinguish an intermediate note,
and have found the least interval, which should be the
unit of measurement, the others insisting that the two sounds
have passed into the same either party setting their ears
before their understanding. You mean, I said, those gentlemen who
tease and torture the strings and rack them on the
pegs of the instrument. I might carry on the metaphor

(01:49:24):
and speak after their manner of the blows which the
plectrum gives, and make accusations against the strings, both the
backwardness and forwardness to sound. But this would be tedious,
and therefore I will only say that these are not
the men, and that I am referring to the Pythagoreans
of whom I was just now proposing to inquire about harmony,

(01:49:45):
For they too are in error. Like the astronomers, they
investigate the numbers of the harmonies which are heard, but
they never attain to problems, that is to say, they
never reach the natural harmonies of number, or reflect why
some numbers are harmonious and others not. That he said,
is a thing of more than mortal knowledge, a thing,

(01:50:06):
I replied, which I would rather call useful, that is,
if sought after with a view to the beautiful and God,
But if pursued in any other spirit useless. Very true,
he said. Now, but all these studies reached the point
of intercommunion and connection with one another, and come to
be considered in their mutual affinities, then, I think, But

(01:50:28):
not till then will the pursuit of them have a
value for our objects? Otherwise there is no profit in them,
I suspect so. But you are speaking, Socrates, of a
vast work. What do you mean, I said, the prelude?
Or what do you not know? That all this is
but the prelude to the actual strain which we have

(01:50:48):
to learn? For you surely would not regard the skilled
mathematician as a dialectician. Or surely not, he said, I
have hardly ever known a mathematician who was capable of reasoning.
But do will you imagine that men who are unable
to give and take a reason will have the knowledge
which we require of them? Neither can this be supposed?

(01:51:09):
And so glaucon I said, we have at last arrived
at the hymn of dialectic. This is that strain which
is of the intellect only, but which the faculty of
sight will nevertheless be found to imitate for sight, as
you may remember, was imagined by us after a while,
to behold the real animals and stars, and last of

(01:51:30):
all the Sun himself. And so is dialectic when a
person starts on the discovery of the absolute by the
light of reason only and without any assistance of sense,
and perseveres until by pure intelligence he arrives at the
perception of the absolute good. He at last finds himself
at the end of the intellectual world, as in the

(01:51:51):
case of sight, at the end of the visible exactly.
Then this is the progress which you call dialectic. True,
but the relief of the prisoners from chains, and their
translation from the shadows to the images and to the light,
and the ascent from the underground den to the sun,
while in his presence they are vainly trying to look
on animals and plants and the light of the sun,

(01:52:14):
but are able to perceive even with their weak eyes,
the images in the water, which are divine and are
the shadows of true existence, not shadows of images cast
by the light of fire, which, compared with the sun,
is only an image. This power of elevating the highest
principle in the soul to the contemplation of that which
is best in existence, with which we may compare the

(01:52:36):
raising of that faculty which is the very light of
the body, to the sight of that which is brightest
in the material and visible world. This power is given,
as I was saying, by all that study and pursuit
of the arts which has been described. I agree in
what you are saying, he replied, which may be hard
to believe, yet from another point of view is harder

(01:52:57):
still to deny. This, however, is not a theme to
be treated of in passing only, but will have to
be discussed again and again. And so, whether our conclusion
be true or false, let us assume all this and
proceed at once from the prelude or preamble to the
chief strain, and describe that in like manner. Say, then,

(01:53:18):
what is the nature? And what are the divisions of dialectic?
And what are the paths which lead thither? For these
paths will also lead to our final rest. Dear Glaucon,
I said, you will not be able to follow me here,
though I would do my best, and you should behold
not an image only, but the absolute truth, according to

(01:53:39):
my notion, whether what I told you would or would
not have been a reality. I cannot venture to say,
but you would have seen something like reality of that
I am confident doubtless, he replied. But I must also
remind you that the power of dialectic alone can reveal this,
and only to one who is a disciple of the
previous ironis of that assertion, you may be as confident

(01:54:03):
as of the last. And assuredly no one will argue
that there is any other method of comprehending by any
regular process or true existence, or of ascertaining what each
thing is in its own nature. For the arts in
general are concerned with the desires or opinions of men,
or are cultivated with a view to production and construction,

(01:54:23):
or for the preservation of such productions and constructions. And
as to the mathematical sciences, which, as we were saying,
have some apprehension of true being geometry and the like,
they only dream about being. But never can they behold
the waking reality, so long as they leave the hypotheses
which they use unexamined, and are unable to give an

(01:54:45):
account of them. For when a man knows not his
own first principle, and when the conclusion and immediate steps
are also constructed that of he knows not what how
can he imagine that such a fabric of convention can
ever become science? Impossible? He said, then dialectic, and dialectic
alone goes directly to the first principle, and is the

(01:55:06):
only science which does away with hypotheses. In order to
make her ground secure, the eye of the soul, which
is literally buried in an outlandish slough, is by her
gentle aid lifted upwards, and she uses as handmaids and
helpers in the work of conversion. The sciences which we
have been discussing, custom terms them sciences. But they ought

(01:55:28):
to have some other name, implying greater clearness than opinion,
and less clearness than science. And this in our previous
sketch was called understanding. But why should we dispute about
names when we have realities of such importance to consider? Why? Indeed,
he said, when any name will do which expresses the
thought of the mind with clearness. At any rate, we

(01:55:50):
are satisfied as before to have four divisions, two for
intellect and two for opinion, and to call the first
division science, the second and understanding, the third belief, and
the fourth perception of shadows. Opinion being concerned with becoming,
an intellect with being, and so to make a proportion.

(01:56:11):
As being is to becoming, so is pure intellect to opinion,
And as intellect is to opinion, so is science to belief,
and understanding to the perception of shadows. But let us
defer the further correlation and subdivision of the subjects of
opinion and of intellect, for it will be a long inquiry,
many times longer than this has been. As far as

(01:56:32):
I understand, he said, I agree, And do you also agree?
I said, In describing the dialectician as one who attains
the conception of the essence of each thing, and he
who does not possess, and is therefore unable to impart
this conception in whatever degree he fails, may in that
degree also be said to fail in intelligence. Will you

(01:56:54):
admit so much? Yes, he said, How can I deny it?
And which you say the same of the conception of
the good until the person is able to abstract and
define rationally the idea of good, and unless he can
run the gauntlet of all objections and is ready to
disprove them, not by appeals to opinion but to absolute truth,

(01:57:16):
never faltering at any step of the argument. Unless he
can do all this, you would say that he knows
neither the idea of good nor any other good. He
apprehends only a shadow, if anything at all, which is
given by opinion and not by science. Dreaming and slumbering
in this life before he is well awake. Here he
arrives at the world below, and has his final quietness

(01:57:39):
in all that. I should most certainly agree with you.
And surely you would not have the children of your
ideal state, whom you are nurturing and educating, if the
ideal ever becomes a reality. You would not allow the
future rulers to be like posts, having no reason in them,
and yet to be set in authority over the highest matters.
Certainly not. Then you will make a law that they

(01:58:02):
shall have such an education as will enable them to
attain the greatest skill in asking and answering questions. Yes,
he said, you and I together will make him dialectic. Then,
as you will agree, is the coping stone of the sciences,
and is set over them. Though other science can be
placed higher, the nature of knowledge can no further go,

(01:58:23):
I agree, he said, But to whom we are to
assign these studies and in what way they are to
be assigned? Are questions which remain to be considered. Yes, clearly,
you remember I said how the rulers were chosen before. Certainly,
he said, the same natures must still be chosen, and
the preference again given to the surest and the bravest,

(01:58:44):
and if possible, to the fairest, and having noble and
generous tempers. They should also have the natural gifts which
will facilitate their education. And what are these such gifts
as keenness and ready powers of acquisition? For the mind
more often fates from the survey of study than from
the severity of gymnastics. The toil is more entirely the

(01:59:04):
mind's own, and is not shared with the body. Very true,
he replied. Further, He of whom we are in search
should have a good memory and be an unwearied, solid
man who is a lover of labor in any line,
or he will never be able to endure the great
amount of bodily exercise and to go through all the
intellectual discipline and study which we require of him. Certainly,

(01:59:27):
he said, he must have natural gifts. The mistake at
present is that those who study philosophy have no vocation.
And this, as I was before saying, is the reason
why she has fallen into disrepute. Her true sons should
take her by the hand, and not bastards. What do
you mean in the first place, her votary should not

(01:59:48):
have a lame or halting industry. I mean that he
should not be half industrious and half idle, as for example,
when a man is a lover of gymnastics and hunting
and all other bodily exercises. But a hater rather than
a lover of the labor of learning or listening or inquiring,
or the occupation to which he devotes himself, may be

(02:00:08):
of an opposite kind, and he may have the other
sort of lameness. Certainly, he said, And as to truth,
I said, is not a soul equally to be deemed
halt and lame, which hates voluntary falsehood and is extremely
indignant at herself and others when they tell lies, but
is patient of involuntary falsehood, and does not mind wallowing

(02:00:30):
like a swinish beast in the mire of ignorance, and
has no shame at being detected. To be sure, and again,
in respect of temperance, courage, magnificence, and every other virtue,
should we not carefully distinguish between the true son and
the bastard. For where there is no discernment of such qualities,
states and individuals unconsciously err and the state makes a ruler,

(02:00:53):
and the individual a friend of one who, being defective
in some part of virtue, is in a figure a
lame or a bastard. That is very true, he said.
All these things, then, will have to be carefully considered
by us. And if only those whom we introduce to
this vast system of education and training are sound in
body and mind, just as herself, will have nothing to

(02:01:16):
say against us, and we shall be the saviors of
the constitution and of the state. But if our pupils
are men of another stamp, the reverse will happen, and
we shall pour a still greater flood of ridicule on
philosophy than she has to endure at present. That would
not be creditable. Certainly, not I said, and yet perhaps

(02:01:38):
in thus turning just into earnest, I am equally ridiculous. Certainly,
not I said, And yet perhaps in thus turning just
into earnest, I am equally ridiculous in what respect I
had forgotten? I said, that we were not serious and
spoke with too much excitement. For when I saw philosophies

(02:02:00):
so undeservedly trampled under foot of men, I could not
help feeling a sort of indignation at the authors of
her disgrace, and my anger made me too vehement. Indeed,
I was listening and did not think so, but I,
who am the speaker, felt that I was. And now
let re remind you that although in our former selection
we chose old men, we must not do so in

(02:02:22):
this Solon was under a delusion when he said that
a man, when he grows old, may learn many things,
for he can no more learn much than he can
run much. Youth is the time for any extraordinary toil,
of course, and therefore calculation and geometry, and all the
other elements of instruction which are a preparation for dialectic

(02:02:43):
should be presented to the mind in childhood, not, however,
under any notion of forcing our system of education. Why not,
because a free man ought not to be a slave
in the acquisition of knowledge of any kind. Bodily exercise,
when compulsory, does no harm to the body, but knowledge
which is acquired under compulsion obtains no hold on the mind.

(02:03:05):
Very true, then, my good friend, I said, do not
use compulsion, but let early education be a sort of amusement.
You will then be better able to find out that
natural bent. That is a very rational notion, he said.
Do you remember that the children too were to be
taken to see the battle on horseback, and that if

(02:03:25):
there were no danger, they were to be brought close up,
and like young hounds, have a taste of blood given them. Yes,
I remember, the same practice may be followed, I said.
In all these things, labors, lessons, dangers, and he who
is most at home in all of them are to
be enrolled in a select number at what age, at
the age when the necessary gymnastics are over. The period,

(02:03:48):
whether of two or three years, which passes in this
sort of training is useless for any other purpose, For
sleep and exercise are unpropitious to learning, and the trial
of who is first in gymnastic exercises is one of
the most important tests to which our youth are subjected. Certainly,
he replied, after that time, those who are selected from

(02:04:09):
the class of twenty years old will be promoted to
higher honor, and the sciences which they learned without any
order in their early education, will now be brought together,
and they will be able to see the natural relationship
of them to one another and to true being. Yes,
he said, that is the only kind of knowledge which
takes lasting route. Yes, I said, And the capacity for

(02:04:30):
such knowledge is the great criterion of dialectical talent. The
comprehensive mind is always the dialectical I agree with you. These,
I said, are the points which you must consider. And
those who have most of this comprehension, and who are
the most steadfast in their learning and in their military
and other appointed duties, when they have arrived at the

(02:04:52):
age of thirty, have to be chosen by you out
of the select class and elevated to higher honor. And
you will have to prove them by the help of dialectic,
in order to learn which of them is able to
give up the use of sight and the other senses,
and in company with truth, to attain absolute being. And here,
my friend, great caution is required. Why great caution do

(02:05:17):
you not remark? I said, How great is the evil
which dialectic has introduced? What evil? He said? The students
of the art are filled with lawlessness? Quite true, he said,
do you think that there is anything so very unnatural
or inexcusable in their case? Or will you make allowance
for them? In what way? Make allowance? I want you,

(02:05:40):
I said, by way of parallel, to imagine a supposititious
son who is brought up in great wealth. He is
one of a great and numerous family, and as many flatterers.
When he grows up to manhood he learns that his
alleged are not his real parents. But who are the
real he is unable to discover. Can you guess how
he will be likely to behave towards his flatterers and

(02:06:02):
his supposed parents, first of all during the period when
he is ignorant of the false relation, and then again
when he knows. Or shall I guess for you? If
you plead, then I should say that while he is
ignorant of the truth, he will be likely to honor
his father and his mother and his supposed relations more
than the flatterers. He will be less inclined to neglect

(02:06:23):
them when in need, or to do or say anything
against them, and he will be less willing to disobey
them in any important manner. He will, But when he
has made the discovery, I should imagine that he would
diminish his honor and regard for them, and would become
more devoted to the flatterers. Their influence over him would
greatly increase. He will now live after their ways and

(02:06:47):
openly associate with them. And unless he were of an
unusually good disposition, he would trouble himself no more about
his supposed parents or other relations. Well, all that is
very probable. But now is the image applicable to the
disciples of philosophy? In this way? You know that there
are certain principles about justice and honor which are taught

(02:07:08):
us in childhood, and under their parental authority, we have
been brought up obeying and honoring them. That is true.
There are also opposite maxims and habits of pleasure, which
flatter and attract the soul, but do not influence those
of us who have any sense of right, and they
continue to honor and obey the maxims of their fathers. True. Now,

(02:07:29):
when a man is in this state, and the questioning
spirit asks what is fair or honorable, and he answers
as the legislator has taught him, and then arguments many
and diverse refute his words, until he is driven into
believing that nothing is honorable any more than dishonorable, or
just and good any more than the reverse. And so

(02:07:49):
all of the notions which he most have valued, do
you think that he will still honor and obey them?
As before impossible? And when he ceases to think them
honorable and natural, as heretofore, and he fails to discover
the true, can he be expected to pursue any life
other than that which flatters his desires? He cannot, And

(02:08:10):
from being a keeper of the law he is converted
into a breaker of it. Unquestionably. Now, all this is
very natural in students of philosophy, such as I have described,
and also as I was just now saying, most excusable, yes,
he said, and I may add pitiable. Therefore, that your
feelings may not be moved to pity. About our citizens,

(02:08:31):
who are now thirty years of age, every care must
be taken in introducing them to dialectic. Certainly, there is
a danger lest they should taste the dead delight too early.
For youngsters, as you may have observed, when they first
get the taste in their mouths argue for amusement, and
are always contradicting and refuting others in imitation of those

(02:08:52):
who refute them like puppy dogs. They rejoice in pulling
and tearing at all who come near them. Yes, he said,
there is nothing which they liked better. And when they
have made many conquests and received defeats at the hands
of many, they violently and speedily get into a way
of not believing anything which they believed before. And hence,

(02:09:13):
not only they, but philosophy in all that relates to
it is apt to have a bad name with the
rest of the world. Too true, he said, But when
a man begins to get older, he will no longer
be guilty of such insanity. He will imitate the dialectician
who was seeking for truth, and not the aoristic who
is contradicting for the sake of amusement, And the greater

(02:09:34):
moderation of his character will increase, instead of diminishing, the
honor of the pursuit. Very true, he said, And did
we not make special provision for this when we said
that the disciples of philosophy were to be orderly and steadfast,
not as now any chance aspirate or intruder. Very true.
Suppose I said the study of philosophy to take the

(02:09:57):
place of gymnastics, and to be continued diligently and earnestly
and exclusively for twice the number of years which were
passed in bodily exercise. Will that be enough, which you
say six or four years? He asked, Save five years,
I replied. At the end of the time, they must
be sent down again into the den and compelled to

(02:10:18):
hold any military or other office which young men are
qualified to hold. In this way they will get their
experience of life, and there will be an opportunity of
trying whether, when they are drawn all manner of ways
by temptation, they will stand firm or flinch. And how
long is this stage of their lives to last? Fifteen years?

(02:10:38):
I answered, And when they have reached fifty years of age,
then let those who still survive and have distinguished themselves
in every action of their lives and in every branch
of knowledge, come at last to their consummation. The time
has now arrived at which they must raise the eye
of the soul to the universal light which lightens all things,

(02:11:00):
and behold the absolute good. For that is the pattern
according to which they are to order the state and
the lives of individuals, and the remainder of their own lives,
also making philosophy their chief pursuit. But when their turn
comes toiling also at politics and ruling for the public good,
not as though they were performing some heroic action, but

(02:11:20):
simply as a matter of duty. And when they have
brought up in each generation others like themselves, and left
them in their place to be governors of the state,
then they will depart to the islands of the blessed
and dwell there, and the city will give them public
memorials and sacrifices, and honor them if the Pythian oracle
consent as demigods. But if not, as in any case,

(02:11:44):
blessed and divine, you are a scuonter Socrates, and have
made statues of our governor's faultless and beauty, Yes, I
said Glaucon, and of our governesses too, For you must
not suppose that what I have been saying applies to
men only, not to women, as far as their natures
can go. There, you are right, he said, since we

(02:12:05):
have made them to share in all things like the men. Well,
I said, and you would agree, would you not, that
what has been said about the state and the government
is not a mere dream, And although difficult, not impossible,
but only possible in the way which has been supposed,
that is to say, when the true philosopher kings are
born in the state, one or more of them, despising

(02:12:28):
the honors of this present world, which they deem mean
and worthless, esteeming above all things right and the honor
that springs from right, and regarding justice as the greatest
and most necessary of all things. Whose ministers they are,
and whose principles will be exalted by them. When they
set in order their own city, how will they proceed.

(02:12:48):
They will begin by sending out into the country all
the inhabitants of the city who are more than ten
years old, and will take possession of their children, who
will be unaffected by the habits of their parents. These
they will trade in their own habits and laws, I mean,
in the laws which we have given them. And in
this way the state and constitution of which we were

(02:13:09):
speaking will soonest and most easily attain happiness. And the
nation which has such a constitution will gain most Yes,
that will be the best way. And I think, Socrates,
that you have very well described how if ever such
a constitution might come into being. Enough, then of the
perfect state and of the man who bears its image,

(02:13:31):
there is no difficulty in seeing how we shall describe him.
There is no difficulty, he replied, And I agree with
you in thinking that nothing more need be said. And
of Book seven, Book eight of the Republic by Plato
and so Glaucon, we have arrived at the conclusion that
in the perfect states, wives and children are to be

(02:13:53):
in common, and that all education and pursuits of war
and peace are also to be common, and the best
philosophers and the bravest warriors are to be their kings.
That replied Glaucan, has been acknowledged. Yes, I said, and
we have further acknowledged that the governors, when appointed themselves,
will take their soldiers and place them in houses such

(02:14:13):
as we were describing, which are common to all and
contain nothing private or individual, and about their property. You
remember what we agreed, Yes, I remember that no one
was to have any of the original possessions of mankind.
They were to be warrior, athletes and guardians, receiving from
the other citizens in lieu of annual payment, only their maintenance.

