|
Socrates: Then not only custom but nature
also affirms that to do is more disgraceful
than to suffer injustice, and that justice
is equality; so that you seem to have been
wrong in your former assertion, when accusing
me you said that nature and custom are opposed,
and that I, knowing this, was dishonestly
playing between them, appealing to custom
when the argument is about nature, and to
nature when the argument is about custom?
Callicles: This man will never cease talking
nonsense. At your age, Socrates, are you
not ashamed to be catching at words and chuckling
over some verbal slip? do you not see-have
I not told you already, that by superior
I mean better: do you imagine me to say,
that if a rabble of slaves and nondescripts,
who are of no use except perhaps for their
physical strength, get together their ipsissima
verba are laws?
Socrates: Ho! my philosopher, is that your
line?
Callicles: Certainly.
Socrates: I was thinking, Callicles, that
something of the kind must have been in your
mind, and that is why I repeated the question-What
is the superior? I wanted to know clearly
what you meant; for you surely do not think
that two men are better than one, or that
your slaves are better than you because they
are stronger? Then please to begin again,
and tell me who the better are, if they are
not the stronger; and I will ask you, great
Sir, to be a little milder in your instructions,
or I shall have to run away from you.
Callicles: You are ironical.
Socrates: No, by the hero Zethus, Callicles,
by whose aid you were just now saying many
ironical things against me, I am not:-tell
me, then, whom you mean, by the better?
Callicles: I mean the more excellent.
Socrates: Do you not see that you are yourself
using words which have no meaning and that
you are explaining nothing?-will you tell
me whether you mean by the better and superior
the wiser, or if not, whom?
Callicles: Most assuredly, I do mean the
wiser.
Socrates: Then according to you, one wise
man may often be superior to ten thousand
fools, and he ought them, and they ought
to be his subjects, and he ought to have
more than they should. This is what I believe
that you mean (and you must not suppose that
I am word-catching), if you allow that the
one is superior to the ten thousand?
Callicles: Yes; that is what I mean, and
that is what I conceive to be natural justice-that
the better and wiser should rule have more
than the inferior.
Socrates: Stop there, and let me ask you
what you would say in this case: Let us suppose
that we are all together as we are now; there
are several of us, and we have a large common
store of meats and drinks, and there are
all sorts of persons in our company having
various degrees of strength and weakness,
and one of us, being physician, is wiser
in the matter of food than all the rest,
and he is probably stronger than some and
not so strong as others of us-will he not,
being wiser, be also better than we are,
and our superior in this matter of food?
Callicles: Certainly.
Socrates: Either, then, he will have a larger
share of the meats and drinks, because he
is better, or he will have the distribution
of all of them by reason of his authority,
but he will not expend or make use of a larger
share of them on his own person, or if he
does, he will be punished-his share will
exceed that of some, and be less than that
of others, and if he be the weakest of all,
he being the best of all will have the smallest
share of all, Callicles:-am I not right,
my friend?
Callicles: You talk about meats and drinks
and physicians and other nonsense; I am not
speaking of them.
Socrates: Well, but do you admit that the
wiser is the better? Answer "Yes"
or "No."
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: And ought not the better to have
a larger share?
Callicles: Not of meats and drinks.
Socrates: I understand: then, perhaps, of
coats -the skilfullest weaver ought to have
the largest coat, and the greatest number
of them, and go about clothed in the best
and finest of them?
Callicles: Fudge about coats!
Socrates: Then the skilfullest and best in
making shoes ought to have the advantage
in shoes; the shoemaker, clearly, should
walk about in the largest shoes, and have
the greatest number of them?
Callicles: Fudge about shoes! What nonsense
are you talking?
Socrates: Or, if this is not your meaning,
perhaps you would say that the wise and good
and true husbandman should actually have
a larger share of seeds, and have as much
seed as possible for his own land?
Callicles: How you go on, always talking
in the same way, Socrates!
Socrates: Yes, Callicles, and also about
the same things.
Callicles: Yes, by the Gods, you are literally
always talking of cobblers and fullers and
cooks and doctors, as if this had to do with
our argument.
Socrates: But why will you not tell me in
what a man must be superior and wiser in
order to claim a larger share; will you neither
accept a suggestion, nor offer one?
