 LIBRARY OF THE FUTURE (tm) Series First Edition Ver. 3.0 
 Republic                                                                 Plato                      
 Screen   423

understanding and not reason, as being intermediate between opinion         
and reason.                                                                 
  You have quite conceived my meaning, I said; and now,                     
corresponding to these four divisions, let there be four faculties          
in the soul-reason answering to the highest, understanding to the           
second, faith (or conviction) to the third, and perception of               
shadows to the last-and let there be a scale of them, and let us            
suppose that the several faculties have clearness in the same degree        
that their objects have truth.                                              
  I understand, he replied, and give my assent, and accept your             
arrangement.                                                                
                                                                            
BOOK_VII                                                                    
  BOOK VII                                                                  
-                                                                           
  SOCRATES - GLAUCON                                                        
-                                                                           
  AND now, I said, let me show in a figure how far our nature is            
enlightened or unenlightened: --Behold! human beings living in a            
underground den, which has a mouth open towards the light and reaching      
all along the den; here they have been from their childhood, and            
have their legs and necks chained so that they cannot move, and can         
only see before them, being prevented by the chains from turning round      
their heads. Above and behind them a fire is blazing at a distance,         
and between the fire and the prisoners there is a raised way; and           
you will see, if you look, a low wall built along the way, like the         
screen which marionette players have in front of them, over which they      
show the puppets.                                                           
  I see.                                                                    
  And do you see, I said, men passing along the wall carrying all           
sorts of vessels, and statues and figures of animals made of wood           
and stone and various materials, which appear over the wall? Some of        
them are talking, others silent.                                            
                                                     {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 5}
  You have shown me a strange image, and they are strange prisoners.        
  Like ourselves, I replied; and they see only their own shadows, or        
the shadows of one another, which the fire throws on the opposite wall      
of the cave?                                                                
  True, he said; how could they see anything but the shadows if they        
were never allowed to move their heads?                                     
  And of the objects which are being carried in like manner they would      
only see the shadows?                                                       
  Yes, he said.                                                             
                                                    {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 10}
  And if they were able to converse with one another, would they not        
suppose that they were naming what was actually before them?                
  Very true.                                                                
  And suppose further that the prison had an echo which came from           
the other side, would they not be sure to fancy when one of the             
passers-by spoke that the voice which they heard came from the passing      
shadow?                                                                     
  No question, he replied.                                                  
  To them, I said, the truth would be literally nothing but the             
shadows of the images.                                                      
                                                    {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 15}
  That is certain.                                                          
  And now look again, and see what will naturally follow if the             
prisoners are released and disabused of their error. At first, when         
any of them is liberated and compelled suddenly to stand up and turn        
his neck round and walk and look towards the light, he will suffer          
sharp pains; the glare will distress him, and he will be unable to see      
the realities of which in his former state he had seen the shadows;         
and then conceive some one saying to him, that what he saw before           
was an illusion, but that now, when he is approaching nearer to             
being and his eye is turned towards more real existence, he has a           
clearer vision, -what will be his reply? And you may further imagine        
that his instructor is pointing to the objects as they pass and             
requiring him to name them, -will he not be perplexed? Will he not          
fancy that the shadows which he formerly saw are truer than the             
objects which are now shown to him?                                         
  Far truer.                                                                
  And if he is compelled to look straight at the light, will he not         
have a pain in his eyes which will make him turn away to take and take      
in the objects of vision which he can see, and which he will                
conceive to be in reality clearer than the things which are now             
being shown to him?                                                         
  True, he now                                                              
                                                    {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 20}
  And suppose once more, that he is reluctantly dragged up a steep and      
rugged ascent, and held fast until he 's forced into the presence of        
the sun himself, is he not likely to be pained and irritated? When          
he approaches the light his eyes will be dazzled, and he will not be        
able to see anything at all of what are now called realities.               
