Phaedrus — Plato
The text is shown on its own: no facing layer is held for this issue.
Here Adeimantus interposed a question.
He said : How^ would you answer, Socrates, if a person were to say that you make your citizens miserable, and all by their own doing ; for they are the actual owners of the city, and yet they reap no advantage from this ; whereas other men acquire lands, and build large and handsome houses, and have everything handsome about them ; offering sacrifices to the gods on their own account, and practicing hospitality ; and also, as you were saying only just now, they have gold and silver, and all that is usual among the favorites of fortune ; while our poor citizens are no better than mercenaries who are fixed in thej city and do nothing but mount guard ?
Yes, I said ; and you may add that they are only fed, anc? not paid, in addition to their food, like other men ; and therefore they ^cannot make a journey of pleasure, they have no money to spend on a mistress or any other luxuri- ^ oas fancy, which, as the world goes, is thought to be happiness; and many other accusations of the same nature might be added. But, said he, let us suppose all that included in the charge.
You mean to ask, I said, what is to be our answer ? ^ Yes, he replied. ^ If we proceed along the path which we are already going, T said, my belief is that we shall find the answer.
Even if our guardians were such as you describe, there would not be anytWngjvonderful in their sH 11 being the Jiappiest of men i. bu leT t"harpass, for our object in the construction of the State is ^he greatest happiness of the whole,~ancl riot "that ~6f ariy^ohe ■Ctass~aiidTn a State which is ordered witTi'a view to the good ""oflTie whole, we think that we are most likely to find justice, ^hd in the ill-ordered State injustice : and, having found ^4liem, we shall then be able to decide which of the two is the hagpier.
At present we aire constructing the happy State, not piecemeal, or with a view of making a few happy citizens, but as a^hole ; and by and by we will proceed to view the opposite kind of State. If we were painting a statue,^ and some » A peculiarity of ancient sculpture and architecture was the practice of painting all kinds of marble work. This is known from traces still present in many works of art and from passages in ancient writers.
p. 252one were to come and blame us for not putting the most beautiful colors on tlje most beautiful parts of the body — for the eyes, he would say, ought to be purple, but they are black — in that case we should seem to excuse ourselves fairly enough by saying to him, *' Pray, sir, do not have the strange notion that we ought to beautify the eyes to such a degree that they are no longer eyes ; but see whether, by giving this and the other features their due, we make the whole beautiful.
And, I say again, in like manner do not compel us to assign to the guardians a sort of happiness which will make them anything but guardians ; for we also should have no difficulty in clothing our husbandmen in fine linen, and setting crowns of gold on their heads, bidding them till the ground no more than they like.
Neither is ignorance the reason why we do not allow our potters to repose on couches, and feast by the fireside, passing round the glittering bowl, while their wheel is conveniently at hand, and working at pottery as much as they like, and no more; or, why we do not make every class happy in this way — and then, as you imagine, the whole State would be happy.
But do not suggest this ; for, if we listen to you, the husbandman will be no longer a ^ husbandman, the potter will cease to be a potter, and nobody will have any distinct character.
Now this is not of much importance where the corruption of society, and pretension to be what you are not, extends only to cobblers ; but when the guardians of the laws and of the government are only seemers and not real guardians, that, as you will observe, is the utter ruin of the State : for they alone are the authors of happiness and order in a State.
If we are right in depicting our guardians as the saviours and not the destroyers of the State, and the author of the other picture is representing peasants at a festival, happy in a life of revelry, rather than fulfilling the duties of citizens, we mean different things, and he is speaking of something which is not a State.
And therefore we must consider whether we appoint our guardians >vith a view to their greatest happiness, or whether this principle of happiness does not rather reside in the State as a whole ; but if so, the guardians and auxiliaries, and all others equally with them, must be compelled or induced to do their own work in the best way and then the whole State growing lup in a noble order, the several classes will only have to rep. 253ceive the proportion of happiness which nature assigns to them. I think that you are quite right. .1 wonder whether you will agree with another remark which occurs to me. What may that be ? There seem to be two causes of the deterioration of the arts. - What are they ? \ Wealth, I said, and poverty. How do they act ? The process is as follows : When a potter becomes rich he no longer takes the same pains with his art ?
Certainly not. ; He grows more and more indolent and careless ? Very true. And the result is that he becomes a worse potter ? Yes ; he greatly deteriorates. But, on the other hand, if he has no money, and is unable to buy tools or instruments, he will not work equally well himself, nor will he teach his sons or apprentices to work equally well. Certainly not.
Then workmen, and also their works, are apt to degenerate un'cler the influence both of poverty and of wealth ? • That is evident. Here, then, is a discovery of new evils, I said, which the guardians will have to watch, or they will creep into the city unobserved. What evils ?
Wealth, I said, and poverty ; for the one is the parent of luxury and indolence, and the other of meanness ^ and viciousness, and both of discontent.'^ That is very true, he replied ; but still I should like to^ know, Socrates, how our city will be able to go to war, especially against an enemy who is rich and powerful, if deprived of the sinews of war.
There may possibly be a difficulty, I replied, in going to war with one such enemy ; but there is no difficulty where there are two of them. a *• Give me neither poverty nor riches." — Proverbs xxx. 8.
No commentary for this page under the selected tracks.
There is commentary on page 1.