Callicles: I have already told you. In the
first place, I mean by superiors not cobblers
or cooks, but wise politicians who understand
the administration of a state, and who are
not only wise, but also valiant and able
to carry. out their designs, and not the
men to faint from want of soul.
Socrates: See now, most excellent Callicles,
how different my charge against you is from
that which you bring against me, for you
reproach me with always saying the same;
but I reproach you with never saying the
same about the same things, for at one time
you were defining the better and the superior
to be the stronger, then again as the wiser,
and now you bring forward a new notion; the
superior and the better are now declared
by you to be the more courageous: I wish,
my good friend, that you would tell me once
for all, whom you affirm to be the better
and superior, and in what they are better?
Callicles: I have already told you that I
mean those who are wise and courageous in
the administration of a state-they ought
to be the rulers of their states, and justice
consists in their having more than their
subjects.
Socrates: But whether rulers or subjects
will they or will they not have more than
themselves, my friend?
Callicles: What do you mean?
Socrates: I mean that every man is his own
ruler; but perhaps you think that there is
no necessity for him to rule himself; he
is only required to rule others?
Callicles: What do you mean by his "ruling
over himself"?
Socrates: A simple thing enough; just what
is commonly said, that a man should be temperate
and master of himself, and ruler of his own
pleasures and passions.
Callicles: What innocence! you mean those
fools-the temperate?
Socrates: Certainly:-any one may know that
to be my meaning.
Callicles: Quite so, Socrates; and they are
really fools, for how can a man be happy
who is the servant of anything? On the contrary,
I plainly assert, that he who would truly
live ought to allow his desires to wax to
the uttermost, and not to chastise them;
but when they have grown to their greatest
he should have courage and intelligence to
minister to them and to satisfy all his longings.
And this I affirm to be natural justice and
nobility. To this however the many cannot
attain; and they blame the strong man because
they are ashamed of their own weakness, which
they desire to conceal, and hence they say
that intemperance is base. As I have remarked
already, they enslave the nobler natures,
and being unable to satisfy their pleasures,
they praise temperance and justice out of
their own cowardice. For if a man had been
originally the son of a king, or had a nature
capable of acquiring an empire or a tyranny
or sovereignty, what could be more truly
base or evil than temperance--to a man like
him, I say, who might freely be enjoying
every good, and has no one to stand in his
way, and yet has admitted custom and reason
and the opinion of other men to be lords
over him?-must not he be in a miserable plight
whom the reputation of justice and temperance
hinders from giving more to his friends than
to his enemies, even though he be a ruler
in his city? Nay, Socrates, for you profess
to be a votary of the truth, and the truth
is this:-that luxury and intemperance and
licence, if they be provided with means,
are virtue and happiness-all the rest is
a mere bauble, agreements contrary to nature,
foolish talk of men, nothing worth.
Socrates: There is a noble freedom, Callicles,
in your way of approaching the argument;
for what you say is what the rest of the
world think, but do not like to say. And
I must beg of you to persevere, that the
true rule of human life may become manifest.
Tell me, then:-you say, do you not, that
in the rightly-developed man the passions
ought not to be controlled, but that we should
let them grow to the utmost and somehow or
other satisfy them, and that this is virtue?
Callicles: Yes; I do.
Socrates: Then those who want nothing are
not truly said to be happy?
Callicles: No indeed, for then stones and
dead men would be the happiest of all.
