<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" n="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0059.tlg004.perseus-eng2" xml:lang="eng"><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="97"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">By Zeus,</q> said he, <q type="spoken">I am far from thinking that I know the
                    cause of any of these things, I who do not even dare to say, when one is added
                    to one, whether the one to which the addition was made has become two, or the
                    one which was added, or the one which was added and <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="97"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="97a"/>
            the one to which it was added
                    became two by the addition of each to the other. I think it is wonderful that
                    when each of them was separate from the other, each was one and they were not
                    then two, and when they were brought near each other this juxtaposition was the
                    cause of their becoming two. And I cannot yet believe that if one is divided,
                    the division causes it to become two; for this is the opposite of 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="97b"/>
            the cause which produced two in the former case; for
                    then two arose because one was brought near and added to another one, and now
                    because one is removed and separated from other. And I no longer believe that I
                    know by this method even how one is generated or, in a word, how anything is
                    generated or is destroyed or exists, and I no longer admit this method, but have
                    another confused way of my own.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/>Then one
                    day I heard a man reading from a book, as he said, by Anaxagoras, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="97c"/>
            that it is the mind that arranges and causes all
                    things. I was pleased with this theory of cause, and it seemed to me to be
                    somehow right that the mind should be the cause of all things, and I thought,
                    <q type="thought">If this is so, the mind in arranging things arranges everything and establishes
                    each thing as it is best for it to be. So if anyone wishes to find the cause of
                    the generation or destruction or existence of a particular thing, he must find
                    out what sort of existence, or passive state of any kind, or activity is best
                    for it. And therefore in respect to 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="97d"/>
            that
                    particular thing, and other things too, a man need examine nothing but what is
                    best and most excellent; for then he will necessarily know also what is
                    inferior, since the science of both is the same.</q> As I considered these things I
                    was delighted to think that I had found in Anaxagoras a teacher of the cause of
                    things quite to my mind, and I thought he would tell me whether the earth is
                    flat or round, and when 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="97e"/>
            he had told me that,
                    would go on to explain the cause and the necessity of it, and would tell me the
                    nature of the best and why it is best for the earth to be as it is; and if he
                    said the earth was in the center, he would proceed to show that it is best for
                    it to be in the center; and I had made up my mind that <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="98"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="98a"/>
            if he made those things clear to
            me, I would no longer yearn for any other kind of cause.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="98"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><q type="spoken" rend="merge">And I had determined
                    that I would find out in the same way about the sun and the moon and the other
                    stars, their relative speed, their revolutions, and their other changes, and why
                    the active or passive condition of each of them is for the best. For I never
                    imagined that, when he said they were ordered by intelligence, he would
                    introduce any other cause for these things than that it it is best for them to
                    be as they are. 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="98b"/>
            So I thought when he assigned
                    the cause of each thing and of all things in common he would go on and explain
                    what is best for each and what is good for all in common. I prized my hopes very
                    highly, and I seized the books very eagerly and read them as fast as I could,
                    that I might know as fast as I could about the best and the worst.
                            <milestone ed="P" unit="para"/>My glorious hope, my friend, was quickly snatched
                    away from me. As I went on with my reading I saw that the man made no use of
                    intelligence, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="98c"/>
            and did not assign any real
                    causes for the ordering of things, but mentioned as causes air and ether and
                    water and many other absurdities. And it seemed to me it was very much as if one
                    should say that Socrates does with intelligence whatever he does, and then, in
                    trying to give the causes of the particular thing I do, should say first that I
                    am now sitting here because my body is composed of bones and sinews, and the
                    bones are hard and have joints which divide them and the sinews 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="98d"/>
            can be contracted and relaxed and, with the flesh
                    and the skin which contains them all, are laid about the bones; and so, as the
                    bones are hung loose in their ligaments, the sinews, by relaxing and
                    contracting, make me able to bend my limbs now, and that is the cause of my
                    sitting here with my legs bent. Or as if in the same way he should give voice
                    and air and hearing and countless other things of the sort as causes for our
                    talking with each other, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="98e"/>
            and should fail to
                    mention the real causes, which are, that the Athenians decided that it was best
                    to condemn me, and therefore I have decided that it was best for me to sit here
                    and that it is right for me to stay and undergo whatever penalty they order.