  Not all in a moment, he said.                                             
  He will require to grow accustomed to the sight of the upper              
world. And first he will see the shadows best, next the reflections of      
men and other objects in the water, and then the objects themselves;        
then he will gaze upon the light of the moon and the stars and the          
spangled heaven; and he will see the sky and the stars by night better      
than the sun or the light of the sun by day?                                
  Certainly.                                                                
  Last of he will be able to see the sun, and not mere reflections          
of him in the water, but he will see him in his own proper place,           
and not in another; and he will contemplate him as he is.                   
                                                    {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 25}
  Certainly.                                                                
  He will then proceed to argue that this is he who gives the season        
and the years, and is the guardian of all that is in the visible            
world, and in a certain way the cause of all things which he and his        
fellows have been accustomed to behold?                                     
  Clearly, he said, he would first see the sun and then reason about        
him.                                                                        
  And when he remembered his old habitation, and the wisdom of the den      
and his fellow-prisoners, do you not suppose that he would                  
felicitate himself on the change, and pity them?                            
  Certainly, he would.                                                      
                                                    {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 30}
  And if they were in the habit of conferring honours among themselves      
on those who were quickest to observe the passing shadows and to            
remark which of them went before, and which followed after, and             
which were together; and who were therefore best able to draw               
conclusions as to the future, do you think that he would care for such      
honours and glories, or envy the possessors of them? Would he not           
say with Homer,                                                             
-                                                                           
  Better to be the poor servant of a poor master,                           
-                                                                           
and to endure anything, rather than think as they do and live after         
their manner?                                                               
  Yes, he said, I think that he would rather suffer anything than           
entertain these false notions and live in this miserable manner.            
                                                    {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 35}
  Imagine once more, I said, such an one coming suddenly out of the         
sun to be replaced in his old situation; would he not be certain to         
have his eyes full of darkness?                                             
  To be sure, he said.                                                      
  And if there were a contest, and he had to compete in measuring           
the shadows with the prisoners who had never moved out of the den,          
while his sight was still weak, and before his eyes had become              
steady (and the time which would be needed to acquire this new habit        
of sight might be very considerable) would he not be ridiculous? Men        
would say of him that up he went and down he came without his eyes;         
and that it was better not even to think of ascending; and if any           
one tried to loose another and lead him up to the light, let them only      
catch the offender, and they would put him to death.                        
  No question, he said.                                                     
  This entire allegory, I said, you may now append, dear Glaucon, to        
the previous argument; the prison-house is the world of sight, the          
light of the fire is the sun, and you will not misapprehend me if           
you interpret the journey upwards to be the ascent of the soul into         
the intellectual world according to my poor belief, which, at your          
desire, I have expressed whether rightly or wrongly God knows. But,         
whether true or false, my opinion is that in the world of knowledge         
the idea of good appears last of all, and is seen only with an effort;      
and, when seen, is also inferred to be the universal author of all          
things beautiful and right, parent of light and of the lord of light        
in this visible world, and the immediate source of reason and truth in      
the intellectual; and that this is the power upon which he who would        
act rationally, either in public or private life must have his eye          
fixed.                                                                      
                                                    {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 40}
  I agree, he said, as far as I am able to understand you.                  
  Moreover, I said, you must not wonder that those who attain to            
this beatific vision are unwilling to descend to human affairs; for         
their souls are ever hastening into the upper world where they              
desire to dwell; which desire of theirs is very natural, if our             
allegory may be trusted.                                                    
  Yes, very natural.                                                        
  And is there anything surprising in one who passes from divine            
contemplations to the evil state of man, misbehaving himself in a           
ridiculous manner; if, while his eyes are blinking and before he has        
become accustomed to the surrounding darkness, he is compelled to           
fight in courts of law, or in other places, about the images or the         
shadows of images of justice, and is endeavouring to meet the               
conceptions of those who have never yet seen absolute justice?              
  Anything but surprising, he replied.                                      