Socrates: But surely life according to your
view is an awful thing; and indeed I think
that Euripides may have been right in saying,
Who knows if life be not death and death
life;
and that we are very likely dead; I have
heard a philosopher say that at this moment
we are actually dead, and that the body (soma)
is our tomb (sema), and that the part of
the soul which is the seat of the desires
is liable to be tossed about by words and
blown up and down; and some ingenious person,
probably a Sicilian or an Italian, playing
with the word, invented a tale in which he
called the soul-because of its believing
and make-believe nature-a vessel, and the
ignorant he called the uninitiated or leaky,
and the place in the souls of the uninitiated
in which the desires are seated, being the
intemperate and incontinent part, he compared
to a vessel full of holes, because it can
never be satisfied. He is not of your way
of thinking, Callicles, for he declares,
that of all the souls in Hades, meaning the
invisible world these uninitiated or leaky
persons are the most miserable, and that
they pour water into a vessel which is full
of holes out of a colander which is similarly
perforated. The colander, as my informer
assures me, is the soul, and the soul which
he compares to a colander is the soul of
the ignorant, which is likewise full of holes,
and therefore incontinent, owing to a bad
memory and want of faith. These notions are
strange enough, but they show the principle
which, if I can, I would fain prove to you;
that you should change your mind, and, instead
of the intemperate and insatiate life, choose
that which is orderly and sufficient and
has a due provision for daily needs. Do I
make any impression on you, and are you coming
over to the opinion that the orderly are
happier than the intemperate? Or do I fail
to persuade you, and, however many tales
I rehearse to you, do you continue of the
same opinion still?
Callicles: The latter, Socrates, is more
like the truth.
Socrates: Well, I will tell you another image,
which comes out of the same school:-Let me
request you to consider how far you would
accept this as an account of the two lives
of the temperate and intemperate in a figure:-There
are two men, both of whom have a number of
casks; the one man has his casks sound and
full, one of wine, another of honey, and
a third of milk, besides others filled with
other liquids, and the streams which fill
them are few and scanty, and he can only
obtain them with a great deal of toil and
difficulty; but when his casks are once filled
he has need to feed them anymore, and has
no further trouble with them or care about
them. The other, in like manner, can procure
streams, though not without difficulty; but
his vessels are leaky and unsound, and night
and day he is compelled to be filling them,
and if he pauses for a moment, he is in an
agony of pain. Such are their respective
lives:-And now would you say that the life
of the intemperate is happier than that of
the temperate? Do I not convince you that
the opposite is the truth?
Callicles: You do not convince me, Socrates,
for the one who has filled himself has no
longer any pleasure left; and this, as I
was just now saying, is the life of a stone:
he has neither joy nor sorrow after he is
once filled; but the pleasure depends on
the superabundance of the influx.
Socrates: But the more you pour in, the greater
the waste; and the holes must be large for
the liquid to escape.
Callicles: Certainly.
Socrates: The life which you are now depicting
is not that of a dead man, or of a stone,
but of a cormorant; you mean that he is to
be hungering and eating?
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: And he is to be thirsting and drinking?
Callicles: Yes, that is what I mean; he is
to have all his desires about him, and to
be able to live happily in the gratification
of them.
Socrates: Capital, excellent; go on as you
have begun, and have no shame; I, too, must
disencumber myself of shame: and first, will
you tell me whether you include itching and
scratching, provided you have enough of them
and pass your life in scratching, in your
notion of happiness?
Callicles: What a strange being you are,
Socrates! a regular mob-orator.
Socrates: That was the reason, Callicles,
why I scared Polus and Gorgias, until they
were too modest to say what they thought;
but you will not be too modest and will not
be scared, for you are a brave man. And now,
answer my question.
Callicles: I answer, that even the scratcher
would live pleasantly.
Socrates: And if pleasantly, then also happily?
Callicles: To be sure.
Socrates: But what if the itching is not
confined to the head? Shall I pursue the
question? And here, Callicles, I would have
you consider how you would reply if consequences
are pressed upon you, especially if in the
last resort you are asked, whether the life
of a catamite is not terrible, foul, miserable?
Or would you venture to say, that they too
are happy, if they only get enough of what
they want?
Callicles: Are you not ashamed, Socrates,
of introducing such topics into the argument?
Socrates: Well, my fine friend, but am I
the introducer of these topics, or he who
says without any qualification that all who
feel pleasure in whatever manner are happy,
and who admits of no distinction between
good and bad pleasures? And I would still
ask, whether you say that pleasure and good
are the same, or whether there is some pleasure
which is not a good?
Callicles: Well, then, for the sake of consistency,
I will say that they are the same.
Socrates: You are breaking the original agreement,
Callicles, and will no longer be a satisfactory
companion in the search after truth, if you
say what is contrary to your real opinion.
Callicles: Why, that is what you are doing
too, Socrates.
