One motive remains, which is exceedingly genuine but not mentioned at all by them, namely, that they plunge into these households for the sake of pleasure and on account of their many extravagant expectations, dazzled by the wealth of gold and silver, enraptured over the dinners and the other forms of indulgence, and assured that they will immediately drink gold in copious draughts, and that nobody will stop their mouths. That is what seduces them and makes them slaves instead of freemen—not lack of necessaries, as they alleged, but desire for unnecessaries and envy of that abundance and luxury. Therefore, like unsuccessful and unhappy lovers, they fall into the hands of shrewd, experienced minions who treat them superciliously, taking good care that they shall always love them, but not permitting them ta enjoy the objects of their affection even to the extent of a meagre kiss; for they know that success will involve the dissolution of love. So they hold that under lock and key and guard it jealously, but otherwise they keep their lover always hopeful, since they fear that despair may wean him from his overmastering desire, and that he may grow out of love for them. They smile upon him, then, and make promises, and are always on the point of being good to him, and generous, and lavish with their attentions. Then before they know it, they both are old, the one has passed the season for loving, the other for yielding to love. Consequently they have done nothing in all their life except to hope.

Now to put up with everything on account of desire for pleasure is perhaps not altogether blameworthy, even excusable, if a man likes pleasure and makes it his aim above all else to partake of it. Yet perhaps it is shameful and ignoble for him to sell himself on that account; for the pleasure of freedom is far sweeter. Nevertheless, let us grant that he would be excusable in a measure, if he obtained it. But to put up with many unpleasantnesses just on account of the hope of pleasure is ridiculous in my opinion and senseless, particularly when men see that the discomforts are definite and patent in advance and inevitable, while the pleasure that is hoped for, whatever it is, has never yet come in all the past, and what is more, is not even likely to come in the future, if one should figure the matter out on the basis of hard fact. The companions: of Odysseus neglected all else because they were eating the lotus and found it sweet, and they contemned what was honourable because they contrasted it with their immediate pleasure; therefore it was not entirely unreasonable of them to forget honour while their souls dwelt upon that sweetness. But for a man in hunger to stand beside another who eats his fill of lotus without giving him any, and to be chained to the spot, forgetful of all that is honourable and right, by the mere hope that he himself may get a taste some day—Heracles! how ridiculous and in very truth deserving of a proper Homeric thrashing!

Like that bestowed upon Thersites by Odysseus (Iliad2, 199, 265).