                                                    {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 45}
  Any one who has common sense will remember that the bewilderments of      
the eyes are of two kinds, and arise from two causes, either from           
coming out of the light or from going into the light, which is true of      
the mind's eye, quite as much as of the bodily eye; and he who              
remembers this when he sees any one whose vision is perplexed and           
weak, will not be too ready to laugh; he will first ask whether that        
soul of man has come out of the brighter light, and is unable to see        
because unaccustomed to the dark, or having turned from darkness to         
the day is dazzled by excess of light. And he will count the one happy      
in his condition and state of being, and he will pity the other; or,        
if he have a mind to laugh at the soul which comes from below into the      
light, there will be more reason in this than in the laugh which            
greets him who returns from above out of the light into the den.            
  That, he said, is a very just distinction.                                
  But then, if I am right, certain professors of education must be          
wrong when they say that they can put a knowledge into the soul             
which was not there before, like sight into blind eyes.                     
  They undoubtedly say this, he replied.                                    
  Whereas, our argument shows that the power and capacity of                
learning exists in the soul already; and that just as the eye was           
unable to turn from darkness to light without the whole body, so too        
the instrument of knowledge can only by the movement of the whole soul      
be turned from the world of becoming into that of being, and learn          
by degrees to endure the sight of being, and of the brightest and best      
of being, or in other words, of the good.                                   
                                                    {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 50}
  Very true.                                                                
  And must there not be some art which will effect conversion in the        
easiest and quickest manner; not implanting the faculty of sight,           
for that exists already, but has been turned in the wrong direction,        
and is looking away from the truth?                                         
  Yes, he said, such an art may be presumed.                                
  And whereas the other so-called virtues of the soul seem to be            
akin to bodily qualities, for even when they are not originally innate      
they can be implanted later by habit and exercise, the of wisdom            
more than anything else contains a divine element which always              
remains, and by this conversion is rendered useful and profitable; or,      
on the other hand, hurtful and useless. Did you never observe the           
narrow intelligence flashing from the keen eye of a clever rogue --how      
eager he is, how clearly his paltry soul sees the way to his end; he        
is the reverse of blind, but his keen eyesight is forced into the           
service of evil, and he is mischievous in proportion to his                 
cleverness.                                                                 
  Very true, he said.                                                       
                                                    {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 55}
  But what if there had been a circumcision of such natures in the          
days of their youth; and they had been severed from those sensual           
pleasures, such as eating and drinking, which, like leaden weights,         
were attached to them at their birth, and which drag them down and          
turn the vision of their souls upon the things that are below --if,         
I say, they had been released from these impediments and turned in the      
opposite direction, the very same faculty in them would have seen           
the truth as keenly as they see what their eyes are turned to now.          
  Very likely.                                                              
  Yes, I said; and there is another thing which is likely. or rather a      
necessary inference from what has preceded, that neither the                
uneducated and uninformed of the truth, nor yet those who never make        
an end of their education, will be able ministers of State; not the         
former, because they have no single aim of duty which is the rule of        
all their actions, private as well as public; nor the latter,               
because they will not act at all except upon compulsion, fancying that      
they are already dwelling apart in the islands of the blest.                
  Very true, he replied.                                                    
  Then, I said, the business of us who are the founders of the State        
will be to compel the best minds to attain that knowledge which we          
have already shown to be the greatest of all-they must continue to          
ascend until they arrive at the good; but when they have ascended           
and seen enough we must not allow them to do as they do now.                
