Phaedo (71-72)

Phaedo. And if it becomes smaller, it must have been greater and then have become smaller? That is true, said he. And the weaker is generated from the stronger, and the slower from the quicker? Certainly. And the worse from the better and the more just from the more unjust? Of course. Then, said he, we have this fact sufficiently established, that all things are generated in this way, opposites from opposites? Certainly. Now then, is there between all these pairs of opposites what may be called two kinds of generation, from one to the other and back again from the other to the first? Between a larger thing and a smaller thing there is increment and diminution and we call one increasing and the other decreasing, do we not? Yes, said he. And similarly analyzing and combining, and cooling and heating, and all opposites in the same way. Even if we do not in every case have the words to express it, yet in fact is it not always inevitable that there is a process of generation from each to the other? Certainly, said he. Well then, said Socrates, is there anything that is the opposite of living, as being awake is the opposite of sleeping? Certainly, said Cebes. What? Being dead, said he. Then these two are generated from each other, and as they are two, so the processes between them are two; is it not so? Of course. Now, said Socrates, I will tell about one of the two pairs of which I just spoke to you and its intermediate processes; and do you tell me about the other. I say one term is sleeping and the other is being awake, and being awake is generated from sleeping, and sleeping from being awake, and the processes of generation are, in the latter case, falling asleep, and in the former, waking up. Do you agree, or not? Certainly. Now do you, said he, tell me in this way about life and death. Do you not say that living is the opposite of being dead? I do. And that they are generated one from the other? Yes. Now what is it which is generated from the living? The dead, said he. And what, said Socrates, from the dead? I can say only one thing—the living. From the dead, then, Cebes, the living, both things and persons, are generated? Evidently, said he. Then, said Socrates, our souls exist in the other world. So it seems. And of the two processes of generation between these two, the one is plain to be seen; for surely dying is plain to be seen, is it not? Certainly, said he. Well then, said Socrates, what shall we do next? Shall we deny the opposite process, and shall nature be one-sided in this instance? Or must we grant that there is some process of generation the opposite of dying? Certainly we must, said he. What is this process? Coming to life again.

Phaedo. Then, said Socrates, if there be such a thing as coming to life again, this would be the process of generation from the dead to the living? Certainly. So by this method also we reach the conclusion that the living are generated from the dead, just as much as the dead from the living; and since this is the case, it seems to me to be a sufficient proof that the souls of the dead exist somewhere, whence they come back to life. I think, Socrates, that results necessarily from our previous admissions. Now here is another method, Cebes, to prove, as it seems to me, that we were right in making those admissions. For if generation did not proceed from opposite to opposite and back again, going round, as it were in a circle, but always went forward in a straight line without turning back or curving, then, you know, in the end all things would have the same form and be acted upon in the same way and stop being generated at all. What do you mean? said he. It is not at all hard, said Socrates, to understand what I mean. For example, if the process of falling asleep existed, but not the opposite process of waking from sleep, in the end, you know, that would make the sleeping Endymion mere nonsense; he would be nowhere, for everything else would be in the same state as he, sound asleep. Or if all thing were mixed together and never separated, the saying of Anaxagoras, all things are chaos, would soon come true. And in like manner, my dear Cebes, if all things that have life should die, and, when they had died, the dead should remain in that condition, is it not inevitable that at last all things would be dead and nothing alive? For if the living were generated from any other things than from the dead, and the living were to die, is there any escape from the final result that all things would be swallowed up in death? I see none, Socrates, said Cebes. What you say seems to be perfectly true. I think, Cebes, said he, it is absolutely so, and we are not deluded in making these admissions, but the return to life is an actual fact, and it is a fact that the living are generated from the dead and that the souls of the dead exist. And besides, Cebes rejoined, if it is true, Socrates, as you are fond of saying, that our learning is nothing else than recollection, then this would be an additional argument that we must necessarily have learned in some previous time what we now remember.