<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.tlg033.perseus-eng2" xml:lang="eng"><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="314"><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Now what can law be?  Let us consider it in this way.  Suppose someone had asked us about what was stated just now: <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="314"/><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="314a"/> Since you say it is by sight that things seen are seen, what is this sight whereby they are seen?  Our answer to him would have been:  That sensation which shows objects by means of the eyes.  And if he had asked us again:  Well then, since it is by hearing that things heard are heard, what is hearing?  Our answer to him would have been:  That sensation which shows us sounds by means of the ears.  In the same way then, suppose he should also ask us:  Since it is by law that loyally accepted things are so accepted, what is this law whereby they are so accepted? <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="314b"/> Is it some sensation or showing, as when things learnt are learnt by knowledge showing them, or some discovery, as when things discovered are discovered—for instance, the causes of health and sickness by medicine, or the designs of the gods, as the prophets say, by prophecy;  for art is surely our discovery of things, is it not?</p></said><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>Certainly.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Then what thing especially of this sort shall we surmise law to be?</p></said><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>Our resolutions and decrees, I imagine: for how else can one describe law? <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="314c"/> So that apparently the whole thing, law, as you put it in your question, is a city’s resolution.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>State opinion, it seems, is what you call law.</p></said><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>I do.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And perhaps you are right:  but I fancy we shall get a better knowledge in this way.  You call some men wise?</p></said><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>I do.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And the wise are wise by wisdom?</p></said><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>Yes.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And again, the just are just by justice?</p></said><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>Certainly.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And so the law-abiding are law-abiding by law?</p></said><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="314d"/><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>Yes.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And the lawless are lawless by lawlessness?</p></said><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>Yes.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And the law-abiding are just?</p></said><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>Yes.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And the lawless are unjust?</p></said><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>Unjust.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And justice and law are most noble?</p></said><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>That is so.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And injustice and lawlessness most base?</p></said><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>Yes.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And the former preserve cities and everything else, while the latter destroy and overturn them?</p></said><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>Yes.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Hence we must regard law as something noble, and seek after it as a good.</p></said><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>Undeniably.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And we said that law is a city’s resolution?</p></said><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="314e"/><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>So we did.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>Well now, are not some resolutions good, and others evil?</p></said><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>Yes, to be sure.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>And, you know, law was not evil.</p></said><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>No, indeed.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>So it is not right to reply, in that simple fashion, that law is a city’s resolution.</p></said><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>I agree that it is not.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>An evil resolution, you see, cannot properly be a law.</p></said><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>No, to be sure.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>But still, I am quite clear myself that law is some sort of opinion;  and since it is not evil opinion, is it not manifest by this time that it is good opinion, granting that law is opinion?</p></said><said who="#Companion"><label>Com.</label><p>Yes.</p></said><said who="#Socrates"><label>Soc.</label><p>But what is good opinion?  Is it not true opinion?</p></said></div></div></body></text></TEI>