<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="23"><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Certainly, Socrates, it seems to me that pleasure has fought for the victory and has fallen in this bout, knocked down by your words. 
<milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="23"/><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="23a"/>And we can only say, as it seems, that mind was wise in not laying claim to the victory;  for it would have met with the same fate.  Now pleasure, if she were to lose the second prize, would be deeply humiliated in the eyes of her lovers;  for she would no longer appear even to them so lovely as before.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Well, then, is it not better to leave her now and not to pain her by testing her to the utmost and proving her in the wrong?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Nonsense, Socrates!</said></p><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="23b"/><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Nonsense because I spoke of paining pleasure, and that is impossible?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Not only that, but because you do not understand that not one of us will let you go yet until you have finished the argument about these matters.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Whew, Protarchus!  Then we have a long discussion before us, and not an easy one, either, this time.  For in going ahead to fight mind’s battle for the second place, I think I need a new contrivance—other weapons, as it were, than those of our previous discussion, though perhaps some of the old ones will serve.  Must I then go on?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Of course you must.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Then let us try to be careful
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="23c"/>in making our beginning.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> What kind of a beginning do you mean?</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Let us divide all things that now exist in the universe into two, or rather, if you please, three classes.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Please tell us on what principle you would divide them.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Let us take some of the subjects of our present discussion.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> What subjects?</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> We said that God revealed in the universe two elements, the infinite and the finite, did we not?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Certainly.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Let us, then, assume these as two of our classes, and a third, made by combining these two. 
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="23d"/>But I cut a ridiculous figure, it seems, when I attempt a division into classes and an enumeration.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> What do you mean, my friend?</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> I think we need a fourth class besides.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Tell us what it is.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Note the cause of the combination of those two and assume that as the fourth in addition to the previous three.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> And then will you not need a fifth, which has the power of separation?</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Perhaps;  but not at present, I think.  However, if we do need a fifth,
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="23e"/>you will pardon me for going after it.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Of course.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> First, then, let us take three of the four and, as we see that two of these are split up and scattered each one into many, let us try, by collecting each of them again into one, to learn how each of them was both one and many.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> If you could tell me more clearly about them, I might be able to follow you.</said></p></div></div></body></text></TEI>