<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns:py="http://codespeak.net/lxml/objectify/pytype" py:pytype="TREE"><text xml:lang="eng"><body><div type="translation" xml:lang="eng" n="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0007.tlg128.perseus-eng3"><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="12"><p rend="indent">And since we have arrived at this point in our argument: What is more profitable to life than Art? And it was fire that discovered and still preserves all the arts. That is why they make Hephaestus the first of artificers. Man has been granted but a little time to live and, as Ariston<note resp="editor" place="unspecified" anchored="true">Von Arnim, <title rend="italic" xml:lang="lat">S.V.F.</title> i. p. 90, frag. 403; <foreign xml:lang="lat">cf.</foreign> Aristotle, <title rend="italic">Nicomachean Ethics</title>, i. 13. 12 (1102 b 7).</note> says, sleep, like a taxcollector, takes away half of that. But I would rather say that it is a question of darkness; for although a man might stay awake all night, yet no good would come of his wakefulness if fire did not give him the benefits of day and remove the difference between day and night.<note resp="editor" place="unspecified" anchored="true">A very corrupt passage. Adler’s reconstruction (<title rend="italic" xml:lang="deu">Wien. Stud.</title> xxxi. 308), with additions by Post, has been followed.</note> If, then, there is nothing more advantageous to man than life and life is many times increased by fire, how should fire not be the most useful of all things? </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="13"><p rend="indent">And, to be sure, will not that be the most advantageous of which each of the senses has the greatest proportion? Do you not perceive, then, that there is no one of the senses which uses moisture by itself without an admixture of air or fire; and that every sense partakes of fire inasmuch as it supplies the vital energy; and especially that sight, the keenest of the physical senses,<note resp="editor" place="unspecified" anchored="true"><foreign xml:lang="lat">Cf.</foreign> Plato, <title rend="italic">Phaedrus</title>, 250 d; <foreign xml:lang="lat">cf.</foreign> <title rend="italic" xml:lang="lat">Mor.</title> 654 d-e, 681 e.</note> is an ignited mass of fire<note resp="editor" place="unspecified" anchored="true"><foreign xml:lang="lat">Cf.</foreign> von Arnim, <title rend="italic" xml:lang="lat">S.V.F.</title> ii, pp. 196, 199; but Post believes the words may mean <q>a chain of fire</q> linking the eye with its object.</note> and is that which has made us believe<note resp="editor" place="unspecified" anchored="true">It is the visible heavens and their fire that make us believe by <q>declaring the glory</q> of the celestial gods. See A. S. Pease, <title>Caeli Enarrant,</title> <title rend="italic">Harvard Theological Review</title>, xxxiv (1941), pp. 163-200.</note> in the gods? And further, through sight, as Plato<note resp="editor" place="unspecified" anchored="true"><title rend="italic">Timaeus</title>, 47 a-b.</note> says, we are able to conform our souls to the movements of the celestial bodies. </p></div></div></body></text></TEI>