<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="28"><milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="28"/><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="28a"/><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Nor would pain, Philebus, be absolute evil;  so it is not the infinite which supplies any element of good in pleasure;  we must look for something else.  Well, I grant you that pleasure and pain are in the class of the infinite but to which of the aforesaid classes, Protarchus and Philebus, can we now without irreverence assign wisdom, knowledge, and mind?  I think we must find the right answer to this question, for our danger is great if we fail.</said></p><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="28b"/><p><said who="#Philebus"><label>Phi.</label> Oh Socrates, you exalt your own god.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> And you your goddess, my friend.  But the question calls for an answer, all the same.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Socrates is right, Philebus;  you ought to do as he asks.</said></p><p><said who="#Philebus"><label>Phi.</label> Did you not, Protarchus, elect to reply in my place?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Yes;  but now I am somewhat at a loss, and I ask you, Socrates, to be our spokesman yourself, that we may not select the wrong representative and so say something improper.</said></p><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="28c"/><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> I must do as you ask, Protarchus;  and it is not difficult.  But did I really, as Philebus said, embarrass you by playfully exalting my god, when I asked to what class mind and knowledge should be assigned?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> You certainly did, Socrates.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Yet the answer is easy;  for all philosophers agree—whereby they really exalt themselves—that mind is king of heaven and earth.  Perhaps they are right.  But let us, if you please, investigate the question of its class more at length.</said></p><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="28d"/><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Speak just as you like, Socrates.  Do not consider length, so far as we are concerned you cannot bore us.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Good.  Then let us begin by asking a question.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> What is the question?</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Shall we say, Protarchus, that all things and this which is called the universe are governed by an irrational and fortuitous power and mere chance, or, on the contrary, as our forefathers said, are ordered and directed by mind and a marvellous wisdom?</said></p><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="28e"/><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> The two points of view have nothing in common, my wonderful Socrates.  For what you are now saying seems to me actually impious.  But the assertion that mind orders all things is worthy of the aspect of the world, of sun, moon, stars, and the whole revolving universe;  I can never say or think anything else about it.</said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="29"><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Do you, then, think we should assent to this and agree in the doctrine of our predecessors,
<milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="29"/><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="29a"/>not merely intending to repeat the words of others, with no risk to ourselves, but ready to share with them in the risk and the blame, if any clever man declares that this world is not thus ordered, but is without order?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Yes, of course I do.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Then observe the argument that now comes against us.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Go on.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> We see the elements which belong to the natures of all living beings, fire, water, air, and earth—or, as the storm-tossed mariners say, land in sight—
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="29b"/>in the constitution of the universe.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Certainly and we are truly storm-tossed in the puzzling cross-currents of this discussion.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Well, here is a point for you to consider in relation to each of these elements as it exists in us.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> What is the point?</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Each element in us is small and poor and in no way pure at all or endowed with the power which is worthy of its nature.  Take one example and apply it to all.  Fire, for instance, exists in us and also in the universe.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Of course.</said></p><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="29c"/><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> And that which is in us is small, weak, and poor, but that which is in the universe is marvellous in quantity, beauty, and every power which belongs to fire.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> What you say is very true.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Well, is the fire of the universe nourished, originated, and ruled by the fire within us, or, on the contrary, does my fire, and yours, and that of all living beings derive nourishment and all that from the universal fire?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> That question does not even deserve an answer.</said></p><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="29d"/><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> True;  and you will, I fancy, say the same of the earth which is in us living creatures and that which is in the universe, and concerning all the other elements about which I asked a moment ago your answer will be the same.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Yes.  Who could answer otherwise without being called a lunatic?</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Nobody, I fancy.  Now follow the next step.  When we see that all the aforesaid elements are gathered together into a unit, do we not call them a body?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Of course.</said></p><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="29e"/><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Apply the same line of thought to that which we call the universe.  It would likewise be a body, being composed of the same elements.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Quite right.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Does our body derive, obtain, and possess from that body, or that body from ours, nourishment and everything else that we mentioned just now?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> That, Socrates, is another question not worth asking.</said></p></div></div></body></text></TEI>