<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.tlg010.perseus-eng2" xml:lang="eng"><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="16"><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Socrates, do you not see how many we are and that we are all young men?  Are you not afraid that we shall join with Philebus and attack you, if you revile us?  However—for we understand your meaning—if there is any way or means of removing this confusion gently from our discussion
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="16b"/>and finding some better road than this to bring us towards the goal of our argument, kindly lead on, and we will do our best to follow for our present discussion, Socrates, is no trifling matter.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> No, it is not, boys, as Philebus calls you;  and there certainly is no better road, nor can there ever be, than that which I have always loved, though it has often deserted me, leaving me lonely and forlorn.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> What is the road?  Only tell us.</said></p><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="16c"/><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> One which is easy to point out, but very difficult to follow for through it all the inventions of art have been brought to light.  See this is the road I mean.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Go on what is it?</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> A gift of gods to men, as I believe, was tossed down from some divine source through the agency of a Prometheus together with a gleaming fire;  and the ancients, who were better than we and lived nearer the gods, handed down the tradition that all the things which are ever said to exist are sprung from one and many and have inherent in them the finite and the infinite.  This being the way in which these things are arranged,
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="16d"/>we must always assume that there is in every case one idea of everything and must look for it—for we shall find that it is there—and if we get a grasp of this, we must look next for two, if there be two, and if not, for three or some other number;  and again we must treat each of those units in the same way, until we can see not only that the original unit is one and many and infinite, but just how many it is.  And we must not apply the idea of infinite to plurality until we have a view of its whole number
	<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="16e"/>between infinity and one;  then, and not before, we may let each unit of everything pass on unhindered into infinity.</said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="17"><p><said who="#Socrates" rend="merge"><label>Soc.</label> The gods, then, as I said, handed down to us this mode of investigating, learning, and teaching one another;  but the wise men of the present day make the one
<milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="17"/><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="17a"/>and the many too quickly or too slowly, in haphazard fashion, and they put infinity immediately after unity; they disregard all that lies between them, and this it is which distinguishes between the dialectic and the disputatious methods of discussion.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> I think I understand you in part, Socrates, but I need a clearer statement of some things.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Surely my meaning, Protarchus, is made clear in the letters of the alphabet, which you were taught as a child; 
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="17b"/>so learn it from them.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> How?</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Sound, which passes out through the mouth of each and all of us, is one, and yet again it is infinite in number.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Yes, to be sure.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> And one of us is no wiser than the other merely for knowing that it is infinite or that it is one;  but that which makes each of us a grammarian is the knowledge of the number and nature of sounds.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Very true.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> And it is this same knowledge which makes the musician.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> How is that?</said></p><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="17c"/><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Sound is one in the art of music also, so far as that art is concerned.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Of course.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> And we may say that there are two sounds, low and high, and a third, which is the intermediate, may we not?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Yes.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> But knowledge of these facts would not suffice to make you a musician, although ignorance of them would make you, if I may say so, quite worthless in respect to music.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Certainly.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> But, my friend, when you have grasped the number and quality of the intervals of the voice in respect to high and low pitch, and the limits of the intervals,
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="17d"/>and all the combinations derived from them, which the men of former times discovered and handed down to us, their successors, with the traditional name of harmonies, and also the corresponding effects in the movements of the body, which they say are measured by numbers and must be called rhythms and measures—and they say that we must also understand that every one and many should be considered in this way—
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="17e"/>when you have thus grasped the facts, you have become a musician, and when by considering it in this way you have obtained a grasp of any other unity of all those which exist, you have become wise in respect to that unity.  But the infinite number of individuals and the infinite number in each of them makes you in every instance indefinite in thought and of no account and not to be considered among the wise, so long as you have never fixed your eye upon any definite number in anything.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> I think, Philebus, that what Socrates has said is excellent.</said></p></div></div></body></text></TEI>