<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="26"><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> In cases of illness, does not the proper combination of these elements produce health?</said></p><milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="26"/><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="26a"/><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Certainly.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> And in the acute and the grave, the quick and the slow, which are unlimited, the addition of these same elements creates a limit and establishes the whole art of music in all its perfection, does it not?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Excellent.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> And again in the case of cold and hot weather, the introduction of these elements removes the excess and indefiniteness and creates moderation and harmony.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Assuredly.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> And thence arise the seasons and all the beauties of our world,
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="26b"/>by mixture of the infinite with the finite?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Of course.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> There are countless other things which I pass over, such as health, beauty, and strength of the body and the many glorious beauties of the soul.  For this goddess, <note resp="Loeb" anchored="true">This goddess may be <foreign xml:lang="grc">Μουσική</foreign> (in which case <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἐγγενομένη</foreign> the reading of T and G, would be preferable to <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἐγγενόμενα</foreign> above), not music in the restricted modern sense, but the spirit of numbers and measure which underlies all music, and all the beauties of the world;  or the goddess may be mentioned here in reference (and opposition) to the goddess Pleasure (12 B);  she is the nameless deity who makes Pleasure and all others conform to her rules.</note> my fair Philebus, beholding the violence and universal wickedness which prevailed, since there was no limit of pleasures or of indulgence in them, established law and order, which contain a limit.  You say she did harm; 
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="26c"/>I say, on the contrary, she brought salvation.  What do you think, Protarchus?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> What you say, Socrates, pleases me greatly.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> I have spoken of these three classes, you observe.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Yes, I believe I understand;  I think you mean that the infinite is one class and the finite is another class among existing things;  but what you wish to designate as the third class, I do not comprehend very well.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> No, because the multitude which springs up in the third class overpowers you and yet the infinite also comprised many classes,
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="26d"/>nevertheless, since they were sealed with the seal of the more and less, they were seen to be of one class.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> True.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> And the finite, again, did not contain many classes, nor were we disturbed about its natural unity.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Of course not.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> No, not at all.  And as to the third class, understand that I mean every offspring of these two which comes into being as a result of the measures created by the cooperation of the finite.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> I understand.</said></p><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="26e"/><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> But we said there was, in addition to three classes, a fourth to be investigated.  Let us do that together.  See whether you think that everything which comes into being must necessarily come into being through a cause.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Yes, I do;  for how could it come into being apart from a cause?</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Does not the nature of that which makes or creates differ only in name from the cause, and may not the creative agent and the cause be properly considered one?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Yes.</said></p></div></div></body></text></TEI>