                    <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="99"/>
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="99a"/>
                        For, by
                    Dog, I fancy these bones and sinews of mine would have been in <placeName key="perseus,Megara">Megara</placeName> or <placeName key="tgn,7002683">Boeotia</placeName> long ago, carried thither by an opinion of what was
                    best, if I did not think it was better and nobler to endure any penalty the city
                    may inflict rather than to escape and run away. </q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="99"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><q type="spoken" rend="merge">
                    
                    But it is most absurd to call
                    things of that sort causes. If anyone were to say that I could not have done
                    what I thought proper if I had not bones and sinews and other things that I
                    have, he would be right. But to say that those things are the cause of my doing
                    what I do, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="99b"/>
            and that I act with intelligence
                    but not from the choice of what is best, would be an extremely careless way of
                    talking. Whoever talks in that way is unable to make a distinction and to see
                    that in reality a cause is one thing, and the thing without which the cause
                    could never be a cause is quite another thing. And so it seems to me that most
                    people, when they give the name of cause to the latter, are groping in the dark,
                    as it were, and are giving it a name that does not belong to it. And so one man
                    makes the earth stay below the heavens by putting a vortex about it, and another
                    regards the earth as a flat trough supported on a foundation of air; but they do
                    not look for 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="99c"/>
            the power which causes things to
                    be now placed as it is best for them to be placed, nor do they think it has any
                    divine force, but they think they can find a new Atlas more powerful and more
                    immortal and more all-embracing than this, and in truth they give no thought to
                    the good, which must embrace and hold together all things. Now I would gladly be
                    the pupil of anyone who would teach me the nature of such a cause; but since
                    that was denied me and I was not able to discover it myself or to learn of it
                    from anyone else, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="99d"/>
            do you wish me,
                    Cebes,</q> said he, <q type="spoken">to give you an account of the way in which I have
                    conducted my second voyage in quest of the cause?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">I wish it with all my heart,</q> he
                        replied.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">After this, then,</q> said
                    he, <q type="spoken">since I had given up investigating realities, I decided that I must
                    be careful not to suffer the misfortune which happens to people who look at the
                    sun and watch it during an eclipse. For some of them ruin their eyes unless they
                    look at its image in water 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="99e"/>
            or something of
                    the sort. I thought of that danger, and I was afraid my soul would be blinded if
                    I looked at things with my eyes and tried to grasp them with any of my senses.
                    So I thought I must have recourse to conceptions and examine in them the truth
                    of realities.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="100"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><q type="spoken" rend="merge">
                            Now perhaps my metaphor <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="100"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="100a"/>
            is not quite accurate; for I do not grant in the
                    least that he who studies realities by means of conceptions is looking at them
                    in images any more than he who studies them in the facts of daily life. However,
                    that is the way I began. I assume in each case some principle which I consider
                    strongest, and whatever seems to me to agree with this, whether relating to
                    cause or to anything else, I regard as true, and whatever disagrees with it, as
                    untrue. But I want to tell you more clearly what I mean; for I think you do not
                    understand now.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Not very well,
                    certainly,</q> said Cebes. 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="100b"/>
            <q type="spoken">Well,</q> said Socrates, <q type="spoken">this is what I mean. It is nothing
                    new, but the same thing I have always been saying, both in our previous
                    conversation and elsewhere. I am going to try to explain to you the nature of
                    that cause which I have been studying, and I will revert to those familiar
                    subjects of ours as my point of departure and assume that there are such things
                    as absolute beauty and good and greatness and the like. If you grant this and
                    agree that these exist, I believe I shall explain cause to you and shall prove
                    that 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="100c"/>
            the soul is immortal.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">You may assume,</q> said Cebes, <q type="spoken">that I
                    grant it, and go on.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then,</q>
                    said he, <q type="spoken">see if you agree with me in the next step. I think that if
                    anything is beautiful besides absolute beauty it is beautiful for no other