Socrates: Then we are both doing wrong. Still,
my dear friend, I would ask you to consider
whether pleasure, from whatever source derived,
is the good; for, if this be true, then the
disagreeable consequences which have been
darkly intimated must follow, and many others.
Callicles: That, Socrates, is only your opinion.
Socrates: And do you, Callicles, seriously
maintain what you are saying?
Callicles: Indeed I do.
Socrates: Then, as you are in earnest, shall
we proceed with the argument?
Callicles: By all means.
Socrates: Well, if you are willing to proceed,
determine this question for me:-There is
something, I presume, which you would call
knowledge?
Callicles: There is.
Socrates: And were you not saying just now,
that some courage implied knowledge?
Callicles: I was.
Socrates: And you were speaking of courage
and knowledge as two things different from
one another?
Callicles: Certainly I was.
Socrates: And would you say that pleasure
and knowledge are the same, or not the same?
Callicles: Not the same, O man of wisdom.
Socrates: And would you say that courage
differed from pleasure?
Callicles: Certainly.
Socrates: Well, then, let us remember that
Callicles, the Acharnian, says that pleasure
and good are the same; but that knowledge
and courage are not the same, either with
one another, or with the good.
Callicles: And what does our friend Socrates,
of Foxton, say -does he assent to this, or
not?
Socrates: He does not assent; neither will
Callicles, when he sees himself truly. You
will admit, I suppose, that good and evil
fortune are opposed to each other?
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: And if they are opposed to each
other, then, like health and disease, they
exclude one another; a man cannot have them
both, or be without them both, at the same
time?
Callicles: What do you mean?
Socrates: Take the case of any bodily affection:-a
man may have the complaint in his eyes which
is called ophthalmia?
Callicles: To be sure.
Socrates: But he surely cannot have the same
eyes well and sound at the same time?
Callicles: Certainly not.
Socrates: And when he has got rid of his
ophthalmia, has he got rid of the health
of his eyes too? Is the final result, that
he gets rid of them both together?
Callicles: Certainly not.
Socrates: That would surely be marvellous
and absurd?
Callicles: Very.
Socrates: I suppose that he is affected by
them, and gets rid of them in turns?
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: And he may have strength and weakness
in the same way, by fits?
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: Or swiftness and slowness?
Callicles: Certainly.
Socrates: And does he have and not have good
and happiness, and their opposites, evil
and misery, in a similar alternation?
Callicles: Certainly he has.
Socrates: If then there be anything which
a man has and has not at the same time, clearly
that cannot be good and evil-do we agree?
Please not to answer without consideration.
Callicles: I entirely agree.
Socrates: Go back now to our former admissions.-Did
you say that to hunger, I mean the mere state
of hunger, was pleasant or painful?
Callicles: I said painful, but that to eat
when you are hungry is pleasant.
Socrates: I know; but still the actual hunger
is painful: am I not right?
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: And thirst, too, is painful?
Callicles: Yes, very.
Socrates: Need I adduce any more instances,
or would you agree that all wants or desires
are painful?
Callicles: I agree, and therefore you need
not adduce any more instances.
Socrates: Very good. And you would admit
that to drink, when you are thirsty, is pleasant?
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: And in the sentence which you have
just uttered, the word "thirsty"
implies pain?
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: And the word "drinking"
is expressive of pleasure, and of the satisfaction
of the want?
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: There is pleasure in drinking?
Callicles: Certainly.
Socrates: When you are thirsty?
Socrates: And in pain?
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: Do you see the inference:-that
pleasure and pain are simultaneous, when
you say that being thirsty, you drink? For
are they not simultaneous, and do they not
affect at the same time the same part, whether
of the soul or the body?-which of them is
affected cannot be supposed to be of any
consequence: Is not this true?
Callicles: It is.
Socrates: You said also, that no man could
have good and evil fortune at the same time?
Callicles: Yes, I did.
Socrates: But, you admitted that when in
pain a man might also have pleasure?
Callicles: Clearly.
Socrates: Then pleasure is not the same as
good fortune, or pain the same as evil fortune,
and therefore the good is not the same as
the pleasant?
Callicles: I wish I knew, Socrates, what
your quibbling means.
Socrates: You know, Callicles, but you affect
not to know.