(02:14:34):
And they were to take care of themselves and of
the whole state. True, I said, And now that this
division of our task is concluded. Let us find the
point at which we digressed, that we may return to
the old path. There is no difficulty in returning, you implied, then,
as now that you had finished the description of the state,

(02:14:54):
you said that such a state was good, and that
the man was good who answered to it, although as
now appears, you had more excellent things to relate, both
of state and man. And you said further that if
this was the true form, then the others were false.
And of the false forms, you said, as I remember
that there were four principal ones, and that their defects

(02:15:16):
and the defects of the individuals corresponding to them, were
worth examining. When we had seen all the individuals and
finally agreed as to who was the best and who
was the worst of them, we were to consider whether
the best was not also the happiest, and the worst
the most miserable. I asked you what were the four
forms of government of which you spoke? And then Partimarchus

(02:15:36):
and Adeimantus put in their word, and you began again,
and have found your way to the point at which
we have now arrived. Your recollection, I said, is most exact.
Then like a wrestler, he replied. You must put yourself
again in the same position, and let me ask the
same questions. And do you give me the same answer
which you were about to give me. Then yes, if

(02:15:59):
I can, I will, I said. I shall particularly wish
to hear what were the four constitutions of which you
were speaking? That question, I said, is easily answered. The
four governments of which I spoke, so far as they
have distinct names, are first those of crete and Sparta,
which are generally applauded. What is termed aligaki comes next.

(02:16:20):
This is not equally approved, and is a form of
government which teems with evils. Thirdly, democracy, which naturally follows alighaky,
although very different. And lastly comes tyranny great and famous,
which differs from them all and is the fourth and
worst disorder of a state. I do not know, do

(02:16:41):
you of any other constitution which can be said to
have a distinct character. There are lordships and principalities which
are bought and sold, and some other intermediate forms of government,
But these are nondescripts and may be found equally among
Hellenes and among barbarians. Yes, he replied, we certainly hear
of many curious forms of government which exist among them.

(02:17:04):
Do you know? I said that governments vary as the
dispositions of men vary, and that there must be as
many of the one as there are of the other.
For we cannot suppose that states are made of oak
and rock, and not out of the human natures which
are in them, and which in a figure turn the
scale and draw other things after them. Yes, he said,

(02:17:25):
the states are as the men are. They grow out
of human characters. Then if the constitutions of states are five,
the dispositions of individual minds will also be five. Certainly,
him who answers to aristocracy, and whom we rightly call
just and good we have already described we have. Then,
let us now proceed to describe the inferior sort of natures,

(02:17:48):
being the contentious and ambitious who answer to the spartan polity,
also the onigarchical, democratical, and tyrannical. Let us place the
most just by the side of the most un, and
when we see them, we shall be able to compare
the relative happiness or unhappiness of him who leads a
life of pure justice or pure injustice. The inquiry will

(02:18:10):
then be completed and we shall know whether we ought
to pursue injustice as Thrasycus advises, or in accordance with
the conclusions of the argument, to prefer justice. Certainly, he replied,
we must do as you say. Shall we follow our
old plan, which we adopted with a view to clearness?
Have taken the state first, and then proceeding to the individual,

(02:18:32):
and begin with the government of honor. I know of
no name for such a government other than timocracy, and
perhaps TIMARCHI we will compare with this the like character
in the individual, and after that consider oligarchy and the
oligarchical man. And then again we will turn our attention
to democracy in the democratical man. And lastly we will

(02:18:53):
go and view the city of tyranny, and once more
take a look into the tyrant's soul, and try to
arrive at a satisfactory decision. That way of viewing and
judging of the matter will be very suitable. First, then,
I said, let us inquire how democracy, the government of
honor arises out of aristocracy, the government of the best. Clearly,

(02:19:15):
all political changes originate in divisions of the actual governing power.
A government which is united, however small, cannot be moved.
Very true, he said, in what way, then will our
city be moved? And in what manner will the two
classes of auxiliaries and rulers disagree among themselves or with
one another? Shall we, after the manner of Homer, pray

(02:19:38):
the muses to tell us how discord first arose? Shall
we imagine them in solemn mockery, to play and jest
with us as if we were children, and to address
us in a lofty, tragic vein making believe to be
in earnest? How would they address it? After this manner?
A city which is thus constituted can hardly be shaken. But,

(02:19:59):
seeing that every which has a beginning also has an end,
even a constitution such as yours, will not last forever,
but will in time be dissolved. And this is the
disillusion in plants that grow in the earth, as well
as in animals that move on the earth's surface. Fertility
and sterility of soul and body occur when the circumferences

(02:20:19):
of the circles of each are completed, which in short
lived existences pass over a short space, and in long
lived ones over a long space. But to the knowledge
of human fecundity and sterility all the wisdom and education
of your rulers will not attain the laws which regulate them,
will not be discovered by an intelligence which is alloyed

(02:20:39):
with sense, but will escape them, and they will bring
children into the world when they ought not. Now that
which is of divine birth as a period which is
contained in a perfect number, But the period of human
birth is comprehended in a number in which first increments
by involution and evolution, obtaining three intervals and four terms
of like and unlike. Waxing and walling numbers make all

(02:21:01):
the terms commensurable and agreeable to one another. The base
of these with a third added, when combined with five
and race to the third power, furnishes two harmonies, the
first a square which is a hundred times as great,
and the other a figure having one side equal to
the former, but oblong, consisting of a hundred numbers squared
upon rational diameters of a square, the side of which

(02:21:23):
is five, each of them being less by one or
less by two perfect squares of irrational diameters, and a
hundred cubes of three. Now this number represents a geometrical
figure which has controlled over the good and evil of births.
For when your guardians are ignorant of the law of
births and unite bride and bridegroom out of season, the

(02:21:44):
children will not be goodly or fortunate. And though only
the best of them will be appointed by their predecessors,
still they will be unworthy to hold their father's places.
And when they come into power as guardians, they will
soon be found to fail in taking care of us.
The Muses verse by undervaluing music, which neglect will soon
extend a gymnastic and hence the young men of your

(02:22:06):
state will be less cultivated. In the succeeding generation, rulers
will be appointed who have lost the guardian power of
testing the metal of their different races, which, like hesiods,
are of gold and silver and brass and iron, and
so iron will be mingled with silver, and brass with gold,
and hence there will arise dissimilarity and inequality and irregularity,

(02:22:28):
which always and in all places are causes of hatred
and war. This the Muses affirm to be the stock
from which discord has sprung wherever arising. And this is
their answer to us. Yes, and we may assume that
they answered truly, Why yes, I said of course, they answered, truly,
how can the muses speak falsely? And what do the

(02:22:50):
muses say next? When discord arose, then the two races
were drawn different ways. The iron and brass fell to
acquiring money in land and houses, and gold and silver.
But the gold and silver races, not wanting money, but
having the true riches in their own nature, inclined towards
virtue and the ancient order of things. There was a

(02:23:11):
battle between them, and at last they agreed to distribute
their land and houses among individual owners. And they enslaved
their friends and maintainers, whom they had formerly protected in
the condition of free men, and made of them subjects
and servants. And they themselves were engaged in war and
in keeping a watch against them. I believe that you
have rightly conceived the origin of the chain, and the

(02:23:33):
new government which thus arises will be of a form
intermediate between oligarchy and aristocracy. Very true, such will be
the change. And after the change has been made, how
will they proceed? Clearly? The new state, being in a
mean between oligarchy and the perfect state, will partly follow
one and partly the other, and will also have some peculiarities. True,

(02:23:56):
he said, in the honor given to rulers, in the
app inbstudents of the warrior class from agriculture, handicrafts, and
trade in general, in the institution of common meals, and
in the attention pay to gymnastics and military training. In
all these respects, this state will resemble the former, true,
but in the fear of admitting philosophers to power, because

(02:24:17):
they are no longer to be had simple and earnest,
but are made up of mixed elements, and in turning
from them to passionate and less complex characters, who are
by nature fitted for war rather than peace, And in
the value set by them upon military stratagems and contrivances,
and in waging of everlasting wars. This state will be,
for the most part peculiar. Yes, yes, I said, And

(02:24:40):
men of this stamp will be covetous of money, like
those who live in oligarchies. They will have a fierce
secret longing after gold and silver, which they will hold
in dark places, having magazines and treasuries of their own
for the deposit and concealment of them. Also castles, which
are just nests for their eggs, and in which they
will spend large sums on their wives, or on any

(02:25:02):
others whom they please. That is most true, he said.
And they are miserly because they have no means of
openly acquiring the money which they prize. They will spend
that which is another man's on the gratification of their desires,
stealing their pleasures and running away like children from the
law their father. They have been schooled not by gentle influences,

(02:25:24):
but by force, for they have neglected her, who is
the true muse, the companion of reason and philosophy, and
have honored gymnastics more than music. Undoubtedly, he said, the
form of government which you describe is a mixture of
good and evil. Why there is a mixture, I said,
But one thing, and one thing only is predominantly seen,

(02:25:45):
the spirit of contention and ambition. These are due to
the prevalence of the passionate or spirited element. Assuredly, he said,
such is the origin, and such the character of this state,
which has been described in outline. Only the more perfect
execution was not required, for a sketch is enough to
show the type of the most perfectly just and the

(02:26:07):
most perfectly unjust, And to go through all the states
and all the characters of men, omitting none of them
would be an interminable labor. Very true, he replied. Now
one man answers to this form of government. How did
he come into being? And what is he like? I think,
said Adeimantus, that in the spirit of contention which characterizes him,

(02:26:28):
he is not unlike our friend Glaucan. Perhaps, I said,
He may be like him in that one point, but
there are other respects in which he is very different.
In what respects he should have more of self assertion,
and be less cultivated, and yet a friend of culture.
And he should be a good listener, but no speaker.
Such a person is apt to be rough with slaves,

(02:26:49):
unlike the educated man, who is too proud for that.
And he will also be courteous to freemen and remarkably
obedient to authority. He is a lover of power and
a lover of honor, claiming to be a ruler, not
because he is eloquence or on any ground of that sort,
but because he is a soldier and has performed feats
of arms. He is also a lover of gymnastic exercises

(02:27:12):
and of the chase. Yes, that is the type of
character which answers her democracy such and one will despise
riches only when he is young, but as he gets
older he will be more and more attracted to them,
because he has a piece of the avaricious nature in him.
And he is not single minded towards virtue, having lost
his best guardian. Who was that, said Adeimantus philosophy, I said,

(02:27:35):
tempered with music, who comes and takes up her abode
in the man, and is the only savior of his
virtue throughout life? Good he said, Such, I said, is
the timocratical youth, and he is like the timocratical state exactly.
His origin is as follows. He is often the young
son of a brave father who dwells in an ill

(02:27:55):
governed city of which he declines the honors and offices,
and will not go to law exert himself in any way,
but is ready to waive his rights in order that
he may escape trouble. And how does the sun come
into being? The character of the son begins to develop
when he hears his mother complaining that her husband has
no place in the government, of which the consequence is
that she has no precedence among other women. Further, when

(02:28:18):
she sees her husband not very eager about money, and
instead of battling and railing in the law courts or assembly,
taking whatever happens to him quietly. And when she observes
that his thoughts always center in himself, while he treats
her with very considerable indifference, she is annoyed and says
to her son that his father is only half a
man and far too easy going, adding all the other

(02:28:40):
complaints about her own ill treatment, which women are so
fond of rehearsing. Yes, said Adeimantus. They give us plenty
of them, and their complaints are so like themselves. And
you know I said that the old servants also, who
are supposed to be attached to the family from time
to time, talk privately in the same strain to the sun.
And if they see any one who owes money to

(02:29:01):
his father or is wronging him in any way, and
he fails to prosecute them, they tell the youth that
when he grows up, he must retaliate upon people of
this sort and be more of a man than his father.
He has only to walk abroad, and he hears and
sees the same sort of thing. Those who do their
own business in the city are called simpletons, and held
in no esteem, while the busy bodies are honored and applauded.

(02:29:24):
The result is that the young man, hearing and seeing
all these things, hearing too the words of his father,
and having a nearer view of his way of life,
and making comparisons of him and others, is drawn opposite ways.
While his father is watering and nourishing the rational principle
of his soul, the others are encouraging the passionate and
the appetitive, And he, being not originally of a bad nature,

(02:29:47):
but having kept bad company, is at last brought by
their joint influence to a middle point, and gives up
the kingdom which is within him, to the middle principle
of contentiousness and passion, and becomes er bagant and ambitious.
You seem to have described his origin perfectly. Then we have, now,
I said, the second form of government, and the second

(02:30:08):
type of character. We have. Next, let us look at
another man, who, as Eschylus says, is set over against
another state, or, rather, as our plan requires, begin with
the state. By all means, I believe that oligarchy follows
next in order, And what manner of government do you
term oligarchy? A government resting on a valuation of property

(02:30:30):
in which the rich have power and the poor man
is deprived of it. I understand, he replied, ought I
not to begin by describing how the change from democracy
to oligarchy arises. Yes, well, I said, No eyes are
required in order to see how the one passes into
the other. Wow. The accumulation of gold in the treasury

(02:30:51):
of private individuals is the ruin of democracy. They invent
illegal modes of expenditure, for what do they or their
wives care about the law? Yes, indeed, And then one,
seeing another grow rich, seeks to rival him. And thus
the great mass of the citizens become lovers of money,
likely enough, and so they grow richer and richer. And

(02:31:13):
the more they think of making a fortune, the less
they think of virtue. For when riches and virtue are
placed together in the scales of the balance, the one
always rises as the other fools true and in proportion.
As riches and rich men are honored in the state,
virtue and the virtuous are dishonored clearly, and one is
honored is cultivated, and that which has no honor is neglected.

(02:31:37):
That is obvious. And so, at last, instead of loving,
contention and glory, men become lovers of trade and money.
They honor and look up to the rich man, and
make a ruler of him, and dishonor the poor man.
They do so, they next proceed to make a law
which fixes a sum of money is the qualification of citizenship.
The sum is higher in one place and lower in another,

(02:31:59):
as the olikarch is more or less exclusive, and they
allow no one whose property falls below the amount fixed
to have any share in the government. These changes in
the constitution they effect by force of arms, if intimidation
has not already done their work. Very true, and this,
speaking generally, is the way in which oligarchy is established. Yes,

(02:32:19):
he said, But what are the characteristics of this form
of government? And what are the defects of which we
are speaking? First of all, I said, consider the nature
of the qualification. Just think what would happen if pilots
were to be chosen according to their property, and a
poor man were refused permission to steer, even though he
were a better pilot. You mean that they would shipwreck? Yes?

(02:32:40):
And is not this true of the government of anything
I should imagine? So except a city, or would you
include a city? Nay? He said? The case of a
city is the strongest of all, inasmuch as the rule
of a city is the greatest and most difficult of all,
This then will be the first great defect of oligarchy, clearly,
and here is another defect which is quite as bad.

(02:33:03):
What defect the inevitable division Such a state as not
one but two states, the one of poor the other
of rich men, and they are living on the same spot,
and always conspiring against one another. That surely is at
least as bad. Another discreditable feature is that, for a
like reason they are incapable of carrying on any war.

(02:33:24):
Either they arm the multitude, and then they are more
afraid of them than of the enemy, or if they
do not call them out in the hour of battle,
they are oligarchs, indeed few to fight, as there are
few to rule. And at the same time their fondness
for money makes them unwilling to pay taxes. How discreditable,
And as we said before, under such a constitution the

(02:33:46):
same persons have too many callings. They are husbandmen, tradesmen,
warriors all in one. Does that look well anything but well,
there is another evil which is perhaps the greatest of all,
and to which this state first begins to be liable.
What evil? A man may sell all that he has,
and another may acquire his property, Yet after the sale

(02:34:08):
he may dwell in the city of which he is
no longer a part, being neither trader, nor artisan, nor
horseman nor hoplight, but only a poor, helpless creature. Yes,
that is an evil which also first begins in this state.
The evil is certainly not prevented there, for oligarchies have
both the extremes of great wealth and utter poverty. True,

(02:34:28):
but think again, in his wealthy days, while he was
spending his money, was a man of this sort a
whit more good to the state for the purposes of citizenship?
Or did he only seem to be a member of
the ruling body, although in truth he was neither ruler
nor subject, but just a spendthrift. As you say, he
seemed to be a ruler, but was only a spendthrift.

(02:34:49):
May we not say that this is the drone in
the house, who is like the drone in the honeycomb,
and that the one is the plague of the city,
as the other is of the hive. Just Socrates, and
God has made the flying drones at Amantis or without stings,
whereas of the walking drones he has made some without stings,
but others have dreadful things. Of the stingless class are

(02:35:12):
those who in their old age, and as paupers are
the stingers come all the criminal class, as they are termed.
Most true, he said, clearly, then, whenever you see paupers
in a state, somewhere in that neighborhood there are hidden
away thieves and cut purses, and robbers of temples, and
all sorts of malefactors. Clearly well, I said, And in

(02:35:34):
other garchical states do you not find paupers? Yes, he said,
nearly everybody is a pauper who is not a ruler.
And may we be so bold as to affirm that
there are also many criminals to be found in them,
rogues who have stings, and whom the authorities are careful
to restrain by force. Certainly we may be so bold.
The existence of such persons is to be attributed to

(02:35:57):
want of education, ill training, and an evil content stitution
of the state. True, such then is the form, and
such are the evils of aligaki, And there may be
many other evils. Very likely, then, oligaki, or the form
of government in which the ruders are elected for their
wealth may now be dismissed. Let Us next proceed to

(02:36:17):
consider the nature and origin of the individual who answers
to this state by all means. Does not the timocratical
man change into the oligarchical on this wise? How a
time arrived when the representative of democracy has a son.
At first he begins by emulating his father and walking
in his footsteps. But presently he sees him of a
sudden foundering against the state, as upon a sunken reef,

(02:36:40):
and he and all that he has is lost. He
may have been a general or some other high officer,
who was brought to trial under a prejudice raised by informers,
and either put to death or exiled, or deprived of
the privileges of a citizen, and all his property taken
from him. Nothing more likely. And the son has seen
and known all this. He is a ruined man, and

(02:37:02):
his fear has taught him to knock ambition and passion
head foremost from his bosom's throne. Humbled by poverty, he
takes to money making, and by mean and miserly savings
and hard work gets a fortune. Together. Is not such
an one likely to seat the concupiscent and covetous element
on the vacant throne, and to suffer it to play
the great king within him, girt with tiara and chain

(02:37:24):
and scimitar. Most true, he replied, And when he has
made reason and spirit sit down on the ground obediently
on either side of their sovereign, and taught them to
know their place, he compels the one to think only
of how lesser sums may be turned into larger ones,
and will not allow the other to worship and admire
anything but riches and rich men, or to be ambitious

(02:37:46):
of anything so much as the acquisition of wealth and
the means of acquiring of all changes. He said, there
is none so speedy or so sure as the conversion
of the ambitious youth into the avaricious one. And the aver,
i said, is the oligarchical youth. Yes, he said, at
any rate, the individual out of whom he came is

(02:38:07):
like the state out of which oligarchy came. Let us
then consider whether there is any likeness between them. Very good. First,
then they resemble one another in the value which they
set upon wealth. Certainly also in their penurious, laborious character.
The individual only satisfies his necessary appetites and confines his
expenditure to them. His other desires he subdues under the

(02:38:30):
idea that they are unprofitable. True, he is a shabby
fellow who saves something out of everything and makes a
purse for himself. And this is the sort of man
whom the vulgar applaud. Is he not a true image
of the state which he represents? He appears to me
to be so. At any rate, money is highly valued
by him, as well as by the state. You see

(02:38:51):
that he is not a man of cultivation, I said,
I imagine not? He said, had he been educated, he
would never have made a blind God directly of his
course are given him chief honor? Excellent? I said, Yet
consider must we not further admit that, owing to this
vast want of cultivation, there will be found in him

(02:39:12):
drone like desires as of pauper and rogue, which are
forcibly kept down by his general habit of life. True,
do you know where you will have to look if
you want to discover his rogueries? Where must I look?
You should see him where he has some great opportunity
of acting dishonestly as in the guardianship of an orphan. Aye.