                                                    {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 60}
  What do you mean?                                                         
  I mean that they remain in the upper world: but this must not be          
allowed; they must be made to descend again among the prisoners in the      
den, and partake of their labours and honours, whether they are             
worth having or not.                                                        
  But is not this unjust? he said; ought we to give them a worse life,      
when they might have a better?                                              
  You have again forgotten, my friend, I said, the intention of the         
legislator, who did not aim at making any one class in the State happy      
above the rest; the happiness was to be in the whole State, and he          
held the citizens together by persuasion and necessity, making them         
benefactors of the State, and therefore benefactors of one another; to      
this end he created them, not to please themselves, but to be his           
instruments in binding up the State.                                        
  True, he said, I had forgotten.                                           
                                                    {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 65}
  Observe, Glaucon, that there will be no injustice in compelling           
our philosophers to have a care and providence of others; we shall          
explain to them that in other States, men of their class are not            
obliged to share in the toils of politics: and this is reasonable, for      
they grow up at their own sweet will, and the government would              
rather not have them. Being self-taught, they cannot be expected to         
show any gratitude for a culture which they have never received. But        
we have brought you into the world to be rulers of the hive, kings          
of yourselves and of the other citizens, and have educated you far          
better and more perfectly than they have been educated, and you are         
better able to share in the double duty. Wherefore each of you, when        
his turn comes, must go down to the general underground abode, and get      
the habit of seeing in the dark. When you have acquired the habit, you      
will see ten thousand times better than the inhabitants of the den,         
and you will know what the several images are, and what they                
represent, because you have seen the beautiful and just and good in         
their truth. And thus our State which is also yours will be a reality,      
and not a dream only, and will be administered in a spirit unlike that      
of other States, in which men fight with one another about shadows          
only and are distracted in the struggle for power, which in their eyes      
is a great good. Whereas the truth is that the State in which the           
rulers are most reluctant to govern is always the best and most             
quietly governed, and the State in which they are most eager, the           
worst.                                                                      
  Quite true, he replied.                                                   
  And will our pupils, when they hear this, refuse to take their            
turn at the toils of State, when they are allowed to spend the greater      
part of their time with one another in the heavenly light?                  
  Impossible, he answered; for they are just men, and the commands          
which we impose upon them are just; there can be no doubt that every        
one of them will take office as a stern necessity, and not after the        
fashion of our present rulers of State.                                     
  Yes, my friend, I said; and there lies the point. You must                
contrive for your future rulers another and a better life than that of      
a ruler, and then you may have a well-ordered State; for only in the        
State which offers this, will they rule who are truly rich, not in          
silver and gold, but in virtue and wisdom, which are the true               
blessings of life. Whereas if they go to the administration of              
public affairs, poor and hungering after the' own private advantage,        
thinking that hence they are to snatch the chief good, order there can      
never be; for they will be fighting about office, and the civil and         
domestic broils which thus arise will be the ruin of the rulers             
themselves and of the whole State.                                          
                                                    {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 70}
  Most true, he replied.                                                    
  And the only life which looks down upon the life of political             
ambition is that of true philosophy. Do you know of any other?              
  Indeed, I do not, he said.                                                
  And those who govern ought not to be lovers of the task? For, if          
they are, there will be rival lovers, and they will fight.                  
  No question.                                                              
                                                    {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 75}
  Who then are those whom we shall compel to be guardians? Surely they      
will be the men who are wisest about affairs of State, and by whom the      
State is best administered, and who at the same time have other             
honours and another and a better life than that of politics?                
  They are the men, and I will choose them, he replied.                     
  And now shall we consider in what way such guardians will be              
produced, and how they are to be brought from darkness to light,            
--as some are said to have ascended from the world below to the gods?       
  By all means, he replied.                                                 
                                                    {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 80}
  The process, I said, is not the turning over of an oyster-shell, but      
the turning round of a soul passing from a day which is little              
better than night to the true day of being, that is, the ascent from        
below, which we affirm to be true philosophy?                               
  Quite so.                                                                 
  And should we not enquire what sort of knowledge has the power of         
effecting such a change?                                                    
  Certainly.                                                                
  What sort of knowledge is there which would draw the soul from            
becoming to being? And another consideration has just occurred to           
me: You will remember that our young men are to be warrior athletes         
                                                    {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 85}
  Yes, that was said.                                                       
  Then this new kind of knowledge must have an additional quality?          
  What quality?                                                             
  Usefulness in war.                                                        
  Yes, if possible.                                                         
                                                    {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 90}
  There were two parts in our former scheme of education, were there        
not?                                                                        
  Just so.                                                                  
  There was gymnastic which presided over the growth and decay of           
the body, and may therefore be regarded as having to do with                
generation and corruption?                                                  
  True.                                                                     
  Then that is not the knowledge which we are seeking to discover? No.      