                    reason than because it partakes of absolute beauty; and this applies to
                    everything. Do you assent to this view of cause?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">I do,</q> said he.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Now I do not yet, understand,</q> he went on, <q type="spoken">nor can I
                    perceive those other ingenious causes. If anyone tells me that what makes a
                    thing beautiful is its lovely color, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="100d"/>
            or its
                    shape or anything else of the sort, I let all that go, for all those things
                    confuse me, and I hold simply and plainly and perhaps foolishly to this, that
                    nothing else makes it beautiful but the presence or communion (call it which you
                    please) of absolute beauty, however it may have been gained; about the way in
                    which it happens, I make no positive statement as yet, but I do insist that
                    beautiful things are made beautiful by beauty. For I think this is the safest
                    answer I can give to myself or to others, and if I cleave fast to this,
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="100e"/>
            I think I shall never be overthrown, and
                    I believe it is safe for me or anyone else to give this answer, that beautiful
                    things are beautiful through beauty. Do you agree?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">I do.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And
                    great things are great and greater things greater by greatness, and smaller
                    things smaller by smallness?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Yes.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="101"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And you would not
                    accept the statement, if you were told that one man was greater or smaller than
                    another by a head, <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="101"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="101a"/>
            but you would insist that you say only that every greater
                    thing is greater than another by nothing else than greatness, and that it is
                    greater by reason of greatness, and that which is smaller is smaller by nothing
                    else than smallness and is smaller by reason of smallness. For you would, I
                    think, be afraid of meeting with the retort, if you said that a man was greater
                    or smaller than another by a head, first that the greater is greater and the
                    smaller is smaller by the same thing, and secondly, that 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="101b"/>
            the greater man is greater by a head, which is small, and
                    that it is a monstrous thing that one is great by something that is small. Would
                    you not be afraid of this?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/>And Cebes
                    laughed and said, <q type="spoken">Yes, I should.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then,</q> he continued, <q type="spoken">you would be afraid to say that ten
                    is more than eight by two and that this is the reason it is more. You would say
                    it is more by number and by reason of number; and a two cubit measure is greater
                    than a one-cubit measure not by half but by magnitude, would you not? For you
                    would have the same fear.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Certainly,</q> said he.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Well,
                    then, if one is added to one 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="101c"/>
            or if one is
                    divided, you would avoid saying that the addition or the division is the cause
                    of two? You would exclaim loudly that you know no other way by which any thing
                    can come into existence than by participating in the proper essence of each
                    thing in which it participates, and therefore you accept no other cause of the
                    existence of two than participation in duality, and things which are to be two
                    must participate in duality, and whatever is to be one must participate in
                    unity, and you would pay no attention to the divisions and additions and other
                    such subtleties, leaving those for wiser men to explain. You would distrust
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="101d"/>
            your inexperience and would be afraid,
                    as the saying goes, of your own shadow; so you would cling to that safe
                    principle of ours and would reply as I have said. And if anyone attacked the
                    principle, you would pay him no attention and you would not reply to him until
                    you had examined the consequences to see whether they agreed with one another or
                    not; and when you had to give an explanation of the principle, you would give it
                    in the same way by assuming some other principle which seemed to you the best of
                    the higher ones, and so on until 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="101e"/>
            you reached
                    one which was adequate. You would not mix things up, as disputants do, in
                    talking about the beginning and its consequences, if you wished to discover any
                    of the realities; for perhaps not one of them thinks or cares in the least about
                    these things.
                    
                   They are so clever that they succeed in being well pleased with
                    themselves even when they mix everything up; <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="102"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="102a"/>
            but if you are a philosopher, I think
                    you will do as I have said.</q></said></p></div></div></body></text></TEI>