(02:39:33):
It will be clear enough then, that in his ordinary dealings,
which give him a reputation for honesty, he coerces his
bad passions by an enforced virtue, not making them see
that they are wrong, or taming them by reason, but
by necessity and fear constraining them, and because he trembles
for his possessions. To be sure, Yes, indeed, my dear friend,

(02:39:54):
but you will find that the natural desires of the
drone commonly exists in him all the say, whenever he
has to spend what is not his own. Yes, and
they will be strong in him too. That man, then
will be at war with himself. He will be two men,
not one. But in general his better desires will be
found to prevail over his inferior one. True, for these reasons,

(02:40:18):
such an one will be more respectable than most people.
Yet the true virtue of a unanimous and harmonious soul
will flee far away and never come near him. I
should expect so. And surely the miser individually will be
an ignoble competitor in a state for any prize of
victory or any object of honorable ambition. He will not
spend his money in the contest for glory. So afraid

(02:40:41):
is he of awakening his expensive appetites and inviting them
to help and join in the struggle. In true oligarchical fashion,
he fights with a small part only of his resources,
and the result commonly is that he loses the prize
and saves his money. Very true, Can we no longer
doubt then, that the miser and the money maker answers
to the oligarchical state. There can be no doubt. Next

(02:41:04):
comes democracy. Of this the origin and the nature have
still to be considered by us. And then we will
inquire into the ways of the democratic man and bring
him up for judgment. That he said is our method? Well,
I said, and how does the change from oligarchy into
democracy arise? Is it not? On this wise? The good
at which such a state aims is to become as

(02:41:27):
rich as possible, a desire which is insatiable. What then,
the rulers, being aware that their power rests upon their wealth,
refuse to curtail by law the extravagance of the spendthrift youth.
Because they gain by their ruin. They take interest from
them and buy up their estates and thus increase their
own wealth and importance. To be sure, there can be

(02:41:48):
no doubt that the love of wealth and the spirit
of moneration cannot exist together in citizens of the same state.
To any considerable extent, one or the other will be disregarded.
That is tolerably clear. And in oligarchical states, from the
general spread of carelessness and extravagance, men of good family
have often been reduced to beggary. Yes, often, and still

(02:42:11):
they remain in the city. There they are ready to
sting and fully armed, and some of them owe money,
some have forfeited their citizenship. A third class are in
both predicaments, and they hate and conspire against those who
have got their property, and against everybody else, and are
eager for revolution. That is true. On the other hand,
the men of business, stooping as they walk and pretending

(02:42:34):
not even to see those whom they have already ruined,
insert their steing, that is, their money into some one
else who is not on his guard against them, and
recover the apparent sum, many times over, multiplied into a
family of children. And so they make drone and paupers
who abound in the states. Yes, he said, there are

(02:42:54):
plenty of them. That is certain. The evil blazes up
like a fire, and they will not extinguish it, either
by restricting a man's use of his own property, or
by any other remedy. What other one, which is the
next best and has the advantage of compelling the citizens
to look to their characters. Let there be a general
rule that every one shall enter into voluntary contracts at

(02:43:17):
his own risk, and there will be less of this
scandalous money making, and the evils of which we were
speaking will be greatly lessened in the state, Yes, they
will be greatly lessened. At present the governors, induced by
the motives which I have named, treat their subjects badly.
While they and their adherents, especially the young men of
the governing class, are habituated to lead a life of

(02:43:39):
luxury and idleness, both of body and mind, they do
nothing and are incapable of resisting either pleasure or pain.
Very true, they themselves care only for making money, and
are as indifferent as the pauper to the cultivation of virtue. Yes,
quite as indifferent. Such is the state of affairs which
prevails among them. And often rulers and their subjects may

(02:44:02):
come in one another's way, whether on a journey, or
on some other occasion of meeting on a pilgrimage or
a march as fellow soldiers or fellow sailors. Aye, And
they may observe the behavior of each other in the
very moment of danger. For where danger is, there is
no fear that the poor will be despised by the rich,
And very likely the wiry, sun burnt poor man will

(02:44:25):
be placed in battle at the side of a wealthy
one who has never spoiled his complexion and has plenty
of superfluous flesh. When he sees such a one puffing
and at his WIT's end, how can he avoid drawing
the conclusion that men like him are only rich because
no one has the courage to despoil them. And when
they meet in private, will not people be saying to

(02:44:45):
one another, our warriors are not good for much. Yes,
he said, I am quite aware that this is their
way of talking. And as in a body which is diseased,
the addition of a touch from without may bring on illness.
And some time, even when there is no external provocation,
a commotion may arise within. In the same way, wherever

(02:45:06):
there is weakness in the states, there is also likely
to be illness, of which the occasion may be very slight,
the one party introducing from without their oligarchical the other
their democratical allies. And then the state falls sick and
is at war with herself, and may be at times distracted,
even when there is no external cause. Yes, surely, and

(02:45:27):
then democracy comes into being after the poor have conquered
their opponents, slaughtering some and banishing some, while to the
remainder they give an equal share of freedom and power.
And this is the form of government in which the
magistrates are commonly elected by lot. Yes, he said, that
is the nature of democracy, whether the revolution had been

(02:45:47):
affected by arms, or whether fear has caused the opposite
party to withdraw. And now what is their manner of life?
And what sort of a government have they? For as
the government is, such will be the man, clearly, he said.
In the first place, are they not free? And is
not the city full of freedom and frankness? A man

(02:46:07):
may say and do what he likes, tis said, so,
he replied. And where freedom is the individual is clearly
able to order for himself his own life as he pleases. Clearly,
then in this kind of state there will be the
greatest variety of human natures their will. This then seems
likely to be the fairest of states, being like an

(02:46:27):
embroidered robe which is spangled with every sort of flower.
And just as women and children think a variety of
colors to be of all things most charming, so there
are many men to whom this state, which is spangled
with the manners and characteristics of mankind, will appear to
be the fairest of states. Yes, yes, my good sir,
And there will be no better in which to look

(02:46:48):
for a government. Why, because of the liberty which reigns there.
They have a complete assortment of constitutions. And he who
has a mind to establish a state, as we have
been doing, must go to a democracy, as he went
to a bazaar in which they seldom, and pick out
the one that suits him. Then, when he has made
his choice, he may found his state. He will be

(02:47:10):
sure to have patterns enough. And there being no necessity
I said for you to govern in this state, even
if you have the capacity or to be governed unless
you like, or go to war when the rest go
to war, or be at peace when the others are
at peace, unless you are so disposed, There being no necessity.
Also because some law forbids you to hold office or

(02:47:31):
to be a die caste, that you should not hold
office or be a die caste if you have a fancy.
Is not this a way of life which for the
moment is supremely delightful for the moment, DearS? And is
not their humanity to the condemned in some cases quite charming?
Have you not observed how in a democracy many persons,
although they have been sentenced to death or exile, just

(02:47:53):
say where they are and walk about the world. The
gentleman parades like a hero, and nobody sees or cares. Yes,
he replied, many and many a one see two, I said,
the forgiving spirit of democracy, and that don't care about trifles,
and the disregard which she shows of all the fine
principles which we solemnly laid down at the foundation of

(02:48:14):
the city, as when we said that, except in the
case of some rarely gifted nature, there never will be
a good man who has not, from his childhood been
used to play amid things of beauty and make of
them a joy and a study. How grandly does she
trample all these fine notions of ours under her feet,
never giving a thought to the pursuits which make a statesman,

(02:48:34):
and promoting to honor anyone who professes to be the
people's friend. Yes, she is of a noble spirit. These
and other kindred characteristics are proper to democracy, which is
a charming form of government, full of variety and disorder,
and dispensing a sort of equality to equals and unequals alike.
We know her well. Consider now, I said, what manner

(02:48:58):
of man the individual is? Or rather, consider, as in
the case of the state, how he comes into being
very good? He said, Is not this the way? He
is the son of the miserly and oligarchical father, who
has trained him in his own habits exactly, and like
his father he keeps under by force the pleasures which

(02:49:18):
are of the spending and not of the getting sort,
being those which are called unnecessary. Obviously, would you like,
for the sake of clearness, to distinguish which are the
necessary and which are the unnecessary pleasures? I should are
not necessary pleasures, those of which we cannot get rid
and of which the satisfaction is a benefit to us.

(02:49:38):
And they are rightly called so, because we are framed
by nature to desire both what is beneficial, and what
is necessary and cannot help it. True, we are not wrong,
therefore in calling them necessary, we are not. And the
desires of which a man may get rid if he
takes pains from his youth upwards, of which the presence
moreover does no good, and in some cases the reverse

(02:50:00):
of good. Shall we not be right in saying that
all these are unnecessary? Yes? Certainly, suppose we select an
example of either kind, in order that we may have
a general notion of them very good. Will not the
desire of eating, that is, of simple food and condiments,
in so far as they are required for health and strength,
be of the necessary class. That is what I should suppose.

(02:50:23):
The pleasure of eating is necessary in two ways. It
does us good, and it is essential to the continuance
of life. Yes, but the condimates are only necessary in
so far as they are good for health, certainly, And
the desire which goes beyond this of more delicate food
or other luxuries, which might generally be got rid of
if controlled and trained in youth, and is hurtful to

(02:50:46):
the body and hurtful to the soul in the pursuit
of wisdom and virtue, may be rightly called unnecessary very true.
May we not say that these desires spend and that
the others make money because they conduce to production. Certainly,
and of the pleasures of love and all other pleasures,
the same holds good true. And the drone of whom

(02:51:07):
we spoke was he who was surfeited in pleasures and
desires of this sort, and was the slave of the
unnecessary desires, whereas he who was subject to the necessary
only was miserly an oligarchical. Very true. Again, let us
see how the democratical man grows out of the oligarchical
The following, as I suspect, is commonly the process. What

(02:51:29):
is the process when a young man who has been
brought up, as we were just now describing, in a
vulgar and miserly way, has tasted drones honey, and has
come to associate with fierce and crafty natures who are
able to provide for him all sorts of refinements and
varieties of pleasure, then, as you may imagine, the change
will begain of the anigarchical principle within him into the

(02:51:52):
democratical inevitably, And as in the city like was helping like,
and the change was effected by an allion from without
assisting one division of the citizens. So too the young
man is changed by a class of desires coming from
without to assist the desires within him that which is
a kin and a like, again helping that which is

(02:52:13):
a kin and alike. Certainly, and if there be any
ally which aids the oligarchical principle within him, whether the
influence of a father or a kindred advising or rebuking him,
then there arises in his soul a faction and an
opposite faction, and he goes to war with himself. It
must be so. And there are times when the democratical

(02:52:35):
principle gives way to the oligarchical, and some of his
desires die and others are banished. A spirit of reverence
enters into the man's soul, an order is restored. Yes,
he said that sometimes happens. And then again, after the
old desires have been driven out, fresh ones spring up,
which are akin to them. And because he their father

(02:52:58):
does not know how to educate them, wax fierce and numerous. Yes,
he said, that is apt to be the way. They
draw him to his old associates, and holding secret intercourse
with them, breed and multiply in him very true. At
length they seize upon the citadel of the young man's soul,
which they perceive to be void of all accomplishments and

(02:53:19):
fair pursuits and true words, which make their abode in
the minds of men who are dear to the Gods,
and are their best guardians and sentinels. None better. False
and boastful conceits and phrases mount upwards and take their place.
They are certain to do so. And so the young
man returns into the country of the lotus eaters and

(02:53:39):
takes up his dwelling there in the face of all men.
And if any help be sent by his friends to
the oligarchical part of him, the aforesaid vain conceits shut
the gait of the king's fastness, and they will neither
allow the embassy itself to enter. Nor if private advisers
offer the fatherly counsel of the aged, will they listen
to them or receive them. There is a battle, and

(02:54:02):
they gain the day. And then modesty, which they call silliness,
is ignominiously thrust into exile by them, and temperance, which
they nickname unmanliness, is trampled in the mire, and cast forth.
They persuade men that moderation and orderly expenditure are vulgarity
and meanness. And so, by the help of the rabble

(02:54:24):
of evil appetites, they drive them beyond the border, Yes,
with a will. And when they have emptied and swept
clean the soul of him who is now in their power,
and who is being initiated by them in great mysteries,
the next thing is to bring back to their house
insolence and anarchy, and waste and impudence in bright array,

(02:54:46):
having gardens on their heads, and a great company with them,
hymning their praises and calling them by sweet names. Insolence
they term breeding and anarchy, liberty and waste, magnificence and
impudence courage. And so the young man passes out of
his original nature, which was trained in the school of necessity,

(02:55:07):
into the freedom and libertinism of useless and unnecessary pleasures. Yes,
he said, the change in him is visible enough. After
this he lives on spending his money and labor and
time on unnecessary pleasures quite as much as all necessary ones.
But if he be fortunate and is not too much

(02:55:27):
disordered in his wits when years have elapsed and the
heyday of passion is over, Supposing that he then re
admits into the city some part of the exiled virtues,
and does not wholly give himself up to their successors.
In that case, he balances his pleasures and lives in
a sort of equilibrium, putting the government of himself into

(02:55:47):
the hands of the one which comes first and wins
the turn, and when he has had enough of that,
then into the hands of another. He despises none of them,
but encourages them all equally. Very true, neither does he
receive or let pass into the fortress any true word
of advice. If any one says to him that some
pleasures are the satisfactions of good and noble desires, and

(02:56:10):
others of evil desires, and that he ought to use
and honor some, and chastise and master the others. Whenever
this is repeated to him, he shakes his head and
says that they are all alike, and that one is
as good as another. Yes, he said, that is the
way with him, Yes, I said. He lives from day
to day indulging the appetite of the hour, and sometimes

(02:56:33):
he is lapped in drink and strains of the fruit.
Then he becomes a water drinker and tries to get thin.
Then he takes a turn at gymnastics, sometimes idling and
neglecting everything, then once more living the life of a philosopher.
Often he is busy with politics, and starts to his
feet and says and does whatever comes into his head.

(02:56:53):
And if he is emulous of anyone who is a warrior,
off he is in that direction, or of men of business.
Once more, in that his life has neither law nor order,
and this distracted existence he terms joy and bliss and freedom,
and so he goes on. Yes, he replied, he is
all liberty and equality. Yes, I said. His life is

(02:57:17):
motley and manifold, and an epitome of the lives of many.
He answers to the state, which we described as fair
and spangled. And many a man and many a woman
will take him for their pattern, and many a constitution,
and many an example of manners is contained in him.
Just so, let him then be set over against democracy.

(02:57:38):
He may truly be called the democratic man. Let that
be his place, he said. Last of all comes the
most beautiful of all man and state, alike, tyranny and
the tyrant. These we have now to consider quite true,
he said, Say, then, my friend, in what manner does

(02:57:58):
tyranny arise? That it has a democratic origin? Is evident clearly,
and does not tyranny spring from democracy in the same
manner as democracy from Oligaki? I mean, after a sort ah,
The good which Oligaki proposed to itself, and the means
by which it was maintained was excess of wealth. Am
I not right? Yes? And the insatiable desire of wealth

(02:58:21):
and the neglect of all other things for the sake
of money getting was also the ruin of Oligaki. True,
And democracy has her own good, of which the insatiable
desire brings her to disillusion. What good freedom, I replied, which,
as they tell you, in a democracy, is the glory
of the state. And that therefore in a democracy alone

(02:58:44):
will the free man of nature deign to dwell? Yes,
the saying is in everybody's mouth. I was going to
observe that the insatiable desire of this and the neglect
of other things introduces the change in democracy which occasions
a demand for tyranny. So when a democracy which is
thirsting for freedom has evil cupbearers presiding over the feast

(02:59:06):
and has drunk too deeply of the strong wine of freedom. Then,
unless her rulers are very amenable and give a plentiful draft,
she calls them to accounts and punishes them, and says
that they are cursed oligarchs. Yes, he replied, a very
common occurrence, yes, I said, And loyal citizens are insultingly
termed by her slaves who hug their chains, and men

(02:59:29):
of naught. She would have subjects who are like rulers,
and rulers are like subjects. These are men after her
own heart, whom she praises and honors, both in private
and public. Now in such a state can liberty have
any limit? Certainly not by degrees. The anarchy finds a
way into private houses and ends by getting among the

(02:59:49):
animals and infecting them. How do you mean. I mean
that the father grows accustomed to descend to the level
of his sons and to fear them. And the son
is on a level with his father, he having no
respect or reverence for either of his parents, and this
is his freedom. And the metic is equal with the citizen,
and the citizen with the metic, and the stranger is

(03:00:10):
quite as good as either. Yes, he said, that is
the way. And these are not the only evils, I said,
there are several lesser ones. In such a state of society.
The master fears and flatters his scholars, and the scholars
despise their masters and tutors. Young and old are all alike,
and the young man is on a level with the old,

(03:00:32):
and is ready to compete with him in word or deed.
And old men condescend to the young, and are full
of pleasantry and gaiety. They are loath to be thought
morose and authoritative, and therefore they adopt the manners of
the young. Quite true, he said, the last extreme of
popular liberty is when the slave bought with money, whether

(03:00:52):
male or female, is just as free as his or
her purchaser. Nor must I forget to tell of the
liberty and equality of a two sexes in relation to
each other. Why not, as Eschylus says, utter the word
which rises to our lips. That is what I am doing,
I replied, And I must add that no one who
does not know would believe how much greater is the

(03:01:15):
liberty which the animals who are under the dominion of
man have in a democracy than in any other state.
For truly, the she dogs, as the proverb says, are
as good as the she mistresses. And the horses and
asses have a way of marching along with all the
rights and dignities of free men. And they will run
at anybody who comes in their way if he does

(03:01:36):
not leave the road clear for them. That all things
are just ready to burst with liberty. When I take
a country walk, he said, I often experience what you describe.
You and I have dreamed the same thing. And above all,
I said, and as the result of all, see how
sensitive the citizens become. They chafe impatiently at the least

(03:01:59):
touch of authority, and at length, as you know, they
cease to care even for the laws written or unwritten.
They will have no one over them. Yes, he said,
I know it too well. Such, my friend, I said,
is the fair and glorious beginning out of which springs tyranny.
Glorious indeed, he said, But what is the next step.

(03:02:22):
The ruin of oligarchy is the ruin of democracy, the
same disease magnified and intensified by liberty over master's democracy.
The truth being that the excessive increase of anything often
causes a reaction in the opposite direction. And this is
the case not only in the seasons, and in vegetable
and animal life, but above all in forms of government. True,

(03:02:44):
the excess of liberty, whether in states or individuals, seems
only to pass into excess of slavery. Yes, the natural order,
and so tyranny naturally arises out of democracy, and the
most aggravated form of tyranny, and slavery out of the
most extreme form of liberty, as we might expect. That, however,

(03:03:06):
was not, says I believe your question. You rather desired
to know what is that disorder which is generated alike
in oligarchy and democracy, and is the ruin of both.
Just so, he replied, well, I said, I meant to
refer to the class of the idle spinthrifts, of whom
the more courageous are the leaders, and the more timid

(03:03:27):
the followers, the same whom we were comparing to drones,
some stinglus and others having stings. A very just comparison.
These two classes are the plagues of every city in
which they are generated, being what phlegm and bile are
to the body. And the good physician and law givern
of the states ought like the wise bee master to

(03:03:49):
keep them at a distance and prevents, if possible they're
ever coming in, And if they have anyhow found a
way in, then he should have them and their cells
cut out, as speedily as possible. Yes, by all means,
he said. Then, in order that we may see clearly
what we are doing, let us imagine democracy to be divided,

(03:04:11):
as indeed it is, into three classes. For in the
first place, freedom creates rather more drones in the democratic
than there are in the oligarchical state. That is true,
and in the democracy they are certainly more intensified. How so,
because in the oligarchical state they are disqualified and driven
from office, and therefore they cannot train or gather strength,

(03:04:34):
whereas in a democracy they are almost the entire ruling power.
And while the keener sort speak and act, the rest
keep buzzing about the beamer and do not suffer a
word to be said on the other side. Hence, in
democracies almost everything is managed by the drones. Very true,
he said, then there is another class which is always

(03:04:57):
being severed from the mass. What is that? Then? They
are the orderly class, which, in a nation of traders,
is sure to be the richest naturally, so they are
the most squeezable persons and yield the largest amount of
honey to the drones. Why, he said, there is little
to be squeezed out of people who have little, and
this is called the wealthy class, and the drones feed

(03:05:20):
upon them. That is pretty much the case, he said.
The people are a third class, consisting of those who
work with their own hands. They are not politicians and
have not much to live upon. This, when assembled, is
the largest and most powerful class in a democracy. True,
he said, But then the multitude is seldom willing to

(03:05:41):
congregate unless they get a little honey. And do they
not share? I said, Do not their leaders deprive the
rich of their estates and distribute them among the people,
at the same time taking care to reserve the larger
part for themselves. Why, yes, he said, to that extent,
the people do share, and the persons who property is
taken from them are compelled to defend themselves before the

(03:06:03):
people as they best can. What else can they do?
And then, although they may have no desire of change,
the others charge them with plotting against the people and
being friends of oligarchy. True, and the end is that
when they see the people not of their own accord,
but through ignorance and because they are deceived by informers

(03:06:25):
seeking to do them wrong. Then at last they are
forced to become oligarchs. In reality they do not wish
to be, but the sting of the drones torments them
and breeds revolution in them. That is exactly the truth.
Then come impeachments, and judgments and trials of one another. True,
the people have always some champion whom they set over

(03:06:48):
them and nurse into greatness. Yes, that is their way.
This and no other is the root from which a
tyrant springs. When he first appears above ground, he is
a protector. Yes, that is quite clear. How then does
a protector begin to change into a tyrant? Clearly when
he does what the man is said to do in
the tale of the Arcadian Temple of lycian Zeus. What tale.