                                                    {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 95}
  But what do you say of music, which also entered to a certain extent      
into our former scheme?                                                     
  Music, he said, as you will remember, was the counterpart of              
gymnastic, and trained the guardians by the influences of habit, by         
harmony making them harmonious, by rhythm rhythmical, but not giving        
them science; and the words, whether fabulous or possibly true, had         
kindred elements of rhythm and harmony in them. But in music there was      
nothing which tended to that good which you are now seeking.                
  You are most accurate, I said, in your recollection; in music             
there certainly was nothing of the kind. But what branch of                 
knowledge is there, my dear Glaucon, which is of the desired nature;        
since all the useful arts were reckoned mean by us?                         
  Undoubtedly; and yet if music and gymnastic are excluded, and the         
arts are also excluded, what remains?                                       
  Well, I said, there may be nothing left of our special subjects; and      
then we shall have to take something which is not special, but of           
universal application.                                                      
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 100}
  What may that be?                                                         
  A something which all arts and sciences and intelligences use in          
common, and which every one first has to learn among the elements of        
education.                                                                  
  What is that?                                                             
  The little matter of distinguishing one, two, and three --in a word,      
number and calculation: --do not all arts and sciences necessarily          
partake of them?                                                            
  Yes.                                                                      
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 105}
  Then the art of war partakes of them?                                     
  To the sure.                                                              
  Then Palamedes, whenever he appears in tragedy, proves Agamemnon          
ridiculously unfit to be a general. Did you never remark how he             
declares that he had invented number, and had numbered the ships and        
set in array the ranks of the army at Troy; which implies that they         
had never been numbered before, and Agamemnon must be supposed              
literally to have been incapable of counting his own feet --how             
could he if he was ignorant of number? And if that is true, what            
sort of general must he have been?                                          
  I should say a very strange one, if this was as you say.                  
  Can we deny that a warrior should have a knowledge of arithmetic?         
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 110}
  Certainly he should, if he is to have the smallest understanding          
of military tactics, or indeed, I should rather say, if he is to be         
a man at all.                                                               
  I should like to know whether you have the same notion which I            
have of this study?                                                         
  What is your notion?                                                      
  It appears to me to be a study of the kind which we are seeking, and      
which leads naturally to reflection, but never to have been rightly         
used; for the true use of it is simply to draw the soul towards being.      
  Will you explain your meaning? he said.                                   
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 115}
  I will try, I said; and I wish you would share the enquiry with           
me, and say 'yes' or 'no' when I attempt to distinguish in my own mind      
what branches of knowledge have this attracting power, in order that        
we may have clearer proof that arithmetic is, as I suspect, one of          
them.                                                                       
  Explain, he said.                                                         
  I mean to say that objects of sense are of two kinds; some of them        
do not invite thought because the sense is an adequate judge of             
them; while in the case of other objects sense is so untrustworthy          
that further enquiry is imperatively demanded.                              
  You are clearly referring, he said, to the manner in which the            
senses are imposed upon by distance, and by painting in light and           
shade.                                                                      
  No, I said, that is not at all my meaning.                                
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 120}
  Then what is your meaning?                                                
  When speaking of uninviting objects, I mean those which do not            
pass from one sensation to the opposite; inviting objects are those         
which do; in this latter case the sense coming upon the object,             
whether at a distance or near, gives no more vivid idea of anything in      
particular than of its opposite. An illustration will make my               
meaning clearer: --here are three fingers --a little finger, a              
second finger, and a middle finger.                                         
  Very good.                                                                
  You may suppose that they are seen quite close: And here comes the        
point.                                                                      
  What is it?                                                               
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 125}
  Each of them equally appears a finger, whether seen in the middle or      
at the extremity, whether white or black, or thick or thin --it             
makes no difference; a finger is a finger all the same. In these cases      
a man is not compelled to ask of thought the question, what is a            
finger? for the sight never intimates to the mind that a finger is          
other than a finger.                                                        
  True.                                                                     
  And therefore, I said, as we might expect, there is nothing here          
which invites or excites intelligence.                                      
