<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="58"><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Clearly anybody can recognize the art I mean;  for I am confident that all men who have any intellect whatsoever believe that the knowledge which has to do with being, reality, and eternal immutability is the truest kind of knowledge.  What do you think, Protarchus?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> I have often heard Gorgias constantly maintain that the art of persuasion surpasses all others for this, he said, makes all things subject to itself,
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="58b"/>not by force, but by their free will, and is by far the best of all arts;  so now I hardly like to oppose either him or you.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> It seems to me that you wanted to speak and threw down your arms out of modesty.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Very well;  have it as you like.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Is it my fault that you have misunderstood?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Misunderstood what?</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> My question, dear Protarchus, was not as yet what art or science surpasses all others
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="58c"/>by being the greatest and best and most useful to us:  what I am trying to find out at present is which art, however little and of little use, has the greatest regard for clearness, exactness, and truth.  See;  you will not make Gorgias angry if you grant that his art is superior for the practical needs of men, but say that the study of which I spoke is superior in the matter of the most perfect truth, just as I said in speaking about the white that if it was small and pure it was superior to that which was great
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="58d"/>but impure.  Now, therefore, with careful thought and due consideration, paying attention neither to the usefulness nor to the reputation of any arts or sciences, but to that faculty of our souls, if such there be, which by its nature loves the truth and does all things for the sake of the truth, let us examine this faculty and say whether it is most likely to possess mind and intelligence in the greatest purity, or we must look for some other faculty
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="58e"/>which has more valid claims.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> I am considering, and I think it is difficult to concede that any other science or art cleaves more closely to truth than this.</said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="59"><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> In saying that, did you bear in mind that the arts in general, and the men who devote themselves to them,
<milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="59"/><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="59a"/>make use of opinion and persistently investigate things which have to do with opinion?  And even if they think they are studying nature, they are spending their lives in the study of the things of this world, the manner of their production, their action, and the forces to which they are subjected.  Is not that true?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Yes, it is.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Such thinkers, then, toil to discover, not eternal verities, but transient productions of the present, the future, or the past?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Perfectly true.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> And can we say that any of these things becomes certain, if tested by the touchstone of strictest truth,
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="59b"/>since none of them ever was, will be, or is in the same state?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Of course not.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> How can we gain anything fixed whatsoever about things which have no fixedness whatsoever?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> In no way, as it seems to me.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Then no mind or science which is occupied with them possesses the most perfect truth.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> No, it naturally does not.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Then we must dismiss the thought of you and me and Gorgias and Philebus, and make this solemn declaration
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="59c"/>on the part of our argument.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> What is the solemn declaration?</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> That fixed and pure and true and what we call unalloyed knowledge has to do with the things which are eternally the same without change or mixture, or with that which is most akin to them;  and all other things are to be regarded as secondary and inferior.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Very true.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> And of the names applied to such matters, it would be fairest to give the finest names to the finest things, would it not?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> That is reasonable.</said></p><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="59d"/><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Are not mind, then, and wisdom the names which we should honor most?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Yes.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Then these names are applied most accurately and correctly to cases of contemplation of true being.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Certainly.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> And these are precisely the names which I brought forward in the first place as parties to our suit.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Yes, of course they are, Socrates.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Very well.  As to the mixture of wisdom and pleasure,
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="59e"/>if anyone were to say that we are like artisans, with the materials before us from which to create our work, the simile would be a good one.</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Certainly.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> And is it, then, our next task to try to make the mixture?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> Surely.</said></p><p><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label> Would it not be better first to repeat certain things and recall them to our minds?</said></p><p><said who="#Protarchus"><label>Pro.</label> What things?</said></p></div></div></body></text></TEI>