(03:07:12):
The tale is that he who has tasted the entrails
of a single human victim minced up with the entrails
of other victims, is destined to become a wolf. Did
you never hear it? Oh? Yes? And the protector of
the people is like him, having a mob entirely at
his disposal. He is not restrained from shedding the blood

(03:07:34):
of kinsmen by the favorite method of false accusation, he
brings them into court and murders them, making the life
of man to disappear, and with unholy tongue and lips,
tasting the blood of his fellow citizens, some he kills,
and others he vanishes at the same time, hinting at
the abolition of debts and partition of lands. And after this,

(03:07:56):
what will be his destiny? Must he not, either at
the hands of his enemies, or from being a man,
become a wolf, that is, a tyrant. Inevitably, this, I said,
is he who begins to make a party against the
rich the same After a while he is driven out,

(03:08:16):
but comes back in spite of his enemies, a tyrant
full grown, that is clear. And if they are unable
to expel him, or to get him condemned to death
by a public accusation, they conspire to assassinate him. Yes,
he said, that is their usual way. Then comes the
famous request for a bodyguard, which is the device of

(03:08:38):
all those who have got thus far in their tyrannical career.
Let not the people's friend, as they say, be lost
to them. Exactly the people readily assent. All their fears
are for him, they have none for themselves. Very true.
And when a man who is wealthy and is also
accused of being an enemy of the people sees this,

(03:09:00):
and my friend, as the oracle said to criesus by
pebbly hermus shore, he flees and rests not. And he
is not ashamed to be a coward. And quite right, too,
said he, for if he were, he would never be
ashamed again. But if he is caught, he dies, of course,
And he, the protector of whom we spoke, is to

(03:09:21):
be seen not larding the plane with his bulk, but himself,
the overthrower of many, standing up in the chariot of state,
with the reins in his hand. No longer protector, but tyrant,
absolute no doubt, he said. And now let us consider
the happiness of the man, and also of the state

(03:09:41):
in which a creature like him is generated. Yes, he said,
let us consider that at first, in the early days
of his power, he is full of smiles, and he
salutes every one whom he meets. He to be called
a tyrant who is making promises in public and also
in private, liberating debtors and distributing land to the people

(03:10:01):
and his followers, and wanting to be so kind and
good to everyone. Of course, he said, But when he
has disposed of foreign enemies by conquest or treaty, and
there is nothing to fear from them, then he is
always stirring up some war or other in order that
the people may require a leader. To be sure, has
he not also another object, which is that they may

(03:10:25):
be impoverished by payment of taxes, and thus compelled to
devote themselves to their daily wants, and therefore less likely
to conspire against him clearly, And if any of them
are suspected by him of having notions of freedom and
of resistance to his authority, he will have a good
pretext for destroying them by placing them at the mercy

(03:10:45):
of the enemy. And for all these reasons, the tyrant
must always be getting up a war. He must. Now
he begins to grow unpopular a necessary result. Then some
of those who joined in setting him up, and who
are in power, speak their minds to him and to
one another, And the more courageous of them cast in

(03:11:05):
his teeth what is being done. Yes, that may be expected,
And the tyrant, if he means to rule, must get
rid of them. He cannot stop. While he has a
friend or an enemy who is good for anything, he cannot.
And therefore he must look about him and see who
is valiant, who is high minded, who is wise, who

(03:11:26):
is wealthy? Happy man? He is the enemy of them all,
and must seek occasion against them, whether he will or no,
until he has made a purgation of the state, yes,
he said, and a rare purgation, yes, I said, not
the sort of purgation which the physicians make of the body.
For they take away the worse and leave the better part.

(03:11:47):
But he does the reverse. If he is to rule,
I suppose that he cannot help himself. What a blessed alternative,
I said, to be compelled to dwell only with the
many bad, and to be by them hated, or not
to live at all. Yes, that is the alternative, And
the more detestable his actions are to the citizens. The

(03:12:07):
more satellites and the greater devotion in them will he require, certainly,
And who are the devoted band? And where will he
procure them? They will flocked to him, he said, of
their own accord. If he pays them by the dog,
I said, here are more drones of every sort, and
from every land, Yes, he said, there are. But will

(03:12:28):
he not desire to get them on the spot. How
do you mean he will rob the citizens of their slaves.
He will then set them free and enroll them in
his bodyguard, to be sure, he said, and he will
be able to trust them best of all. But a
blessed creature, I said, must this tyrant be he has
put to death the others and has these for his

(03:12:50):
trusted friends. Yes, he said, They are quite of his sort. Yes,
I said, And these are the new citizens whom he
has called into existence, who admire him and are his companions,
while the good hate and avoid him. Of course, verily, then,
tragedy is a wise thing, and Euripides a great tragedian.

(03:13:12):
Why so, Why because he is the author of the
pregnant saying tyrants are wise by living with the wise,
And he clearly meant to say that they are the
wise whom the tyrant makes his companions. Yes, he said,
and he also praises tyranny as god like. And many
other things of the same kind are said by him

(03:13:33):
and by the other poets. And therefore, I said, the
tragic poets, being wise men, will forgive us and any
others who live after our manner, if we do not
receive them into our state, because they are the eulogists
of tyranny. Yes, he said, those who have the wit
will doubtless forgive us. But they will continue to go

(03:13:53):
to the other cities and attract mobs and higher voices,
fair and loud and persuasive, and draw the cities over
to tyrannies and democracies. Very true. Moreover, they are paid
for this, and receive honor, the greatest honor as might
be expected from tyrants, and the next greatest from democracies.

(03:14:13):
But the higher they ascend our constitutional hill, the more
their reputation fails, and seems unable from shortness of breath
to proceed further. True, but we are wandering from the subject.
Let us therefore return and inquire how the tyrant will
maintain that fair and numerous, and various and ever changing

(03:14:34):
army of his. If he said there are sacred treasures
in the city, he will confiscate and spend them, And
in so far as the fortunes of attainted persons may suffice,
he will be able to diminish the taxes which he
would otherwise have to impose upon the people. And when
these fail, why, clearly, he said, then he and his

(03:14:54):
moon companions, whether male or female, will be maintained out
of his father's estate. You mean to say that the
people from whom he has derived his being will maintain
him and his companions. Yes, he said, they cannot help themselves.
But one if the people fly into a passion and
aver that a grown up son ought not to be

(03:15:16):
supported by his father, but that the father should be
supported by the son. The father did not bring him
into being or settle him in life in order that
when his son became a man, he should himself be
the servant of his own servants, and should support him
and his rabble of slaves and companions, but that his
son should protect him, and by his help he might

(03:15:37):
be emancipated from the government of the rich and aristocratic,
as they are termed. And so he bids him and
his companions depart, just as any other father might drive
out of the house of riot his son and his
undesirable associates. By heaven, he said, then the parent will
discover what a monster he has been fostering in his bosom,

(03:15:57):
and when he wants to drive him out, he will
find that he is weak and his son strong. Why
you do not mean to say that the tyrant will
use violence? What beat his father if he opposes him?
Yes he will, having first disarmed him. Then he is
a parricide and a cruel guardian of an aged parent.

(03:16:19):
And this is real tyranny, about which there can be
no longer a mistake, As the saying is, the people
who would escape the smoke which is the slavery of
free men, has fallen into the fire, which is the
tyranny of slaves. Thus liberty, getting out of all order
and reason, passes into the harshest and bitterest form of slavery. True,

(03:16:43):
he said, very well. And may we not rightly say
that we have sufficiently discussed the nature of tyranny and
the manner of the transition from democracy to tyranny. Yes,
quite enough, he said, end of book eight, Book nine
of the Republic by Plato. Last of all comes the

(03:17:03):
tyrannical man, about whom we have once more to ask,
how is he formed out of the democratical and how
does he live in happiness or in misery? Yes, he said,
he is the only one remaining there is. However, I
said a previous question which remains unanswered? What question? I
do not think that we have adequately determined the nature

(03:17:26):
and number of the appetites, And until this is accomplished,
the inquiry will always be confused. Well, he said, it
is not too late to supply the omission. Very true,
I said, and observe the point which I want to understand.
Certain of the unnecessary pleasures and appetites I conceive to
be unlawful. Every one appears to have them. But in

(03:17:49):
some persons they are controlled by the laws and by reason,
and the better desires prevail over them. Either they are
wholly banished, or they become few and weak, while in
the case of ours, they are stronger, and there are
more of them. Which appetites do you mean? I mean
those which are awake when the reasoning in human and
ruling power is asleep, than the wild beast within us,

(03:18:12):
gorged with meat or drink, starts up, and, having shaken
off sleep, goes forth to satisfy his desires. And there
is no conceivable folly or crime, not accepting incest or
any other unnatural union, or parricide, or the eating of
forbidden food, which at such a time when he has

(03:18:32):
parted company with all shame and sense. A man may
not be ready to commit most true, he said, But
when a man's pulse is healthy and temperate, and when
before going to sleep, he has awakened his rational powers
and fed them on noble thoughts and inquiries, collecting himself
in meditation, after having first indulged his appetites, neither too

(03:18:55):
much nor too little, but just enough to lay them
to sleep, and prevent them and their enjoyments and pains
from interfering with the higher principle, which he leaves in
the solitude of pure abstraction, free to contemplate and aspire
to the knowledge of the unknown, whether in past, present,
or future. When again he has allayed the passionate elements,

(03:19:16):
if he has a quarrel against anyone, I say, when
after pacifying the two irrational principles, he rouses up the third,
which is reason, before he takes his rest, then, as
you know, he attains truth most nearly, and is least
likely to be the sport of fantastic and lawless visions.
I quite agree in saying this, I have been running

(03:19:38):
into a digression. But the point which I desire to
note is that in all of us. Even in good men,
there is a lawless, wild beast nature which peers out
in sleep. Pray, consider whether I am right, and you
agree with me? Yes, I agree. And now remember the
character which we attributed to the democratic man. He was supposed,

(03:19:59):
by his youth upwards to have been trained under a
miserly parent, who encouraged the saving appetites in him, but
discountenanced the unnecessary, which aim only at amusement and ornament. True,
and then he got into the company of a more refined,
licentious sort of people, and, taking to all their wanton ways,
rushed into the opposite extreme from an abhorrence of his

(03:20:23):
father's meanness, at last, being a better man than his corruptors.
He was drawn in both directions until he halted midway
and led a life not of vulgar and slavish passion,
but of what he deemed moderate indulgence in various pleasures.
After this manner, the Democrat was generally out of the oligarch. Yes,

(03:20:43):
he said, that was our view of him, and is
so still. And now I said, years will have passed away,
and you must conceive this man such as he is.
To have a son who was brought up in his
father's principles, I can imagine him, then you must further
imagine the same thing to happen to the son which
has already happened to the father. He is drawn into

(03:21:05):
a perfectly lawless life, which by his seducers is termed
perfect liberty, that his father and friends take part with
his moderate desires, and the opposite party assist the opposite ones.
As soon as these dire magicians and tyrant makers find
that they are losing their hold on him, they contrive
to implant in him a master passion to be lord

(03:21:27):
over his idle and spendthrift lusts, a sort of a
monstrous weed drone. That is the only image which will
adequately describe him. Yes, he said, that is the only
adequate image of him. And when his other lusts amid
clouds of incense and perfumes, and garlands and wines and
all the pleasures of a dissolute life, now let loose

(03:21:49):
come buzzing around him, nourishing to the utmost the steing
of desire which they implanted his drone like nature. Then
at last this lord of the soul, having madness for
the captain of his God, breaks out into a frenzy.
And if he finds in himself any good opinions or
appetites in process of formation, and there is in him

(03:22:11):
any sense of shame remaining to these better principles, he
puts an end and casts them forth until he has
purged away temperance and brought in madness to the full. Yes,
he said, that is the way in which the tyrannical
man is generated. And is not this the reason why
of old love has been called a tyrant? I should

(03:22:32):
not wonder. Further, I said, has not a drunken man?
Also the spirit of a tyrant? He has? And you
know that a man who is deranged and not right
in his mind will fancy that he is able to
rule not only over men, but also over the gods.
That he will. And the tyrannical man, in the true

(03:22:52):
sense of the word, comes into being when, either under
the influence of nature or habits for both, he becomes drunken, lustful, passionate. Oh,
my friend, is not that so? Assuredly? Such is the man,
and such is his origin? And next, how does he live? Suppose,

(03:23:13):
as people facetiously say, you were to tell me, I imagine,
I said, at the next step in his progress, that
there will be feasts and carousals, and revelings and courtizons,
and all that sort of thing. Love is the lord
of the house within him, and orders all the concerns
of his soul. That is certain. Yes, and every day

(03:23:34):
and every night desires grow up, many informidable, and their
demands are many. They are, indeed, he said, his revenues,
if he has any, are soon spent. True, then comes
debt and the cutting down of his property. Of course,
when he has nothing left, must not his desires crowning
in the nest like young ravens be crying aloud for food.

(03:23:58):
And he goaded on by them, and especially by Love himself,
who is in a matter the captain of them is
in a frenzy, and would fain discover whom he can
defraud or despoil of his property in order that he
might gratify them. Yes, that is sure to be the case.
He must have money, no matter how, if he is
to escape horrid pains and pangs, he must. And as

(03:24:22):
in himself, there was a succession of pleasures, and then
you got the better of the old and took away
their rights. So he, being younger, will claim to have
more than his father and his mother. And if he
has spent his own share of the property, he will
take a slice of theirs, No doubt he will. And
if his parents will not give way, that he will

(03:24:42):
try first of all to cheat and deceive them, very true.
And if he fails, then he will use force and
plunder them. Yes, probably. And if the old man and
woman fight for their own what, then, my friend, will
the creature feel any compunction at tyrannizing over them? Nay,
he said, I should not feel at all comfortable about

(03:25:04):
his parents. But oh heavens adamatus, on account of some
new fangled love of a harlot who is anything but
a necessary connection. Can you believe that he would strike
the mother, who is his ancient friend and necessary to
his very existence, and would place her under the authority
of the other when she is brought under the same
roof with her, Or that under like circumstances he would

(03:25:26):
do the same to his withered old father, first and
most indispensable of friends, for the sake of some newly
found blooming youth who is the reverse of the indispensable. Yes, indeed,
he said, I believe that he would. Truly, Then I
said a tyrannical son is a blessing to his father
and mother. He is, indeed, he replied, he first takes

(03:25:48):
their property, and when that fails and pleasures are beginning
to swarm in the hive of his soul, then he
breaks into a house or steals the garments of some
knightly wayfarer. Next he proceeds to clear a temple. Meanwhile,
the old opinions which he had when a child, and
which gave judgment about good and evil, are overthrown by

(03:26:08):
those others which have just been emancipated, and are now
the bodyguard of Love and share his empire. These, in
his democratic days, when he was still subject to the
laws and to his father, were only let loose in
the dreams of sleep. But now that he is under
the dominion of Love, he becomes always, and in waking
reality what he was then very rarely, and in a

(03:26:30):
dream only. He will commit the foulest murder, or eat
forbidden food, or be guilty of any other horrid act.
Love is his tyrant, and lives lordly in him and lawlessly,
and being himself a king, leads him on as a
tyrant leads a state to the performance of any reckless
deed by which he can maintain himself and the rabble

(03:26:52):
of his associates, whether those whom evil communications have brought
in from without, or those who he himself has allowed
to break loose wid than him by reason of a
similar evil nature in himself, have we not here a
picture of his way of life? Yes, indeed, he said,
And if there are only a few of them in
the state, and the rest of the people are well disposed,

(03:27:14):
they go away and become the bodyguard or mercenary soldiers
of some other tyrant, who may probably want them for
a war. And if there is no war, they stay
at home and do many little pieces of mischief in
the city. What sort of mischief? For example, they are
the thieves, burglars, cut purses, foot pads, robbers of temples,

(03:27:35):
man stealers of the community. Or if they are able
to speak, they turn informers and bear false witness and
take bribes. A small catalog of evils, even if the
perpetrators of them are a few in number, Yes, I said,
But small and greater are comparative terms. And all these things,
the misery and evil which they inflict upon a state,

(03:27:57):
do not come within a thousand miles of the tyrant.
When this noxious class and their followers grow numerous and
become conscious of their strength, assisted by the infatuation of
the people, they choose from among themselves the one who
has most of the tyrant in his own soul, and
him they create their tyrant. Yes, he said, and he

(03:28:18):
will be most fit to be a tyrant if the
people yield well and good. But if they resist him,
as he began by beating his own father and mother.
So now if he has the power, he beats them
and will keep his dear old fatherland or motherland. As
the Cretans say in subjection to his young retainers, whom

(03:28:38):
he has introduced to be their rulers and masters, this
is the end of his passions and desire. Exactly when
such men are only private individuals, and before they get power,
this is their character. They associate entirely with their own
flatterers or ready tools, or if they want anything from anybody,

(03:28:59):
they in their turn, are equally ready to bow down
before them. They profess every sort of affection for them,
but when they have gained their point, they know them
no more. Yes, truly, they are always either the masters
or servants and never the friends of anybody. The tyrants
never tastes of true freedom or friendship, certainly not. And

(03:29:22):
may we not rightly call such men treacherous? No question.
Also they are utterly unjust. If we were right in
our notion of justice, yes, he said, and we were
perfectly right. But us then, sum up in a word,
I said, the character of the worst man. He is
the waking reality of what we dreamed most true. And

(03:29:44):
this is he who, being by nature most of a tyrant,
bears rule. And the longer he lives, the more of
a tyrant he becomes, that is certain, said Glaucon, taking
his turn to answer. And will not he who has
been show to be the wickedest be also the most miserable,
and he who has tyrannized the longest and most most

(03:30:05):
continually and truly miserable. Although this may not be the
opinion of men in general, yes, he said, inevitably, and
must not. The tyrannical man be like the tyrannical state,
and the democratical man like the democratical state, and the
same of the others. Certainly, and as state is to
state in virtue and happiness, so is man in relation

(03:30:27):
to man to be sure, then, comparing our original city,
which was under a king, and the city which is
under a tyrant, how do they stand as to virtue?
They are opposite extremes, he said, For one is the
very best and the other is the very worst. There
can be no mistake, I said, as to which is which.