Callicles: Well, get on, and don't keep fooling:
then you will know what a wiseacre you are
in your admonition of me.
Socrates: Does not a man cease from his thirst
and from his pleasure in drinking at the
same time?
Callicles: I do not understand what you are
saying.
Gor. Nay, Callicles, answer, if only for
our sakes;-we should like to hear the argument
out.
Callicles: Yes, Gorgias, but I must complain
of the habitual trifling of Socrates; he
is always arguing about little and unworthy
questions.
Gor. What matter? Your reputation, Callicles,
is not at stake. Let Socrates argue in his
own fashion.
Callicles: Well, then, Socrates, you shall
ask these little peddling questions, since
Gorgias wishes to have them.
Socrates: I envy you, Callicles, for having
been initiated into the great mysteries before
you were initiated into the lesser. I thought
that this was not allowable, But to return
to our argument:-Does not a man cease from
thirsting and from pleasure of drinking at
the same moment?
Callicles: True.
Socrates: And if he is hungry, or has any
other desire, does he not cease from the
desire and the pleasure at the same moment?
Callicles: Very true.
Socrates: Then he ceases from pain and pleasure
at the same moment?
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: But he does not cease from good
and evil at the same moment, as you have
admitted: do you still adhere to what you
said?
Callicles: Yes, I do; but what is the inference?
Socrates: Why, my friend, the inference is
that the good is not the same as the pleasant,
or the evil the same as the painful; there
is a cessation of pleasure and pain at the
same moment; but not of good and evil, for
they are different. How then can pleasure
be the same as good, or pain as evil? And
I would have you look at the matter in another
light, which could hardly, I think, have
been considered by you identified them: Are
not the good they have good present with
them, as the beautiful are those who have
beauty present with them?
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: And do you call the fools and cowards
good men? For you were saying just now that
the courageous and the wise are the good
would you not say so?
Callicles: Certainly.
Socrates: And did you never see a foolish
child rejoicing?
Callicles: Yes, I have.
Socrates: And a foolish man too?
Callicles: Yes, certainly; but what is your
drift?
Socrates: Nothing particular, if you will
only answer.
Callicles: Yes, I have.
Socrates: And did you ever see a sensible
man rejoicing or sorrowing?
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: Which rejoice and sorrow most-the
wise or the foolish?
Callicles: They are much upon a par, I think,
in that respect.
Socrates: Enough: And did you ever see a
coward in battle?
Callicles: To be sure.
Socrates: And which rejoiced most at the
departure of the enemy, the coward or the
brave?
Callicles: I should say "most"
of both; or at any rate, they rejoiced about
equally.
Socrates: No matter; then the cowards, and
not only the brave, rejoice?
Callicles: Greatly.
Socrates: And the foolish; so it would seem?
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: And are only the cowards pained
at the approach of their enemies, or are
the brave also pained?
Callicles: Both are pained.
Socrates: And are they equally pained?
Callicles: I should imagine that the cowards
are more pained.
Socrates: And are they better pleased at
the enemy's departure?
Callicles: I dare say.
Socrates: Then are the foolish and the wise
and the cowards and the brave all pleased
and pained, as you were saying, in nearly
equal degree; but are the cowards more pleased
and pained than the brave?
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: But surely the wise and brave are
the good, and the foolish and the cowardly
are the bad?
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: Then the good and the bad are pleased
and pained in a nearly equal degree?
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: Then are the good and bad good
and bad in a nearly equal degree, or have
the bad the advantage both in good and evil?
[i. e. in having more pleasure and more pain.]
Cal I really do not know what you mean.
Socrates: Why, do you not remember saying
that the good were good because good was
present with them, and the evil because evil;
and that pleasures were goods and pains evils?
Callicles: Yes, I remember.
Socrates: And are not these pleasures or
goods present to those who rejoice-if they
do rejoice?
Callicles: Certainly.
Socrates: Then those who rejoice are good
when goods are present with them?
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: And those who are in pain have
evil or sorrow present with them?
Callicles: Yes.
Socrates: And would you still say that the
evil are evil by reason of the presence of
evil?
Callicles: I should.
Socrates: Then those who rejoice are good,
and those who are in pain evil?
Callicles: Yes.
|