  There is not, he said.                                                    
  But is this equally true of the greatness and smallness of the            
fingers? Can sight adequately perceive them? and is no difference made      
by the circumstance that one of the fingers is in the middle and            
another at the extremity? And in like manner does the touch adequately      
perceive the qualities of thickness or thinness, or softness or             
hardness? And so of the other senses; do they give perfect intimations      
of such matters? Is not their mode of operation on this wise --the          
sense which is concerned with the quality of hardness is necessarily        
concerned also with the quality of softness, and only intimates to the      
soul that the same thing is felt to be both hard and soft?                  
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 130}
  You are quite right, he said.                                             
  And must not the soul be perplexed at this intimation which the           
sense gives of a hard which is also soft? What, again, is the               
meaning of light and heavy, if that which is light is also heavy,           
and that which is heavy, light?                                             
  Yes, he said, these intimations which the soul receives are very          
curious and require to be explained.                                        
  Yes, I said, and in these perplexities the soul naturally summons to      
her aid calculation and intelligence, that she may see whether the          
several objects announced to her are one or two.                            
  True.                                                                     
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 135}
  And if they turn out to be two, is not each of them one and               
different?                                                                  
  Certainly.                                                                
  And if each is one, and both are two, she will conceive the two as        
in a state of division, for if there were undivided they could only be      
conceived of as one?                                                        
  True.                                                                     
  The eye certainly did see both small and great, but only in a             
confused manner; they were not distinguished.                               
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 140}
  Yes.                                                                      
  Whereas the thinking mind, intending to light up the chaos, was           
compelled to reverse the process, and look at small and great as            
separate and not confused.                                                  
  Very true.                                                                
  Was not this the beginning of the enquiry 'What is great?' and 'What      
is small?'                                                                  
  Exactly so.                                                               
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 145}
  And thus arose the distinction of the visible and the intelligible.       
  Most true.                                                                
  This was what I meant when I spoke of impressions which invited           
the intellect, or the reverse --those which are simultaneous with           
opposite impressions, invite thought; those which are not simultaneous      
do not.                                                                     
  I understand, he said, and agree with you.                                
  And to which class do unity and number belong?                            
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 150}
  I do not know, he replied.                                                
  Think a little and you will see that what has preceded will supply        
the answer; for if simple unity could be adequately perceived by the        
sight or by any other sense, then, as we were saying in the case of         
the finger, there would be nothing to attract towards being; but            
when there is some contradiction always present, and one is the             
reverse of one and involves the conception of plurality, then               
thought begins to be aroused within us, and the soul perplexed and          
wanting to arrive at a decision asks 'What is absolute unity?' This is      
the way in which the study of the one has a power of drawing and            
converting the mind to the contemplation of true being.                     
  And surely, he said, this occurs notably in the case of one; for          
we see the same thing to be both one and infinite in multitude?             
  Yes, I said; and this being true of one must be equally true of           
all number?                                                                 
  Certainly.                                                                
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 155}
  And all arithmetic and calculation have to do with number?                
  Yes.                                                                      
  And they appear to lead the mind towards truth?                           
  Yes, in a very remarkable manner.                                         
  Then this is knowledge of the kind for which we are seeking,              
having a double use, military and philosophical; for the man of war         
must learn the art of number or he will not know how to array his           
troops, and the philosopher also, because he has to rise out of the         
sea of change and lay hold of true being, and therefore he must be          
an arithmetician.                                                           
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 160}
  That is true.                                                             
  And our guardian is both warrior and philosopher?                         