(03:30:47):
And therefore I will at once inquire whether you would
arrive at a similar decision about their relative happiness and misery.
And here we must not allow ourselves to be panic
stricken at the apparition of the tyrant, who is only
a unit, and may perhaps have a few retainers about him.
But let us go, as we ought, into every corner
of the city and look all about, and then we

(03:31:09):
will give our opinion a fair invitation, he replied. And
I see, as every one must, that a tyranny is
the wretchedest form of government, and the rule of a
king the happiest. And in estimating the men too, may
I not fairly make a like request that I should
have a judge whose mind can enter into and see
through human nature. He must not be like a child

(03:31:31):
who looks at the outside and is dazzled at the
pompous aspect which the tyrannical nature assumes to the beholder.
But let him be one who has a clear insight.
May I suppose that the judgment is given in the
hearing of us all by one who is able to judge,
and has dwelt in the same place with him, and
been present at his daily life, and known him in

(03:31:51):
his family relations, where he may be seen stripped of
his tragedy attire. And again, in the hour of public danger,
he shall tell us about the happiness and misery of
the tyrant when compared with other men. That, again, he said,
is a very fair proposal. Shall I assume that we
ourselves are able and experienced judges, and have before now

(03:32:13):
met with such a person, We shall then have someone
who will answer our inquiries by all means. Let me
ask you not to forget the parallel of the individual
and the state. Bearing this in mind, and glancing in
turn from one to the other of them, will you
tell me their respective conditions? What do you mean, he asked,
beginning with a state, I replied, would you say that

(03:32:36):
a city which is governed by a tyrant is free
or enslaved? No city, he said, can be more completely enslaved.
And yet as you see there are free men as
well as masters in such a state, Yes, he said,
I see that there are a few. But the people,
speaking generally, and the best of them are miserably degraded

(03:32:57):
and enslaved. Then if a man is like the states
I said, must not the same rule prevail. His soul
is full of meanness and vulgarity. The best elements in
him are enslaved, and there is a small ruling part
which is also the worst, and madness inevitably, And would
you say that the soul of such an one is

(03:33:17):
the soul of a free man or of a slave.
He has the soul of a slave, in my opinion.
And the state which is enslaved under a tyrant is
utterly incapable of acting voluntarily, utterly incapable. And also the
soul which is under a tyrant I am speaking of
the soul taken as a whole, is least capable of
doing what she desires. There is a gadfly which goads her,

(03:33:40):
and she is full of trouble and remorse. Certainly, and
is the city which is under a tyrant rich or poor, poor?
And the tyrannical soul must be always poor and insatiable. True,
And must not such a state and such a man
be always full of fear? Yes, indeed, is there any
state in which you will find i'd more of lamentation

(03:34:01):
and sorrow and groaning and pain? Certainly not. And is
there any man in whom you will find more of
this sort of misery than in the tyrannical man, who
is in a fury of passions and desires? Impossible? Reflecting
upon these and similar evils, you held the tyrannical state
to be the most miserable of states. And I was right,

(03:34:21):
he said, certainly, I said, And when you see the
same evils in the tyrannical man, what do you say
of him? I say that he is by far the
most miserable of all men. There, I said, I think
that you are beginning to go wrong. What do you mean?
I do not think that he has as yet reached
the utmost extreme of misery. Then who is more miserable

(03:34:45):
one of whom I am about to speak? Who is
that he who is of a tyrannical nature, and, instead
of leading a private life, has been cursed with the
further misfortune of being a public tyrant. From what has
been said, I gather that you are right. Yes, I replied,
but in this high argument you should be a little

(03:35:06):
more certain and should not conjecture. Only, for of all questions,
this respecting good and evil is the greatest. Very true,
he said. Let me then offer you an illustration, which
may I think throw a light upon this subject. What
is your illustration? The case of rich individuals in cities
who possess many slaves. From them you may form an

(03:35:29):
idea of a tyrant's condition, For they both have slaves.
The only difference is that he has more slaves. Yes,
that is the difference. You know that they live securely
and have nothing to apprehend from their servants. What should
they fear? Nothing? But do you observe the reason of this? Yes,
the reason is that the whole city is leadd together

(03:35:51):
for the protection of each individual. Very true, I said,
But imagine one of these owners, the master, say, of
some fifty slaves, together with his family and property and slaves,
carried off by a god into the wilderness where there
are no free men to help him. Will he not
be in an agony of fear lest he and his

(03:36:12):
wife and children should be put to death by his slaves? Yes,
he said, he will be in the utmost fear. The
time has arrived when he will be compelled to flatter
divers of his slaves and make many promises to them
of freedom and other things. Much against his will. He
will have to cajole his own servants. Yes, he said,
that will be the only way of saving himself. And

(03:36:34):
suppose the same God who carried him away to surround
him with neighbors who will not suffer any man to
be the master of another, and who, if they could
catch the offender, would take his life. His case will
be still worse if you suppose him to be everywhere
surrounded and watched by enemies. And is not this the
sort of prison in which the tyrant will be bound?

(03:36:54):
He who, being by nature such as we have described,
is full of all sorts of fear, years, and lusts.
His soul is dainty and greedy, and yet alone of
all men in the city, he is never allowed to
go on a journey or to see the things which
other free men desire to see. But he lives in
his hole like a woman hidden in the house, and

(03:37:15):
is jealous of any other citizen who goes into foreign
parts and sees things of interest. Very true, he said,
And amid evils such as these, will not he who
is ill governed in his own person? The tyrannical man,
I mean, whom you just now decided to be the
most miserable of all? Will not he be yet mold
miserable when instead of leading a private life, he is

(03:37:38):
constrained by fortune to be a public tyrant. He has
to be master of others when he is not master
of himself. He is like a diseased or paralytic man
who is compelled to pass his life not in retirement,
but fighting and combating with other men. Yes, he said,
the similitude is most exact. Is not his case utterly miserable?

(03:37:59):
And it is not the actual tyrant lead a worse
life than he whose life you determine to be the worst. Certainly,
he who is the real tyrant, whatever man may think,
is the real slave, and is obliged to practice the
greatest adulation and servility, and to be the flatterer of
the vilest of mankind. He has desires which he is

(03:38:21):
utterly unable to satisfy, and has more wants than anyone,
and is truly poor. If you know how to inspect
the whole soul of him all his life long. He
is beset with fear, and is full of convulsions and distractions,
even as the state which he resembles. And surely the
resemblance holds very true, he said. Moreover, as we were

(03:38:44):
saying before, he grows worse from having power. He becomes
and is of necessity more jealous, more faithless, more unjust,
more friendless, more impious than he was at first. He
is the purveyor and cherisher of every sort of vice.
And the consequence is that he is supremely miserable, and

(03:39:04):
that he makes everybody else as miserable as himself. No
man of any sense will dispute your words. Come, then,
I said, And as the general umpire in theatrical contests
proclaims the result, do you also decide who, in your opinion,
is first in the scale of happiness, and who second,
and in what order the others follow. There are five

(03:39:26):
of them in all they are the royal, timocratical, oligarchical, democratical, tyrannical.
The decision will be easily given, he replied. They shall
be choruses coming on the stage, and I must judge
them in the order in which they enter by the
criterion of virtue and vice, happiness and misery. Need we

(03:39:46):
hire a herald? Or shall I announce that the son
of Ariston the Best has decided that the best and
justice is also the happiest, And that this is he
who is the most royal man and king over himself,
And that the worst and most unjust man is also
the most miserable. And that this is he who, being

(03:40:08):
the greatest tyrant of himself, is also the greatest tyrant
of his state. Make the proclamation yourself, he said, And
shall I add, whether seen or unseen by gods and men,
let the words be added. Then, this, I said, will
be our first proof. And there is another which may
also have some weight. What is that? The second proof

(03:40:30):
is derived from the nature of the soul, Seeing that
the individual soul, like the state, has been divided by
us into three principles. The division, may I think, furnish
a new demonstration of what nature. It seems to me
that to these three principles three pleasures correspond also three
desires and governing powers. How do you mean, he said,

(03:40:53):
there is one principle with which, as we were saying,
a man learns another with which he is angry. The third,
having many forms, has no special name, but is denoted
by the general term appetitive, from the extraordinary strength and
vehemence of the desires of eating and drinking, and the
other sensual appetites which are the main elements of it.

(03:41:14):
Also money loving, because such desires are generally satisfied by
the help of money. That is true, he said, If
I were to say that the loves and pleasures of
this third part were concerned with gain, we should then
be able to fall back on a single notion, and
might truly and intelligibly describe this part of the soul
as loving gain or money. I agree with you again,

(03:41:37):
is not the passionate element wholly set on ruling and
conquering and getting fame? True? Suppose we call it the
contentious or ambitious? Would the term be suitable? Extremely suitable.
On the other hand, everyone sees that the principle of
knowledge is wholly directed to the truth and cares less
than either of the others for gain or fame, far less.

(03:41:59):
Lover of wisdom lover of knowledge are titles which we
may fitly apply to that part of the soul. Certainly,
one principle prevails in the souls of one class of
men another in others, as may happen. Yes, then we
may begin by assuming that there are three classes of men,
lovers of wisdom, lovers of honor, lovers of gain exactly,

(03:42:23):
and there are three kinds of pleasure, which are their
several objects. Very true. Now, if you examine the three
classes of men and ask of them in turn, which
of their lives is pleasantness, each will be found a
praising his own and depreciating that of others. The money
maker will contrast the vanity of honor or of learning
if they bring no money, with the solid advantages of

(03:42:45):
gold and silver, true, he said. And the lover of honor,
what will be his opinion? Will he not think that
the pleasure of riches is vulgar? Or the pleasure of learning,
if it brings no distinction, is all smoke and nonsense
to him? Very true? And are we to suppose I
said that the philosopher sets any value on other pleasures

(03:43:06):
in comparison with the pleasure of knowing truth and in
that pursuit abiding ever learning not so far indeed, from
the heaven of pleasure? Does he not call the other
pleasures necessary under the idea that if there are no
necessity for them, he would rather not have them. There
can be no doubt of that, he replied, Since then
the pleasures of each class and the life of each

(03:43:28):
are in dispute, And the question is not which life
is more or less honorable, or better or worse, but
which is the more pleasant or painless? How shall we know?
Who speaks? Truly? I cannot myself tell, he said. Well,
but what ought to be the criterion? Is any better
than experience and wisdom and reason? There cannot be better,

(03:43:50):
he said, Then, I said, reflect of the three individuals,
which has the greatest experience of all the pleasures which
we enumerated, has the lover of gain in learning the
nature of essential truth greater experience of the pleasure of
knowledge than the philosopher has of the pleasure of gain.
The philosopher, he replied, has greatly the advantage, for he has,

(03:44:13):
of necessity always known the taste of the other pleasures
from his childhood upwards. But the lover of gain, in
all his experience, has not, of necessity tasted, or, I
should rather say, even had he desired, could hardly have
tasted the sweetness of learning and knowing truth. Than the
lover of wisdom has a great advantage over the lover
of gain, for he has a double experience. Yes, very

(03:44:35):
great Again, has he greater experience of the pleasures of
honor or the lover of honor of the pleasures of wisdom? Nay,
he said, all three are honored in proportion as they
attain their object. For the rich man and the brave man,
and the wise man alike have their crowd of admirers,
And as they all receive honor, they all have experience

(03:44:55):
of the pleasures of honor. But the delight which is
to be found in the knowledge of true being being
is known to the philosopher. Only his experience, then, will
enable him to judge better than anyone, far better, And
he is the only one who has wisdom as well
as experience. Certainly, further, the very faculty which is the
instrument of judgment is not possessed by the comfortous or

(03:45:17):
ambitious man, but only by the philosopher. What faculty reason
with whom, as we were saying, the decision ought to rest. Yes,
and reasoning is peculiarly his instrument. Certainly, if wealth and
gain were the criterion, then the praise or blame of
the lover of gain would surely be the most trustworthy, assuredly,

(03:45:38):
or if honor or victory or courage, in that case,
the judgment of the ambitious or pugnacious would be the truest, clearly.
But since experience and wisdom and reason are the judges,
the only interference possible, he replied, is that pleasures which
are approved by the lover of wisdom and reason are
the truest. And so we arrive at the result that

(03:46:01):
the pleasure of the intelligent part of the soul is
the pleasantest of the three, and that he of us,
in whom this is the ruling principle, has the pleasantest life. Unquestionably,
he said, the wise man speaks with authority when he
approves of his own life. And what does the judge
affirm to be the life which is next, and the
pleasure which is next, clearly that of the soldier and

(03:46:23):
lover of honor, who is nearer to himself than the
money maker. Last comes the lover of gain. Very true,
he said, twice in succession. Then has the just man
overthrown the unjust in this conflict. And now comes the
third trial, which is dedicated to Olympian Zeus the savior,
a sage whispers in my ear that no pleasure except

(03:46:45):
that of the wise, is quite true and pure. All
others are a shadow only. And surely this will prove
the greatest and most decisive of falls. Yes, the greatest.
But will you explain yourself? I will work out the subject,
and you shall answer my questions. Proceed, say, then, is
not pleasure opposed to pain? True? And there is a

(03:47:08):
neutral state which is neither pleasure nor pain. There is
a state which is intermediate and a sort of repose
of the soul about either. That is what you mean. Yes,
you remember what people say when they are sick? What
do they say that, after all, nothing is pleasanter than health?
But then they never knew this to be the greatest

(03:47:29):
of pleasures until they were ill. Yes, I know, he said.
And when persons are suffering from acute pain, you must
have heard them say that there is nothing pleasanter than
to get rid of their pain. I have, and there
are many other cases of suffering in which the mere
rest and cessation of pain, and not any positive enjoyment,
is extolled by them as the greatest pleasure. Yes, he said,

(03:47:52):
at the time they are pleased and well content to
be at rest again, when pleasure ceases, that sort of
rest or cessation will be paid doubtless, he said. Then
the intermediate state of rest will be pleasure and will
also be pain, so it would seem. But can that
which is neither become both? I should say not? And

(03:48:13):
both pleasure and pain are motions of the soul, are
they not? Yes? But that which is neither was just
now shown to be rest and not motion, and in
a mean between them, yes. How then can we be
right in supposing that the absence of pain is pleasure,
or that the absence of pleasure is pain? Impossible? This

(03:48:33):
then is an appearance only and not a reality. That
is to say, the rest is pleasure at the moment,
and in comparison of what is painful, and painful in
comparison of what is pleasant. But all these representations, when
tried by the test of true pleasure, are not real,
but a sort of imposition, that is the inference. Look

(03:48:54):
at the other class of pleasures, which have no antecedent pains,
and you will no longer suppose, as you prop may
at present, that pleasure is only the cessation of pain
or pain of pleasure? What are they, he said, And
where shall I find them? There are many of them.
Take as an example the pleasures of smell, which are
very great and have no antecedent pains. They come in

(03:49:17):
a moment, and when they depart leave no pain behind them.
Most true, he said, Let us not then be induced
to believe that pure pleasure is the cessation of pain
or pain of pleasure. No. Still, the more numerous and
violent pleasures which reach the soul through the body are
generally of this sort. They are beliefs of pain, that

(03:49:38):
is true, And the anticipations of future pleasures and pains
are of a like nature. Yes, shall I give you
an illustration of them? Let me hear you would allow?
I said that there is in nature an upper and
lower and middle region. I should and if a person
were to go from the lower to the middle region,
would he not imagine that he is going up? And

(03:50:00):
he who is standing in the middle and sees whence
he has come, would imagine that he is already in
the upper region if he has never seen the true
upper world. To be sure, he said, how can he
think otherwise? But if he were taken back again, he
would imagine, and truly imagine that he was descending, no
doubt all that would arise out of his ignorance of

(03:50:20):
the true upper and middle and lower regions. Yes, then
can you wonder that persons who are inexperienced in the truth,
as they have wrong ideas about many other things, should
also have wrong ideas about pleasure and pain and the
intermediate state, so that when they are only being drawn
towards the painful, they feel pain and think the pain

(03:50:41):
which they experience to be real, and in like manner,
when drawn away from pain to the neutral or intermediate states,
they firmly believe that they have reached the goal of
satiety and pleasure. They not knowing pleasure err in contrasting
pain with the absence of pain, which is like contrasting
black with gray instead of white. Can you wonder I

(03:51:02):
say at this? No? Indeed, I should be much more
disposed to wonder at the opposite look at the matter. Thus, hunger, thirst,
and the like are inanitions of the bodily state, deares
and ignorance and folly are inanitions of the soul true
and food and wisdom are the corresponding satisfactions of either certainly,

(03:51:23):
And is the satisfaction derived from that which has less,
or from that which has more existence? The truer clearly
from that which has more. What classes of things have
a greater share of pure existence in your judgment, those
of which food and drink, and condiments and all kinds
of sustenance are examples, Or the class which contains true opinion,

(03:51:44):
and knowledge, and mind, and all the different kinds of virtue.
But the question in this way, which has a more
pure being that which is concerned with the invariable, the immortal,
and the true, and is of such a nature and
is found in such natures, Or or that which is
concerned with and found in the variable and mortal, and
is itself variable and mortal? Far purer, he replied, is

(03:52:08):
the being of that which is conceived with the invariable?
And does the essence of the invariable partake of knowledge
in the same degree as of essence, yes, of knowledge
in the same degree, and of truth in the same degree. Yes.
And conversely, that which has less of truth will also
have less of essence. Necessarily, then, in general, those kinds

(03:52:31):
of things which are in the serface of the body
have less of truth, and essence than those which are
in the surface of the soul far less, and has
not the body itself less of truth and essence than
the soul. Yes, what is filled with more real existence
and actually has a more real existence, is more really
feeled than that which is filled with less real existence

(03:52:52):
and is less real. Of course, and if there is
a pleasure in being filled with that which is according
to nature, that which is more really fill with more
real being will more really and truly enjoy true pleasure,
whereas that which participates in less real being will be
less truly and surely satisfied, and will participate in an
illusory and less real pleasure. Unquestionably, those then, who know

(03:53:16):
not wisdom and virtue, and are always busy with gluttony
and sensuality, go down and up again as far as
the mean, and in this region they move at random
throughout life, But they never pass into the true upper world.
Thither they neither look, nor do they ever find their way.
Neither are they truly filled with true being, nor do

(03:53:37):
they taste of pure and abiding pleasure. Like cattle with
their eyes always looking down and their heads stooping to
the earth, that is, to the dining table. They fatten
and feed and breed, and in their excessive love of
these delights, they kick and butt at one another with
horns and hoofs which are made of iron. And they
kill one another by reason of their insatiable lust. For

(03:53:59):
they fill themselves with that which is not substantial, and
the part of themselves which they feel is also unsubstantial
and incontinent. Verily, Socrates said, Glaucon, you describe the life
of many like an oracle. Their pleasures are mixed with pain.
How can they be otherwise, For they were mere shadows

(03:54:20):
and pictures of the true, and are colored by contrast,
which exaggerates both light and shade. And so they implant
in the minds of fool's insane desires of themselves. And
they are thoughts about as Tesicurus says that the Greeks
fought about the shadow of Helen at Troy in ignorance
of the truth. Something of that sort must inevitably happen,
and must not the like happen with the spirited or

(03:54:42):
passionate element of the soul. Will not the passionate man
who carries his passion into action be in the like case,
whether he is envious and ambitious, violent and contentious, or
angry and discontented, if he be seeking to attain honor
and victory and the satisfaction of his anger without reason
or sense. Yes, he said, the same will happen with

(03:55:04):
the spirited element. Also, then, may we not confidently assert
that the lovers of money and honor, when they seek
their pleasures under the guidance and in the company of
reason and knowledge, and pursue after and win the pleasures
which wisdom shows them, will also have the truest pleasures
in the highest degree which is attainable to them, inasmuch

(03:55:24):
as they follow truth, and they will have the pleasures
which are natural to them, if that which is best
for each one is also most natural to him. Yes, certainly,
the best is the most natural. And when the whole
soul follows the philosophical principle, and there is no division,
the several parts are just, and do each of them
their own business, and enjoy severally the best and truest

(03:55:47):
pleasures of which they are capable exactly. But when either
of the two other principles prevails, it fails in attaining
its own pleasure, and compels the rest to pursue after
a pleasure which is a shadow only, and which is
not their own true. And the greater the interval which
separates them from philosophy and reason, the more strange and

(03:56:08):
elusive will be the pleasure. Yes, And is not that
farthest from reason, which is at the greatest distance from
law and order? Clearly, and the lustful and tyrannical desires are,
as we saw, at the greatest distance, Yes, and the
royal and orderly desires are nearest. Yes, Then the tyrant
will live at the greatest distance from true or natural pleasure,

(03:56:31):
and the king at the least certainly. But if so,
the tyrant will live most unpleasantly, and the king most
pleasantly inevitably. Would you know the measure of the interval
which separates them? Will you tell me? There appear to
be three pleasures, one genuine and two spurious. Now the
transgression of the tyrant reaches a point beyond the spurious.

(03:56:54):
He has run away from the region of law and
reason and taken up his abode with certain slave pleasures
jar his satellites, and the measure of his inferiority can
only be expressed in a figure. How do you mean,
I assume? I said, that the tyrant is in the
third place from the oligarch. The democrat was in the middle. Yes,
and if there is truth in what has preceded, he

(03:57:17):
will be wedded to an image of pleasure, which is
thrice removed, as to truth, from the pleasure of the oligarch,
he will. And the oligarch is third from the royal,
since we count as one royal and aristocratical. Yes, he
is third. Then the tyrant is removed from true pleasure
by the space of a number which is three times three. Manifestly,

(03:57:38):
the shadow, then of tyrannical pleasure, determined by the number
of length, will be a plane figure. Certainly, and if
you raise the power and make the plane a solid,
there is no difficulty in seeing how vast is the
interval by which the tyrant is parted from the king. Yes,
the arithmetician will easily do the sum, or if some
person begins at the other end, he measures the interval

(03:58:01):
by which the king is parted from the tyrant in
truth of pleasure, he will find him, when the multiplication
is completed, living seven hundred twenty nine times more pleasantly,
and the tyrant more painfully by this same interval what
a wonderful calculation, And how enormous is the distance which
separates the just from the unjust in regard to pleasure
and pain? Yet a true calculation, I said, and a

(03:58:24):
number which nearly concerns human life. If human beings are
concerned with days and nights, and months and years, yes,
he said, human life is certainly concerned with them. Then
if the good and just man be thus superior in
pleasure to the evil and unjust, his superiority will be
infinitely greater in propriety of life, and in beauty and virtue,

(03:58:45):
immeasurably greater. Well, I said, And now, having arrived at
this stage of the argument, we may revert to the
words which brought us hither. Was not someone saying that
injustice was agained to the perfectly unjust, who was reputed
to be just? Yes, that was said. Now, then, having
determined the power and quality of justice at injustice, let

(03:59:07):
us have a little conversation with him. What shall we
say to him? Let us make an image of the
soul that he may have his own words presented before
his eyes. Of what sort an ideal image of the soul?
Like the composite creations of ancient mythology, such as the chimera,
or scylla, or Cerberus. And there are many others in

(03:59:28):
which two or more different natures are said to grow
into one. There are said of having been such unions.
Then do you now model the form of a multitudinous,
many headed monster, having a ring of heads, of all manner,
of beasts, tame and wild, which he is able to
generate and metamorphose at will? You suppose marvelous powers in
the artist. But as language is more pliable than wax

(03:59:51):
or any similar substance, let there be such a model
as you propose. Suppose now that you make a second
form as of a lion, and a third of a
the second smaller than the first, and the third smaller
than the second. That he said is an easier task.
And I have made them as you say, And now
join them, and let the three grow into one. That

(04:00:13):
has been accomplished. Next, fashion the outside of them into
a single image as of a man, so that he
who is not able to look within and sees only
the utter hull, may believe the beast to be a
single human creature. I have done so, he said. And
now to him who maintains that it is profitable for
the human creature to be unjust and unprofitable to be just.

(04:00:37):
Let us reply that, if he be right, it is
profitable for this creature to feast the multitudinous monster, and
strengthen the lion and the lion like qualities, but to
starve and weaken the man, who is consequently liable to
be dragged about at the mercy of either of the
other two. And he is not to attempt to familiarize
or harmonize them with one another. He ought rather to

(04:00:59):
suffer them to fight and bite and devour one another. Certainly,
he said, that is what the approver of injustice says
to him. The supporter of justice makes answer that he
should ever so speak and act as to give the
man within him, in some way or other, the most
complete mastery over the entire human creature. He should watch

(04:01:20):
over them and he headed monster, like a good husbandman,
fostering and cultivating the gentle qualities, and preventing the wild
ones from growing. He should be making the lion heart
his ally, and in common care of them all should
be uniting the several parts with one another and with himself. Yes,
he said, that is quite what the maintainer of justice says,

(04:01:41):
and so, from every point of view, whether a pleasure, honor,
or advantage, the approver of justice is right and speaks
the truth, and the disapprover is wrong and false and ignorant. Yes,
from every point of view. Come now, and let us
gently reason with the unjust, who is not intentionally in error?

(04:02:01):
Sweet sir, we will say to him, what think you
of things esteemed noble and ignoble? Is not the noble
that which subjects the beast to the man, or rather
to the god in man, and the ignoble that which
subjects the man to the beast. He can hardly avoid saying, yes,
can he now not if he has any regard for
my opinion? But if he agree so far, we may

(04:02:25):
ask him to answer another question. Then how would a
man profit if he received gold and silver on the
condition that he was to enslave the noblest part of
him to the worst. Who can imagine that a man
who sold his son or daughter into slavery for money,
especially if he sold them into the hands of fierce
and evil men, would be the gainer, however large might

(04:02:46):
be the sum which he received. And will anyone say
that he is not a miserable catiff who remorselessly sells
his own divine being to that which is most godless
and detestable. Ariphile took the necklace of the price of
her husband's. But he is taking a bribe in order
to compass a worse ruin, Yes, said Glaucon, far worse

(04:03:06):
I will answer for him. Has not the intemperate been
censured of old? Because in him the huge, multiform monster
is allowed to be too much at large? Clearly, and
men are blamed for pride and bad temper when the
lion and serpent element in them disproportionately grows and gains strength. Yes,
And luxury and softness are blamed because they relax and

(04:03:28):
weaken the same creature and make a coward of him.
Very true, And is not a man reproached for flattery
and meanness who subordinates the spirited animal to the unruly monster,
and for the sake of money of which he can
never have enough, habituates him in the days of his
youth to be trampled in the mire, and from being
a lion to becoming a monkey. True, he said, And

(04:03:51):
why are mean employments and manual arts are reproached only
because they imply a natural weakness of the higher principle.
The individual is unable to control the creatures within him,
but has to court them, and his great study is
how to flatter them. Such appears to be the reason,
and therefore, being desirous of placing him under a rule
like that of the best, we say that he ought

(04:04:13):
to be the servant of the best, in whom the
divine rules, not as Thrasymachus supposed to the injury of
the servant, but because every one had better be ruled
by divine wisdom dwelling within him, or, if this be impossible,
than by an external authority, in order that we may
be all, as far as possible, under the same government,

(04:04:33):
friends and equals. True, he said, and this is clearly
seen to be the intention of the law, which is
the ally of the whole city, and is seen also
in the authority which we exercise over children, and the
refusal to let them be free until we have established
in them a principle analogous to the constitution of a state,

(04:04:53):
and by cultivation of this higher element, have set up
in their hearts a guardian and ruler like our own.
And when this is done, they may go their ways. Yes,
he said, the purpose of the law is manifest. From
what point of view, then, and on what ground can
we say that a man is profited by injustice or
in temperance, or other baseness which will make him a

(04:05:15):
worse man, even though he acquire money or power by
his wickedness. From no point of view at all, What
shall he profit if his injustice be undetected and unpunished.
He who is undetected only gets worse. Whereas he who
is detected and punished has the brutal part of his
nature silenced and humanized. The gentler element in him is liberated,

(04:05:37):
and his whole soul is perfected and ennobled by the
acquirement of justice and temperance and wisdom, more than the
body ever is by receiving gifts of beauty, strength, and
health in proportion as the soul is more honorable than
the body. Certainly, he said, to this nobler purpose, the
man of understanding will devote the energies of his life.
And in the first place, he will honor studies which

(04:05:59):
impress these qualities on his soul, and will disregard others. Clearly,
he said, in the next place, he will regulate his
bodily habit and training. And so far will he be
from yielding to brutal and irrational pleasures, that he will
regard even health as quite a secondary matter. His first
object will be not that he may be fair, or strong,

(04:06:20):
or well, unless he is likely thereby to gain temperance.
But he will always desire so to attemper the body
as to preserve the harmony of the soul. Certainly he will,
if he has true music in him, And in the
acquisition of wealth, there is a principle of order and
harmony which he will also observe. He will not allow
himself to be dazzled by the foolish applause of the world,

(04:06:43):
and heap up riches to his own infinite harm. Certainly not,
he said. He will look at the city which is
within him, and take heed that no disorder occur in it,
such as might arise either from superfluity or from want.
And upon this principle he will regulate his property and
gaze nor spend according to his means. Very true, and

(04:07:03):
for the same reason, he will gladly accept and enjoy
such honors as he deems likely to make him a
better man. But those whether private or public, which are
likely to disorder his life he will avoid. Then, if
that is his motive, he will not be a statesman
by the dog of Egypt. He will in the city
which is his own, he certainly will, though in the

(04:07:25):
land of his birth perhaps not unless he have a
divine call. I understand you mean that he will be
a ruler in the city of which we are the founders,
and which exists in idea only, for I do not
believe that there is such an one anywhere on earth.
In heaven, I replied, there is laid up a pattern
of it me things which he who desires may behold,

(04:07:47):
and beholding, may set his own house in order. But
whether such an one exists, or ever will exist, in fact,
is no matter, for he will live after the manner
of that city, having nothing to do with any other.
I think so, he said, end of Book nine, Book
ten of the Republic by Plato. Of the many excellences

(04:08:09):
which I perceive in the order of our states, there
is none which, upon reflection, pleases me better than the
rule about poetry. To what do you refer to the
rejection of imitative poetry, which certainly ought not to be received,
as I see far more clearly now that the parts
of the soul have been distinguished. What do you mean

(04:08:29):
speaking in confidence? For I should not like to have
my words repeated to the tragedians and the rest of
the imitative tribe. But I do not mind saying to
you that all poetical imitations are ruinous to the understanding
of the hearers, and that the knowledge of their true
nature is the only antidote to them. Explain the purport
of your remark, well, I will tell you, although I

(04:08:52):
have always, from my earliest youth had in awe and
love of Homer, which even now makes the words falter
on my life, for he is the great captain and
teacher of the whole of that charming tragic company. But
a man is not to be reverenced more than the truth,
and therefore I will speak at very good, he said.
Listen to me, then, or rather answer me put your question,

(04:09:16):
Can you tell me what imitation is? For I really
do not know a likely thing then that I should know?
Why not? For a dullar I may often see a
thing sooner than the keener. Very true, he said, But
in your presence, even if I had any faint notion,
I could not muster courage to utter it? Will you

(04:09:37):
inquire yourself? Well? Then shall we begin the inquiry in
our usual manner. Whenever a number of individuals have a
common name, we assume them to have also a corresponding
idea or form. Do you understand me? I do? Let
us take any common instance. There are beds and tables
in the world. Plenty of them, are there? Not? Yes?

(04:09:59):
But there are only two ideas or forms of them.
One the idea of a bed, the other of a table. True,
and the maker of either of them makes a bed,
or he makes a table for our use and accordance
with the idea. That is our way of speaking in
this and similar instances. But no artificer makes the ideas themselves.

(04:10:19):
How could he impossible? And there is another artist? I
should like to know what you would say of him?
Who is he? One who is the maker of all
the works of all other workmen? What an extraordinary man?
Wait a little and there will be more reason for
your saying so, For this is he who is able
to make not only vessels of every kind, but plants

(04:10:41):
and animals himself, and all other things the earth and heaven,
and the things which are in heaven and under the earth.
He makes the gods also, he must be a wizard,
and no mistake, Oh, you are incredulous. I do you
mean that there is no such maker or creator, or
that in one sense there might be a maker of

(04:11:02):
all these things? But in another not? Do you see
that there is a way in which you can make
them all yourself? What way an easy way enough? Or rather,
there are many ways in which the feet might be
quickly and easily accomplished, none quicker than that of turning
a mirror round and round. You would soon enough make
the sun and the heavens, and the earth, and yourself,

(04:11:25):
and other animals and plants, and all the other things
of which we were just now speaking in the mirror, Yes,
he said, but they would be appearances, only very good,
I said. You are coming to the point now. And
the painter too, is, as I conceive, just another a
creator of appearances? Is he not? Of course? But then

(04:11:47):
I suppose you will say that what he creates is untrue.
And yet there is a sense in which the painter
also creates a bed, yes, he said, but not a
real bed, and one of the maker of the bed.
Were you not saying that he too, makes not the idea,
which according to our view is the essence of the bed,
but only a particular bed. Yes, I did. Then, if

(04:12:10):
he does not make that which exists, he cannot make
true existence, but only some semblance of existence. And if
any one were to say that the work of the
maker of the bed, or any other workman has real existence,
he could hardly be supposed to be speaking the truth.
At any rate, he replied, Philosophers would say that he
was not speaking the truth. No wonder then that his work, too,

(04:12:34):
is an indistinct expression of truth. No wonder. Suppose now that,
by the light of the examples just offered, we inquire
who this imitator is. If you please, well, then here
are three beds, one existing in nature, which is made
by God, as I think, we may say, for no
one else can be the maker. No, there is another,

(04:12:58):
which is the work of the carpenter. Yes, and the
work of a painter is a third. Yes. Beds then
are of three kinds, and there are three artists who
superintend them, God, the maker of the bed, and the painter. Yes,
there are three of them. God, whether from choice or
from necessity, made one bed in nature, and one only

(04:13:21):
two or more such ideal beds neither ever have been,
nor ever will be made by God. Why is that?
Because even if he had made but two, a third
would still appear behind them, which both of them would
have for their idea, And that would be the ideal bed,
and not the two others. Very true, he said, God

(04:13:42):
knew this, and he desired to be the real maker
of a real bed, not a particular maker of a
particular bed. And therefore he created a bed which is
essentially and by nature one only so we believe. Shall
we then speak of him as the natural author or
maker of the bed? Yes, he replied, inasmuch as by

(04:14:04):
the natural process of creation, he is the author of
this and of all other things. And what shall we
say of the carpenter? Is he not also the maker
of the bed? Yes? But would you call a painter
a creator and maker? Certainly not. Yet, if he is
not the maker, what is he in relation to the bed?
I think? He said? That we may fairly designate him

(04:14:28):
as the imitator of that which the others make good?
I said, Then you call him, who is third in
the descent from nature, an imitator? Certainly, he said, And
the tragic poet is an imitator, and therefore, like all
other imitators, he is thrice removed from the king and
from the truth that appears to be so. Then about

(04:14:52):
the imitator, we are agreed. And what about the painter,
I would like to know whether he may be thought
to imitate that which you wi exists in nature? Are
only the creations of artists, the latter as they are
or as they appear? You still have to determine this.
What do you mean? I mean that you may look

(04:15:13):
at a bed from different points of view, obliquely or directly,
or from any other point of view, and the bed
will appear different, But there is no difference in reality,
and the same of all things. Yes, he said, the
difference is only apparent. Now let me ask you another question.
Which is the art of painting designed to be an

(04:15:34):
imitation of things as they are or as they appear,
of appearance, or of reality of appearance. Then the imitator,
i said, is a long way off the truth, and
can do all things because he lightly touches on a
small part of them, and that parts an image. For example,
a painter will paint a cobbler, carpenter, or any other artists,

(04:15:57):
though he knows nothing of their arts. And if he
is a good artist, he may deceive children or simple
persons when he shows them his picture of a carpenter
from a distance, and they will fancy that they are
looking at a real carpenter. Certainly, and whenever anyone informs
us that he has found a man who knows all
the arts and all things else that anybody knows, and

(04:16:20):
every single thing with a higher degree of accuracy than
any other man whoever tells us this, I think that
we can only imagine him to be a simple creature
who is likely to have been deceived by some wizard
or actor whom he met, and whom he thought all knowing,
because he himself was unable to analyze the nature of

(04:16:40):
knowledge and ignorance and imitation. Most true, And so when
we hear persons saying that the tragedians and Homer, who
is at their head know all the arts and all
things human virtue, as well as vice and divine things too,
For that the good poet cannot compose well he knows
his subject, and that he who has not this knowledge

(04:17:03):
can never be a poet. We ought to consider whether
here or so there may not be a similar illusion.
Perhaps they may have come across imitators and been deceived
by them. They may not have remembered when they saw
their works that these were but imitations thrice removed from
the truth, and could easily be made without any knowledge

(04:17:23):
of the truth, because they are appearances only and not realities.
Or after all, they may be in the right, and
poets do really know the things about which they seem
to the many to speak so well. The question, he said,
should by all means be considered. Now, do you suppose
that if a person were able to make the original

(04:17:44):
as well as the image, he would seriously devote himself
to the image making branch. Would he allow imitation to
be the ruling principle of his life, as if he
had nothing higher in him? I should say not. The
real artist, who knew what he was imitating, would be
interested in realities and not in imitations, and would desire

(04:18:05):
to leave as memorials of himself works many and fair,
And instead of being author of encomiums, he would prefer
to be the theme of them. Yes, he said, that
would be to him a source of much greater honor
and profit. Then I said, we must put a question
to Homer, not about medicine or any of the arts

(04:18:27):
to which his poems only incidentally refer. We are not
going to ask him or any other poet, whether he
has cured patients like Eslepiasts, or left behind him a
school of medicine such as es Slepiads were, or whether
he only talks about medicine and other arts at second hand.
But we have a right to know respecting military tactics, politics, education,

(04:18:49):
which are the chiefest and noblest subjects of his poems,
and we may fairly ask him about them, Friend Homer,
than we say to him if you are only in
the second removed from truth in what you say of virtue,
and not in the third, not an image maker or imitator.
And if you are able to discern what pursuits make

(04:19:11):
men better or worse in private or public life, tell
us what state was ever better governed by your help.
The good order of Lacedaemon is due to Lycurgus, and
many other cities, great and small, have been similarly benefited
by others. But who says that you have been a
good legislator to them and have done them any good?

(04:19:33):
Italy and sicily boast of Karandas, And there is Solon,
who is renowned among us. But what city has anything
to say about you? Is there any city which he
might name? I think, not, said Glaucon. Not even the
Homorrhage themselves pretend that he was a legislator. Well, but
is there any war on record which was carried on

(04:19:56):
successfully by him or aided by his counsels when he
was alive? There is not, or is there any invention
of his applicable to the arts or to human life,
such as taali Is the Malesian, or Anacarsis the Scythian,
and other ingenious men have conceived, which is attributed to him.
There is absolutely nothing of the kind. But if Homer

(04:20:17):
never did any public service, was he privately a guide
or teacher of any? Had he in his lifetime friends
who loved to associate with him, and who handed down
to posterity and Homeric way of life, such as was
established by Pythagoras, who was so greatly beloved for his wisdom,
and whose followers are to this day quite celebrated for

(04:20:39):
the order which was named after him. Nothing of the
kind is recorded of him. For surely Socrates Creophilus, the
companion of Homer, that child of flesh, whose name always
makes us laugh, might be more justly ridiculed for his
stupidity if, as he said, Homer was greatly neglected by
him and others in his own day when he was alive. Yes,

(04:21:01):
I replied, that is the tradition. But can you imagine,
glaucon that if Homer had really been able to educate
and improve mankind, if he had possessed knowledge, had not
been a mere imitator, can you imagine, I say, that
he would not have had many followers and been honored
and loved by them. Protagoras of Abdera, and Prodigus of Sirius,

(04:21:24):
and a host of others have only to whisper to
their contemporaries. You will never be able to manage either
your own house or your own state until you appoint
us to be your ministers of education. And this ingenious
device of theirs has such an effect in making men
love them that their companions all but carry them about
on their shoulders. And is it conceivable that the contemporaries

(04:21:47):
of Homer, or again of Hersiod, would have allowed either
of them to go about as rhapsodists if they had
really been able to make mankind virtuous, would they not
have been as unwilling to part with them as with gold,
and have compelled them to stay at home with them?
Or if the master would not stay, then the disciples
would have followed him about everywhere until they got education enough. Yes, Socrates,

(04:22:13):
that I think is quite true. Then must we not
infer that all these poetical individuals, beginning with Homer, are
only imitators. They copy images of virtue and the like,
but the truth they never reach. The poet is like
a painter, who, as we have already observed, will make

(04:22:33):
a likeness of a cobbler, though he understands nothing of cobbling,
and his picture is good enough for those who know
no more than he does, and judge only by colors
and figures. Quite so, in like manner, the poets, with
his words and phrases, may be said to lay on
the colors of the several arts, himself, understanding their nature

(04:22:54):
only enough to imitate them. And other people who are
as ignorant as he is, and judge only from his words,
imagine that if he speaks of cobbling, or of military tactics,
or of anything else, in meter and harmony and rhythm.
He speaks very well, such is the sweet influence which
melody and rhythm by nature have. And I think that

(04:23:17):
you must have observed again and again what a poor
appearance the tales of poets make when stripped of the
colors which music puts upon them. And recited in simple prose, Yes,
he said, they are like faces which were never really beautiful,
but only blooming, And now the bloom of youth has
passed away from them. Exactly Here is another point. The

(04:23:40):
imitator or maker of the image knows nothing of true existence.
He knows appearances only. Am I not right? Yes? Then
let us have a clear understanding, and not be satisfied
with half an explanation. Proceed of the painter. We saw
that he will paint rains, and he will paint a bit. Yes,
and the worker in leather and brass will make them, certainly.