  Certainly.                                                                
  Then this is a kind of knowledge which legislation may fitly              
prescribe; and we must endeavour to persuade those who are prescribe        
to be the principal men of our State to go and learn arithmetic, not        
as amateurs, but they must carry on the study until they see the            
nature of numbers with the mind only; nor again, like merchants or          
retail-traders, with a view to buying or selling, but for the sake          
of their military use, and of the soul herself; and because this            
will be the easiest way for her to pass from becoming to truth and          
being.                                                                      
  That is excellent, he said.                                               
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 165}
  Yes, I said, and now having spoken of it, I must add how charming         
the science is! and in how many ways it conduces to our desired end,        
if pursued in the spirit of a philosopher, and not of a shopkeeper!         
  How do you mean?                                                          
  I mean, as I was saying, that arithmetic has a very great and             
elevating effect, compelling the soul to reason about abstract number,      
and rebelling against the introduction of visible or tangible               
objects into the argument. You know how steadily the masters of the         
art repel and ridicule any one who attempts to divide absolute unity        
when he is calculating, and if you divide, they multiply, taking            
care that one shall continue one and not become lost in fractions.          
  That is very true.                                                        
  Now, suppose a person were to say to them: O my friends, what are         
these wonderful numbers about which you are reasoning, in which, as         
you say, there is a unity such as you demand, and each unit is              
equal, invariable, indivisible, --what would they answer?                   
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 170}
  They would answer, as I should conceive, that they were speaking          
of those numbers which can only be realised in thought.                     
  Then you see that this knowledge may be truly called necessary,           
necessitating as it clearly does the use of the pure intelligence in        
the attainment of pure truth?                                               
  Yes; that is a marked characteristic of it.                               
  And have you further observed, that those who have a natural              
talent for calculation are generally quick at every other kind of           
knowledge; and even the dull if they have had an arithmetical               
training, although they may derive no other advantage from it,              
always become much quicker than they would otherwise have been.             
  Very true, he said.                                                       
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 175}
  And indeed, you will not easily find a more difficult study, and not      
many as difficult.                                                          
  You will not.                                                             
  And, for all these reasons, arithmetic is a kind of knowledge in          
which the best natures should be trained, and which must not be             
given up.                                                                   
  I agree.                                                                  
  Let this then be made one of our subjects of education. And next,         
shall we enquire whether the kindred science also concerns us?              
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 180}
  You mean geometry?                                                        
  Exactly so.                                                               
  Clearly, he said, we are concerned with that part of geometry             
which relates to war; for in pitching a camp, or taking up a position,      
or closing or extending the lines of an army, or any other military         
manoeuvre, whether in actual battle or on a march, it will make all         
the difference whether a general is or is not a geometrician.               
  Yes, I said, but for that purpose a very little of either geometry        
or calculation will be enough; the question relates rather to the           
greater and more advanced part of geometry --whether that tends in any      
degree to make more easy the vision of the idea of good; and                
thither, as I was saying, all things tend which compel the soul to          
turn her gaze towards that place, where is the full perfection of           
being, which she ought, by all means, to behold.                            
  True, he said.                                                            
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 185}
  Then if geometry compels us to view being, it concerns us; if             
becoming only, it does not concern us?                                      
  Yes, that is what we assert.                                              
  Yet anybody who has the least acquaintance with geometry will not         
deny that such a conception of the science is in flat contradiction to      
the ordinary language of geometricians.                                     
  How so?                                                                   
  They have in view practice only, and are always speaking? in a            
narrow and ridiculous manner, of squaring and extending and applying        
and the like --they confuse the necessities of geometry with those          
of daily life; whereas knowledge is the real object of the whole            
science.                                                                    
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 190}
  Certainly, he said.                                                       
  Then must not a further admission be made?                                
  What admission?                                                           
  That the knowledge at which geometry aims is knowledge of the             
eternal, and not of aught perishing and transient.                          
  That, he replied, may be readily allowed, and is true.                    
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 195}
  Then, my noble friend, geometry will draw the soul towards truth,         
and create the spirit of philosophy, and raise up that which is now         
unhappily allowed to fall down.                                             
  Nothing will be more likely to have such an effect.                       