(04:24:03):
But does the painter know the right form of the
bit and rains? Nay, hardly, even the workers in brass
and leather who make them. Only the horseman who knows
how to use them, he knows their right form, most true?
And may we not say the same of all things?
What that there are three arts which are concerned with
all things, one which uses, another which makes, a third

(04:24:27):
which imitates them. Yes, and the excellence or beauty or
truth of every structure, animate or inanimate, and every action
of man is relative to the use for which nature
or the artist has intended them. True, then the user
of them must have the greatest experience of them, and
he must indicate to the maker the good or bad

(04:24:49):
qualities which develop themselves in use. For example, the flute
player will tell the flute maker which of his flutes
is satisfactory to the performer. He will tell him how
he ought to make them, and the other will attend
to his instructions. Of course, the one knows, and therefore
speaks with authority about the goodness and badness of fruits,

(04:25:09):
while the other, confiding in him, will do what he
is told by him. True, the instrument is the same,
but about the excellence or badness of it, the maker
will only attain to a correct belief, and this he
will gain from him who knows, by talking to him
and being compelled to hear what he has to say.
Whereas the user will have knowledge, true, what will the

(04:25:31):
imitator have? Either will he know from use whether or
no his drawing is correct or beautiful, or will he
have right opinion from being compelled to associate with another
who knows and gives him instructions about what he should draw.
Neither then he will no more have true opinion than
he will have knowledge about the goodness or badness of
his imitations. I suppose not the imitative artists will be

(04:25:54):
in a brilliant state of intelligence about his own creations. Nay,
very much the reverse. And still he will go on
imitating without knowing what makes a thing good or bad,
and may be expected, therefore to imitate only that which
appears to be good to the ignorant multitude, Just sir.
Thus far then we are pretty well agreed that the

(04:26:16):
imitator has no knowledge worth mentioning of what he imitates.
Imitation is only a kind of play or sport. And
the tragic poets, whether they write in iambic or in
heroic verse, are imitators in the highest degree. Very true,
And now tell me, I conjure you, has not imitation
been shown by us to be concerned with that which

(04:26:38):
is thrice removed from the truth? Certainly? And what is
the faculty in man to which imitation is addressed. What
do you mean? I will explain. The body, which is
large when seen near, appears small when seen at a distance. True,
And the same object appears straight when looked at out
of the water, and crooked within the world. And the

(04:27:00):
concave becomes convex owing to the illusion about colors to
which the sight is liable. Thus every sort of confusion
is revealed within. And this is that weakness of the
human mind on which the art of conjuring and of
deceiving by light and shadow and other ingenious devices imposes,
having an effect upon us like magic. True, and the

(04:27:24):
arts of measuring and numbering and weighing come to the
rescue of the human understanding there is the beauty of them,
and the apparent greater or less, or more or heavier
no longer have the mastery over us, but give way
before calculation and measure and waight most true. And this
surely must be the work of the calculating and rational

(04:27:46):
principle in the soul, to be sure. And when this
principle measures and certifies that some things are equal, and
that some are greater or less than others, there occurs
an apparent contradiction true. But were we not saying that
such a contradiction is impossible, the same faculty cannot have
contrary opinions at the same time about the same thing.

(04:28:08):
Very true, then that part of the soul which has
an opinion contrary to measure is not the same with
that which has an opinion in accordance with measure. True,
And the better part of the soul is likely to
be that which trusts to measure and calculation. Certainly, and
that which is opposed to them is one of the
inferior principles of the soul. No doubt this was the

(04:28:30):
conclusion at which I was seeking to arrive when I
said that painting or drawing, and imitation in general, when
doing their own proper work, are far removed from truth,
and the companions and friends and associates of a principle
within us which is equally removed from reason, and that
they have no true or healthy aim. Exactly, the imitative

(04:28:53):
art is an inferior who marries an inferior and has
inferior offspring. Very true. And is this confined to the
sight only, or does it extend to the hearing? Also,
relating in fact to what we term poetry, probably the
same would be true of poetry. Do not rely, I said,
on a probability derived from the analogy of painting. But

(04:29:16):
let us examine further and see whether the faculty with
which poetical imitation is concerned is good or bad By
all means we may state the question. Thus, imitation imitates
the actions of men, whether voluntary or involuntary, on which,
as they imagine, a good or bad result has ensued,

(04:29:36):
and they rejoice or sorrow. Accordingly, is there anything more? No,
there is nothing else. But in all this variety of
circumstances is the man at unity with himself? Or rather,
as in the instance of sight, there was confusion and
opposition in his opinions about the same things. So here
also is there not strife and inconsistency in his life?

(04:30:00):
Though I need hardly raise the question again, for I
remember that all this has been already admitted, and the
soul has been acknowledged by us to be full of
these and ten thousand similar oppositions occurring at the same moment.
And we were right, he said, yes, I said, thus
far we were right. But there was an omission which

(04:30:21):
must now be supplied. What was the omission? Were we
not saying that a good man who has the misfortune
to lose his son or anything else which is most
dear to him, will bear the loss with more equanimity
than another. Yes, but will he have no sorrow? Or
shall we say that although he cannot help sorrowing, he
will moderate his sorrow. The latter he said is the

(04:30:45):
truer statement. Tell me. Will he be more likely to
struggle and hold out against his sorrow when he is
seen by his equals or when he is alone? It
will make a great difference whether he is seen or not.
When he is by himself, he will not mind saying
or doing many things which he would be ashamed of
any one hearing or seeing him do. True, there is

(04:31:07):
a principle of law and reason in him which bids
him resist, as well as a feeling of his misfortune
which is forcing him to indulge his sorrow. True. But
when a man is drawn in two opposite directions to
and from the same object, this, as we affirm, necessarily
implies two distinct principles in him. Certainly one of them

(04:31:29):
is ready to follow the guidance of the law. Under
you mean the law would say that to be patient
under suffering is best, and that we should not give
way to impatience, as there is no knowing whether such
things are good or evil, and nothing is gained by impatience.
Also because no human thing is of serious importance, and
grief stands in the way of that which, at that

(04:31:51):
moment is most required. What is most required, he asked
that we should take counsel about what has happened, and
when the ice have been thrown, order our affairs in
the way which reason deems best. Knots like children who
have had a fall, keeping hold of the parts struck,
and wasting time in setting up a howl, but always

(04:32:12):
accustoming the soul forthwith to apply a remedy, raising up
that which is sickly and fallen, banishing the cry of
sorrow by the healing art. Yes, he said, That is
the true way of meeting the attacks of fortune. Yes,
I said, And the higher principle is ready to follow
this suggestion of reason clearly. And the other principle, which

(04:32:33):
inclines us to recollection of our troubles and to lamentation,
and can never have enough of them, we may call irrational, useless,
and cowardly. Indeed, we may and does not the latter,
I mean the rebellious principle furnish a great variety of
materials for imitation, whereas the wise and calm temperaments, being

(04:32:54):
always nearly equable, is not easy to imitate or to
appreciate when imitating, especially at a public festival, when a
promiscuous crowd is assembled in a theater, for the feeling
represented is one to which they are strangers. Certainly, then
the imitative poet who aims at being popular is not
by nature made, nor is his art intended to please

(04:33:18):
or to affect a rational principle in the soul. But
he will prefer the passionate and fitful temper, which is
easily imitated. Clearly, and now we may fairly take him
and place him by the side of the painter, For
he is like him in two ways. First, inasmuch as
his creations have an inferior degree of truth. In this

(04:33:39):
I say he is like him. And he is also
like him in being concerned with an inferior part of
the soul. And therefore we shall be right in refusing
to admit him into a well ordered state, because he
awakens and nourishes and strengthens the feelings and impairs the reason.
As in a city when the evil are permitted to

(04:33:59):
have a authority and the good are put out of
the way. So in the soul of man, as we maintain,
the imitative poet implants an evil constitution, for he indulges
the irrational nature, which has no discernment of greater and less,
but thinks the same thing at one time great and
another small. He is a manufacturer of images, and is

(04:34:22):
very far removed from the truth exactly. But we have
not yet brought forward the heaviest count in our accusation.
The power which poetry has of harming even the good,
and there are very few who are not harmed, is
surely an awful thing. Yes, certainly, if the effect is
what you say here. And judge the best of us

(04:34:44):
as I conceive when we listen to a passage of
Homer or one of the Tragedians, in which he represents
some pitiful hero who is drawling out his sorrows in
a long old ragon, for weeping or smiting his breast.
The best of us, you know, delight in giveing way
to sympathy, and are in raptures at the excellence of
the poet who stirs our feelings. Most yes, of course

(04:35:06):
I know. But when any sorrow of our own happens
to us, then you may observe that we pride ourselves
on the opposite quality we would fain be quiet and patient.
This is the manly part, and the other which delighted
us in the recitation is now deemed to be the
part of a woman. Very true, he said. Now, can

(04:35:27):
we be right in praising and admiring another who is
doing that which any one of us would abominate and
be ashamed of in his own person. No, he said,
that is certainly not reasonable. Nay, I said, quite reasonable
from one point of view. What point of view? If
you consider? I said that when in misfortune we feel

(04:35:49):
a natural hunger and desire to relieve our sorrow by
weeping and lamentation, And that this feeling, which is kept
under control in our own calamities, is satisfied and lighted
by the poets. The better nature in each of us,
not having been sufficiently trained by reason or habit, allows
the sympathetic element to break loose, because the sorrow is another's,

(04:36:11):
and the spectator fancies that there can be no disgrace
to himself in praising and pitying any one who comes
telling him what a good man he is and making
a fuss about his troubles. He thinks that the pleasure
is again, and why should he be supercilious and lose this?
And the poem? Too few persons ever reflect, as I

(04:36:32):
should imagine, that from the evil of other men, something
of evil is communicated to themselves. And so the feeling
of sorrow, which has gathered strength at the sight of
the misfortunes of others, is with difficulty repressed in our
own how very true, and does not the same hold
also of the ridiculous. There are jests which you would

(04:36:53):
be ashamed to make yourself, and yet on the comic stage,
or indeed in private, when you hear them, you are
greatly amused by them, and are not at all disgusted
at their unseemliness. The case of pity is repeated. There
is a principle in human nature which is disposed to
raise a laugh. And this which you, once restrained by

(04:37:16):
reason because you were afraid of being thought of buffoon,
is now let out again, And having stimulated the risible
faculty at the theater, you are betrayed unconsciously to yourself
into playing the comic poet at home. Quite true, he said,
And the same may be said of lust and anger,
and all the other affections of desire, and pain and pleasure,

(04:37:39):
which are held to be inseparable from every action. In
all of them, poetry feeds and waters the passions. Instead
of drying them up. She lets them rule, although they
ought to be controlled. If mankind are ever to increase
in happiness and virtue, I cannot deny it. Therefore, glaucan
I said, whenever you meet with any of the eulogists

(04:38:01):
of Homer, declaring that he has been the educator of Hellas,
and that he is profitable for education and for the
ordering of human things, and that you should take him
up again and again and get to know him and
regulate your whole life according to him. We may love
and honor those who say these things. They are excellent
people as far as their lives extend. And we are

(04:38:22):
ready to acknowledge that Homer is the greatest of poets
and first of tragedy writers. But we must remain affirm
in our conviction that hymns to the gods and praises
of famous men are the only poetry which ought to
be admitted into our state. For if you go beyond this,
and allow the honeyed muse to enter, either in epic

(04:38:44):
or lyric verse, not law and the reason of mankind,
which by common consent have ever been deemed best, but
pleasure and pain will be the rulers in our state.
That is most true, he said. And now, since we
have reverted to the son object of poetry, that this
our defense served to show the reasonableness of our former

(04:39:06):
judgment in sending away out of our state, and arts
having the tendencies which we have described for reason constrained us.
But that she may not impute to us any harshness
or want of politeness. Let us tell her that there
is an ancient quarrel between philosophy and poetry, of which
there are many proofs, such as the saying of the

(04:39:28):
yelping hound howling at her lord, or of one Mighty
in the vain talk of fools, than the mob of
sages circumventing Zeus and the subtle thinkers, who are beggars
after all, And there are innumerable other signs of ancient
enmity between them. Notwithstanding this, let us assure our sweet
friend and the sister arts of imitation, that if she

(04:39:50):
will only prove her title to exist in a well
ordered state, we shall be delighted to receive her. We
are very conscious of her charms, but we may not,
on that account betray the truth. I dare say, Glaucon,
that you are as much charmed by her as I am,
especially when she appears in Homer. Yes, indeed I am

(04:40:11):
greatly charmed. Shall I propose then that she be allowed
to return from exile, but upon this condition, only that
she make a defense of herself in lyrical or some
other meter. Certainly, and we may further grant to those
of her defenders who are lovers of poetry, and yet
not poets, the permission to speak in prose on her behalf.

(04:40:33):
Let them show not only that she is pleasant, but
also useful to states and to human life. And we
will listen in a kindly spirit, For if this can
be proved, we shall surely be the gainers. I mean,
if there is a use in poetry as well as delight. Certainly,
he said, we shall be the gainers. If her defense fails, then,

(04:40:57):
my dear friend, like other persons who are enamored of something,
but put a restraint upon themselves when they think their
desires are a post to their interests. So too must we,
after the manner of lovers, give her up, though not
without a struggle. We too are inspired by that love
of poetry which the education of noble states has implanted
in us, and therefore we would have her appear at

(04:41:19):
her best and truest. But so long as she is
unable to make good her defense, this argument of ours
shall be a charm to us, which we will repeat
to ourselves while we listen to her, strange that we
may not fall away into the childish love of her
which captivates the many. At all events, we are well
aware that poetry, being such as we have described, is

(04:41:43):
not to be regarded seriously, as ititating to the truth.
And he who listens to her, fearing for the safety
of the city which is within him, should be on
his guard against her seductions, and make our words his law. Yes,
he said, I quite agree with you, Yes, I said,
my dear Glaucon. For great is the issue at stake,

(04:42:04):
greater than appears, whether a man is to be good
or bad? And what will anyone be profited if under
the influence of honor, or money or power I or
under the excitement of poetry, he neglect justice and virtue. Yes,
he said, I have been convinced by the argument, as
I believe that any one else would have been. And

(04:42:25):
yet no mention has been made of the greatest prizes
and rewards which await virtue. What are there any greater? Still?
If there are, they must be of inconceivable greatness. Why,
I said, what was ever great in a short time?
The whole period of three score years and ten is
surely but a little thing in comparison with eternity. Say

(04:42:47):
rather nothing, he replied, And should an immortal being seriously
think of this little space rather than of the whole
of the whole? Certainly? But why do you ask? Are
you not aware? I said that the soul of man
is immortal and imperishable. He looked at me in astonishment
and said, no, by Heaven. And are you really prepared

(04:43:10):
to maintain this? Yes, I said, I ought to be,
and you too. There is no difficulty in proving it.
I see a great difficulty. But I should like to
hear you state this argument of which you make so light. Listen, then,
I am attending there is a thing which you call
good and another which you call evil, Yes, he replied.

(04:43:33):
Would you agree with me in thinking that the corrupting
and destroying element is the evil, and the saving and
improving element the good. Yes, And you admit that everything
has a good and also an evil, as ophthalmia is
the evil of the eyes, and disease of the whole body,
as mildew is of cord, and rot of timber, or

(04:43:53):
rust of copper and iron. In everything, or in almost everything,
there is an inherent evil and disease, yes, he said.
And anything which is infected by any of these evils
is made evil, and at last wholly dissolves and dies. True.
The vice and evil which is inherent in each is
the destruction of each. And if this does not destroy them,

(04:44:16):
there is nothing else that will for good certainly will
not destroy them, nor again, that which is neither good
nor evil, certainly not. If then we find any nature which,
having this inherent corruption, cannot be dissolved or destroyed, we
may be certain that of such a nature there is
no destruction that may be assumed. Well, I said, and

(04:44:37):
is there no evil which corrupts the soul? Yes, he said.
There are all the evils which we were just now
passing in review unrighteousness, intemperance, cowardice, ignorance. But does any
of these dissolve or destroy her? And here do not
let us fall into the error of supposing that the
unjust and foolish man, when he is detected, perishes through

(04:44:59):
his own injustice, which is an evil of the soul.
Take the analogy of the body. The evil of the
body is a disease which wastes and reduces and annihilates
the body. And all the things of which we were
just now speaking come to annihilation through their own corruption,
attaching to them and inhering in them, and so destroying them.
Is not this true? Yes, consider the soul in like manner.

(04:45:23):
Does the injustice or other evil which exists in the
soul waste and consume her? Do they, by attaching to
the soul and inhering in her, at last bring her
to death and so separate her from the body? Certainly not.
And yet I said, it is unreasonable to suppose that
anything can perish from without through affection of external evil,

(04:45:44):
which could not be destroyed from within by a corruption
of its own. It is, he replied, Consider, I said,
Glaucon that even the badness of food, whether staleness, decomposition,
or any other bad quality, when confined to the actual food,
food is not supposed to destroy the body. Although if
the badness of food communicates corruption to the body, then

(04:46:06):
we should say that the body has been destroyed by
a corruption of itself, which is disease brought on by this.
But that the body, being one thing, can be destroyed
by the badness of food, which is another, and which
does not engender any natural infection. This we shall absolutely deny,
very true. And on the same principle, unless some bodily

(04:46:28):
evil can produce an evil of the soul, we must
not suppose that the soul, which is one thing, can
be dissolved by any merely external evil which belongs to another. Yes,
he said, there is reason in that. Either then let
us refute this conclusion, or while it remains unrefuted, let
us never say that fever or any other disease, or

(04:46:50):
the knife put to the throat, or even the cutting
up of the whole body into the minutest pieces, can
destroy the soul until she herself is proved to become
more unholy or un righteous in consequence of these things
being done to the body. But that the soul or
anything else, if not destroyed by an internal evil, can
be destroyed by an external evil. Is not to be

(04:47:11):
affirmed by any man. And surely, he replied, no one
will ever prove that the souls of men become more
unjust in consequence of death. But if some one who
would rather not admit the immortality of the soul boldly
denies this and says that the dying do really become
more evil and unrighteous, then if the speaker is right,

(04:47:31):
I suppose that injustice, like disease, must be assumed to
be fatal to the unjust, and that those who take
this disorder die by the natural inherent power of destruction
which evil has, and which kills them sooner or later.
But in quite another way from that in which at
present the wicked received death at the hands of others
as the penalty of their deeds. Nay, he said, in

(04:47:55):
that case, injustice, if fatal to the unjust, will not
be so very terrible to him, for he will be
delivered from evil. But I rather suspect the opposite to
be the truth, and that injustice, which if it have
the power, will murder others, keeps the murderer alive. Aye,
and well awake too. So far removed is her dwelling

(04:48:15):
place from being a house of death? True, I said,
if the inherent, natural vice or evil of the soul
is unable to kill or destroy her, hardly will that
which is appointed to be the destruction of some other
body destroy a soul or anything else except that of
which it was appointed to be the destruction. Yes, that
can hardly be. But the soul, which cannot be destroyed

(04:48:37):
by an evil, whether inherent or external, must exist forever.
And if existing forever, must be immortal. Certainly that is
the conclusion, I said. And if a true conclusion, then
the souls must always be the same, For if none
be destroyed, they will not diminish in number, neither will
they increase. For the increase of the immortal dns nature

(04:49:00):
must come from something mortal, and all things would thus
end in immortality. Very true, But this we cannot believe.
Reason will not allow us any more than we can
believe the soul, in her truest nature, to be full
of variety and difference and dissimilarity. What do you mean,
he said the soul, I said, being as is now

(04:49:20):
proven immortal, must be the fairest of compositions, and cannot
be compounded of many elements. Certainly not her immortality is
demonstrated by the previous argument, and there are many other proofs.
But to see her as she really is, not as
we now behold her, marred by communion with the body
and other miseries, you must contemplate her with the eye

(04:49:42):
of reason, in her original purity, and then her beauty
will be revealed, and justice and injustice, and all the
things which we have described will be manifested more clearly.
Thus far we have spoken the truth concerning her as
she appears at present. But we must remember also we
have seen her only in a condition which may be
compared to that of the sea god Glaucus, whose original

(04:50:06):
image can hardly be discerned, because his natural members are
broken off and crushed and damaged by the waves in
all sorts of ways, and incrustations have grown over them
of sea weed and shells and stones, so that he
is more like some monster than he is to his
own natural form. And the soul which we behold is
in a similar condition, disfigured by ten thousand ills. But

(04:50:29):
not there, Glaucon, Not there must we look? Where then
at her love of wisdom. Let us see whom she affects,
and what society and converse she seeks in virtue of
her near kindred with the immortal and eternal and divine. Also,
how different she would become if wholly following this superior principle,

(04:50:50):
and borne by a divine impulse out of the ocean
in which she now is, and disengaged from the stones
and shells and things of earth and rock, which in
wild variety spring up around her, because she feeds upon
earth and is overgrown by the good things of this life,
as they are termed. Then you would see her as
she is, and know whether she have one shape only

(04:51:12):
or many, or what her nature is, of her affections,
and of the forms which she takes in this present life.
I think that we have now said enough, true, he replied,
And thus I said, we have fulfilled the conditions of
the argument. We have not introduced the rewards and glories
of justice, which, as you were saying, are to be

(04:51:32):
found in Homer and Hesiod. But justice in her own
nature has been shown to be best for the soul.
In her own nature, Let a man do what is just,
whether he had the ring of guijees or not. And
even if in addition to the ring of guigees he
put on the helmet of hades. Very true, and now
glaucon there will be no harm in further enumerating how

(04:51:54):
many and how great are the rewards which justice and
other virtues procure to the soul from gods and men,
both in life and after death. Certainly not, he said,
will you repay me then, what you borrowed in the argument?
What did I borrow the assumption that the just man
should appear unjust and the unjust just. For you were

(04:52:16):
of opinion that even if the true stated, the case
could not possibly escape the eyes of gods and men.
Still this admission ought to be made for the sake
of the argument, in order that pure justice might be
weighed against pure injustice. Do you remember I should be
much to blame if I had forgotten? Then, as the
cause is decided, I demand on behalf of justice that

(04:52:39):
the estimation in which she is held by gods and men,
and which we acknowledge to be her due, should now
be restored to her by us, since she has been
shown to confer reality and not to deceive those who
truly possess her. Let what has been taken from her
be given back, that so she may win that palm
of appearance which is hers, also which she gives to

(04:53:00):
her own. The demand, he said, is just in the
first place, I said, and this is the first thing
which you will have to give back. The nature both
of the just and unjust, is truly known to the gods, granted,
And if they are both known to them, one must
be the friend and the other the enemy of the gods.
As we admit it from the beginning, true and the

(04:53:23):
friend of the gods may be supposed to receive from
them all things at their best, excepting only such evil
as is the necessary consequence of former sins. Certainly, then
this must be our notion of the just man, that
even when he is in poverty, or sickness, or in
any other seeming misfortune, all things will in the end

(04:53:44):
work together for good to him in life and death.
For the Gods have a care of any one whose
desire is to become just and to be like God,
as far as man can attain the divine likeness by
the pursuit of virtue. Yes, he said, if he is
like God, he will surely not be neglected by him,
and of the unjust, may not the opposite be supposed? Certainly,

(04:54:06):
such then are the palms of victory which the gods
give the just. That is my conviction. And what do
they receive of men? Look at things as they really are,
and you will see that the clever unjust are in
the case of runners who run well from the starting
place to the goal, but not back again. From the goal.
They go off at a great pace, but in the

(04:54:27):
end only look foolish, slinking away with their ears draggling
on their shoulders, and without a crown. But the true
runner comes to the finish and receives the prize and
is crowned. And this is the way with the just.
He who endures to the end of every action and
occasion of his entire life, has a good report and
carries off the prize which men have to bestow. True

(04:54:51):
and now you must allow me to repeat of the
just the blessings which you were attributing to the fortunate unjust.
I shall say of them what you were say saying
of the others, that as they grow older, they become
rulers in their own city. If they care to be,
they marry whom they like and give in marriage to
whom they will. All that you said of the others,
I now say of these, And on the other hand,

(04:55:14):
of the unjust, I say that the greater number, even
though they escape in their youth, are found out at
last and look foolish at the end of their course.
And when they come to be old and miserable, are
flouted alike by stranger and citizen. They are beaten. And
then come those things unfit for ears, polite as you

(04:55:35):
truly term them. They will be racked and have their
eyes burned out, as you were saying. And you may
suppose that I have repeated the remainder of your tale
of horrors. But will you let me assume, without reciting them,
that these things are true? Certainly, he said, what you
say is true. These, then, are the prizes and rewards

(04:55:56):
and gifts which are bestowed upon the just by gods
and men in this present life, in addition to the
other good things which Justice of herself provides. Yes, he said,
and they are fair and lasting. And yet I said,
all these are as nothing, either in number or greatness,
in comparison with those other recompenses which await both just

(04:56:17):
and unjust after death. And you ought to hear them,
and then both just and unjust will have received from
us a full payment of the debt which the argument
owes to them. Speak, he said, there are few things
which I would more gladly hear. Well, I said, I
will tell you a tale, not one of the tales

(04:56:38):
which Odysseus tells to the hero Alcinus. Yet this too
is a tale of a hero er, the son of
Armenius of Hemphylian by birth. He was slain in battle,
and ten days afterwards, when the bodies of the dead
were taken up, already in a state of corruption, his
body was found unaffected by decay and carried home to
be buried. And on the twelfth death, as he was

(04:57:01):
lying on the funeral pyre, he returned to life and
told them what he had seen in the other world.
He said that when his soul left the body, he
went on a journey with a great company, and that
they came to a mysterious place at which there were
two openings in the earth. They were near together, and
over against them were two other openings in the heaven
above in the intermediate space, there were judges seated who

(04:57:24):
commanded the just. After they had given judgment on them,
and had bound their sentences in front of them, to
ascend by the heavenly way on the right hand, and
in like manner, the unjust were bidden by them to
descend by the lower way of the left hand. These
also bore the symbols of their deeds, but fastened on
their backs. He drew near, and they told him that

(04:57:45):
he was to be the messenger who would carry the
report of the other world to men. And they bade
him here and see all that was to be heard
and seen in that place. Then he beheld and saw
on one side the souls departing at either opening of
Heaven and Earth, when sentence had been given on them,
and at the two other openings other souls, some ascending
out of the earth dusty and worn with travel, some

(04:58:08):
descending out of Heaven, clean and bright, and arriving ever
and anon. They seemed to have come from a long journey,
And they went forth with gladness into the meadow, where
they encamped as at a festival. And those who knew
one another embraced and conversed the souls which came from earth,
curiously inquiring about the things above, and the souls which

(04:58:28):
came from heaven about the things beneath, and they told
one another of what had happened by the way, those
from below weeping and sorrowing at the remembrance of the
things which they had endured and seen in their journey
beneath the earth. Now the journey lasted a thousand years,
while those from above were describing heavenly delights and visions
of inconceivable beauty. The story Glaucon would take too long

(04:58:51):
to tell, but the sum was this. He said that
for every wrong which they had done to any one,
they suffered tenfold, or once in a hundred years, such
being reckoned to be the length of man's life, and
the penalty being thus paid ten times in a thousand years. If,
for example, there were any who had been the cause
of many deaths, or had betrayed or enslaved cities or armies,

(04:59:14):
or been guilty of any other evil behavior, for each
and all of their offenses, they received punishment ten times over,
and the rewards of beneficence and justice and holiness were
in the same proportion. I need hardly repeat what he
said concerning young children dying almost as soon as they
were born of piety and impiety to gods and parents,

(04:59:35):
and of murderers. There were retributions other and greater far
which he described. He mentioned that he was present when
one of the spirits asked another, whereas Ardaius the Great?
Now This Ardaius lived a thousand years before the time
of er. He had been the tyrant of some city
of Pamphylia, and had murdered his aged father and his
elder brother, and was said to have committed many other

(04:59:57):
abominable crimes. The answer the other spirit was, he comes
not hither and will never come. And this said he
was one of the dreadful sights which we ourselves witnessed.
We were at the mouth of the cavern, and having
completed all our experiences, were about to reascend, when of
a sudden Ardias appeared and several others, most of whom

(05:00:19):
were tyrants. And there were also besides the tyrants, private
individuals who had been great criminals. They were just as
they fancied, about to return into the upper world. But
the mouth, instead of admitting them, gave a roar whenever
any of these incurable sinners, or someone who had not
been sufficiently punished, tried to ascend, And then wild men

(05:00:41):
of fiery aspect, who were standing by and heard the sound,
seized and carried them off, And Ardias and others they
bound head and foot and hand, and threw them down,
and flayed them with scourges, and dragged them along the
road at the side, carding them on thorns like wool,
and declaring to the passers by what were their crimes,
and that they were being taken away to be cast

(05:01:03):
into hell. Of all the many terrors which they had endured,
he said that there was none like the terror which
each of them felt at that moment lest they should
hear the voice. And when there was silence, one by
one they ascended with exceeding joy. These said er were
the penalties and retributions, and there were blessings as great. Now.

(05:01:23):
When the spirits which were in the meadow had tearried
seven days, on the eighth they were obliged to proceed
on their journey. And on the fourth day after he
said that they came to a place where they could
see from above a line of light, straight as a column,
extending right through the whole heaven and through the earth,
in color resembling their rainbow, only brighter and purer another

(05:01:44):
day's journey brought them to the place, and there, in
the midst of the light, they saw the ends of
the chains of Heaven let down from above. For this
light is the belt of Heaven, and holds together the
circle of the universe, like the undergirdys of a trireme.
From these these ends is extended the spindle of Necessity
on which all the revolutions turn. The shaft and hook

(05:02:06):
of this spindle are made of steel, and the whorl
is made partly of steel and also partly of other materials.
Now the whorl is in form like the whorl used
on Earth, and the description of it implied that there
was one large hollow world which is quite scooped out,
and into this is fitted another lesser one, and another,
and another, and four others, making eight in all. Like

(05:02:29):
vessels which fit into one another, the worlds show their
edges on the upper side and on the lower side.
Altogether form one continuous whorl. This is pierced by the spindle,
which is driven home through the center of the eighth.
The first and outermost wall has the rim broadest, and
the seven inner worlds are narrower. In the following proportions.

(05:02:49):
The sixth is next to the first in size, the
fourth next to the sixth, Then comes the eighth. The
seventh is fifth, the fifth is sixth, the third is seventh, last,
and eighth comes the second. The largest is spangled, and
the seventh is brightest, the eighth colored by the reflected
light of the seventh. The second and fifth are in
color like one another, and yellower than the preceding. The

(05:03:12):
third has the whitest light, the fourth is reddish. The
sixth is in whiteness second. Now the whole spindle has
the same motion, but as the whole revolves in one direction,
the seventh inner circles move slowly in the other, and
of those the swiftness is the eighth. Next in swiftness
are the seventh, sixth, and fifth, which move together. Third

(05:03:33):
in swiftness appear to move according to the law of
this reversed motion, the fourth, the third appeared fourth, and
the second fifth. The spindle turns on the knees of necessity,
and on the upper surface of each circle is a
siren who goes round with them, hymning a single tone
or note. The eighth together for one harmony, and round
about at equal intervals. There is another band, three in number,

(05:03:56):
each sitting upon her throne. These are the faith daughters
of Necessity, who are clothed in white robes and have
chapelets upon their heads. Lechisis and Clotho and Atropos, who
accompany with their voices the harmony of the sirens. Lacisis
singing of the past, Clotho, of the present, Atropos of
the future Clotho, from time to time, assisting with a

(05:04:18):
touch of her right hand the revolution of the outer
circle of the war or spindle, and Atropos with her
left hand, touching and guiding the inner ones, and Lechisis,
laying hold of either in turn, first with one hand
and then with the other. When Er and the spirits arrived,
their duty was to go on at once to Lechisis.
But first of all there came a prophet who arranged

(05:04:39):
them in order. Then he took from the knees of Lachisis,
lts and samples of lives, and, having mounted a high pulpit,
spoke as follows, hear the word of Leakisis, the daughter
of Necessity. Mortal souls, behold a new cycle of life
and mortality. Your genius will not be allotted to you,
but you will choose your genius. And let him who

(05:05:00):
draws the first lot have the first choice, and the
life which he chooses shall be his destiny. Virtue is free,
and as a man honors or dishonors her, he will
have more or less of her. The responsibility is with
the chooser. God is justified. When the interpreter had thus spoken,
he scattered lots indifferently among them all and each of

(05:05:21):
them took up the lot which fell near him, All
but er himself he was not allowed. And each, as
he took his lot, perceived the number which he had obtained.
Then the interpreter placed on the ground before them the
samples of lives. And there were many more lives than
the souls present, and they were of all sorts. There
were lives of every animal and of man, in every condition.

(05:05:43):
And there were tyrannies among them, some lasting out the
tyrant's life, others which broke off in the middle and
came to an end in poverty and exile and beggary.
And there were lives of famous men, some who were
famous for their form and beauty, as well as for
their strength and success in games or again for their
birth and the qualities of their ancestors, and some who

(05:06:04):
were the reverse of famous for the opposite qualities, and
of women. Likewise, there was not, however, any definite character
in them, because the soul, when choosing a new life,
must of necessity become different. But there was every other quality,
and the all mingled with one another, and also with
elements of wealth and poverty, and disease and health. And

(05:06:25):
there were mean states also, And here, my dear Glaucon,
is the supreme peril of our human state, And therefore
the utmost care should be taken. Let each one of
us leave every other kind of knowledge and seek and
follow one thing only, if peradventure he may be able
to learn, and may find some one who will make

(05:06:46):
him able to learn and discern between good and evil,
and so to choose always and everywhere the better life.
As he has opportunity, he should consider the bearing of
all these things which have been mentioned severally and collectively
upon very virtue. He should know what the effect of
beauty is when combined with poverty or wealth in a
particular soul, And what are the good and evil consequences

(05:07:09):
of noble and humble birth of private and public station
of strength and weakness, of cleverness and dullness, and of
all the natural and acquired gifts of the soul, and
the operation of them when conjoined. He will then look
at the nature of the soul, and from the consideration
of all these qualities, he will be able to determine
which is the better and which is the worse. And

(05:07:30):
soul he will choose, giving the name of evil to
the life which will make his soul more unjust and good,
to the life which will make his soul more just.
All else he will disregard. For we have seen and
know that this is the best choice, both in life
and after death. A man must take with him into
the world below and adamantine faith in truth and right,

(05:07:54):
that there too he may be undazzled by the desire
of wealth or the other allurements of evil. Lest coming
upon tyrannies and similar villainies, he do irremediable wrongs to others,
and suffer yet worse himself. But let him know how
to choose the mean and avoid the extremes on either
side as far as possible, not only in this life,

(05:08:15):
but in all that which is to come. For this
is the way of happiness. And according to the report
of the messenger from the other world, this was what
the prophet said at the time. Even for the last comer,
if he chooses wisely and will live diligently, there is
upoint it a happy and not undesirable existence. Let not
him who chooses first be careless, and let not the

(05:08:37):
last despair. And when he had spoken, he who had
the first choice, came forward and in a moment chose
the greatest tyranny. His mind having been darkened by folly
and sensuality. He had not thought out the whole matter
before he chose, and did not at first sight perceive
that he was fated, among other evils, to devour his
own children. But when he had time to reflect and

(05:09:00):
saw what was in the lot, he began to beat
his breast and lament over his choice, forgetting the proclamation
of the prophet, for instead of throwing the blame of
his misfortune on himself, he accused chance and the gods
and everything rather than himself. Now he was one of
those who came from heaven, and in a former life
had dwelt in a well ordered state. But his virtue

(05:09:21):
was a matter of habit only, and he had no philosophy.
And it was true of others who were similarly overtaken,
that the greater number of them came from heaven, and
therefore they had never been schooled by trial, whereas the pilgrims,
who came from earth, having themselves suffered and seen others suffer,
were not in a hurry to choose, And owing to
this inexperience of theirs, and also because the lot was

(05:09:44):
a chance, many of the souls exchanged a good destiny
for an evil, or an evil for a good. For
if a man had, always, on his arrival in this world,
dedicated himself from the first to sound philosophy, and had
been moderately fortunate in the number of the lot, he might,
as the messenger reported, be happy here, and also his
journey to another life and return to this, instead of

(05:10:07):
being rough and underground, would be smooth and heavenly. Most curious,
he said, was the spectacle sad and laughable and strange,
for the choice of the souls was in most cases
based on their experience of a previous life. There he
saw the soul which had once been Orpheus, choosing the
life of a swan out of enmity to the race
of women, hating to be born of a woman because

(05:10:30):
they had been his murderers. He beheld also the soul
of Tamyris, choosing the life of a nightingale. Birds on
the other hand, like the swan and other musicians, wanting
to be men. The soul which obtained the twentieth lot
chose the life of a lion, and this was the
soul of Ajax, the son of Telemann, who would not
be a man, remembering the injustice which has done him

(05:10:52):
in the judgment about the arms. The next was Agamemnon,
who took the life of an eagle, because, like Ajax,
he hated hugh man nature by reason of his sufferings.
About the middle came the lot of Atalanta. She, seeing
the great fame of an athlete, was unable to resist
the temptation. And after her there followed the soul of Epeus,

(05:11:12):
the son of Panopeus, passing into the nature of a
woman cunning in the arts, and far away among the
last who chose the soul of the jester Thirsites, was
putting on the form of a monkey. There came also
the soul of Odysseus, having yet to make a choice,
and his lot happened to be the last of them all.
Now the recollection of former toils had disenchanted him of ambition,

(05:11:36):
and he went about for a considerable time in search
of the life of a private man who had no cares.
He had some difficulty in finding this which was lying
about that had been neglected by everybody else. And when
he saw it, he said that he would have done
the same had his lot been first instead of last,
and that he was delighted to have it. And not
only did men pass into animals, but I must also

(05:11:58):
mention that there were animals tame men wild, who changed
into one another and into corresponding human natures, the good
into the gentle, and the evil into the savage, in
all sorts of combinations. All the souls had now chosen
their lives, and they went in the order of their
choice to Lachisus, who sent with them the genius whom
they had severally chosen to be the guardian of their

(05:12:19):
lives and the fulfiller of the choice. This genius led
the souls first to Clotho and drew them within the
revolution of the spindle impelled by her hand, thus ratifying
the destiny of each and then when they were fastened
to this carried them to Atropos, who spun the threads
and made them irreversible. Whence, without turning round, they passed
beneath the throne of Necessity. And when they had all passed,

(05:12:42):
they marched on in a scorching heat to the plain
of Forgetfulness, which was a barren waste, destitute of trees
and verdure. And then towards evening they encamped by the
river of Unmindfulness, whose water no vessel could hold. Of
this they were all obliged to drink a certain quantity,
and those who were not saved by wisdom drank more
than was necessary, and each one, as he drank, forgot

(05:13:06):
all things. Now, after they had gone to rest, about
the middle of the night, there was a thunder storm
and earthquake, and then in an instant they were driven
upwards in all manner of ways to their birth, like
stars shooting. He himself was hindered from drinking the water.
But in what manner or by what means have returned
to the body, he could not say. Only in the

(05:13:28):
morning awakening, suddenly he found himself lying on the pyre,
and Thus Klaocan the tale has been saved and has
not perished, and will save us if we are obedient
to the words spoken, and we shall pass safely over
the river of forgetfulness, and our soul will not be defiled. Wherefore,
my counsel is that we hold fast ever to the

(05:13:52):
heavenly way, and follow after justice and virtue, always considering
that the soul is immortal and able to endure every
soul of good and every sort of evil. Thus shall
we live dear to one another and to the gods,
both while remaining here, and when, like conquerors in the
games who go round to gather gifts, we receive our reward,

(05:14:13):
and it shall be well with us, both in this
life and in the pilgrimage of a thousand years, which
we have been describing,