  Then nothing should be more sternly laid down than that the               
inhabitants of your fair city should by all means learn geometry.           
Moreover the science has indirect effects, which are not small.             
  Of what kind? he said.                                                    
  There are the military advantages of which you spoke, I said; and in      
all departments of knowledge, as experience proves, any one who has         
studied geometry is infinitely quicker of apprehension than one who         
has not.                                                                    
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 200}
  Yes indeed, he said, there is an infinite difference between them.        
  Then shall we propose this as a second branch of knowledge which our      
youth will study?                                                           
  Let us do so, he replied.                                                 
  And suppose we make astronomy the third --what do you say?                
  I am strongly inclined to it, he said; the observation of the             
seasons and of months and years is as essential to the general as it        
is to the farmer or sailor.                                                 
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 205}
  I am amused, I said, at your fear of the world, which makes you           
guard against the appearance of insisting upon useless studies; and         
I quite admit the difficulty of believing that in every man there is        
an eye of the soul which, when by other pursuits lost and dimmed, is        
by these purified and re-illumined; and is more precious far than           
ten thousand bodily eyes, for by it alone is truth seen. Now there are      
two classes of persons: one class of those who will agree with you and      
will take your words as a revelation; another class to whom they            
will be utterly unmeaning, and who will naturally deem them to be idle      
tales, for they see no sort of profit which is to be obtained from          
them. And therefore you had better decide at once with which of the         
two you are proposing to argue. You will very likely say with neither,      
and that your chief aim in carrying on the argument is your own             
improvement; at the same time you do not grudge to others any               
benefit which they may receive.                                             
  I think that I should prefer to carry on the argument mainly on my        
own behalf.                                                                 
  Then take a step backward, for we have gone wrong in the order of         
the sciences.                                                               
  What was the mistake? he said.                                            
  After plane geometry, I said, we proceeded at once to solids in           
revolution, instead of taking solids in themselves; whereas after           
the second dimension the third, which is concerned with cubes and           
dimensions of depth, ought to have followed.                                
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 210}
  That is true, Socrates; but so little seems to be known as yet about      
these subjects.                                                             
  Why, yes, I said, and for two reasons: --in the first place, no           
government patronises them; this leads to a want of energy in the           
pursuit of them, and they are difficult; in the second place, students      
cannot learn them unless they have a director. But then a director can      
hardly be found, and even if he could, as matters now stand, the            
students, who are very conceited, would not attend to him. That,            
however, would be otherwise if the whole State became the director          
of these studies and gave honour to them; then disciples would want to      
come, and there would be continuous and earnest search, and                 
discoveries would be made; since even now, disregarded as they are          
by the world, and maimed of their fair proportions, and although            
none of their votaries can tell the use of them, still these studies        
force their way by their natural charm, and very likely, if they had        
the help of the State, they would some day emerge into light.               
  Yes, he said, there is a remarkable charm in them. But I do not           
clearly understand the change in the order. First you began with a          
geometry of plane surfaces?                                                 
  Yes, I said.                                                              
  And you placed astronomy next, and then you made a step backward?         
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 215}
  Yes, and I have delayed you by my hurry; the ludicrous state of           
solid geometry, which, in natural order, should have followed, made me      
pass over this branch and go on to astronomy, or motion of solids.          
  True, he said.                                                            
  Then assuming that the science now omitted would come into existence      
if encouraged by the State, let us go on to astronomy, which will be        
fourth.                                                                     
  The right order, he replied. And now, Socrates, as you rebuked the        
vulgar manner in which I praised astronomy before, my praise shall          
be given in your own spirit. For every one, as I think, must see            
that astronomy compels the soul to look upwards and leads us from this      
world to another.                                                           
  Every one but myself, I said; to every one else this may be clear,        
but not to me.                                                              
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 220}
  And what then would you say?                                              
  I should rather say that those who elevate astronomy into philosophy      
appear to me to make us look downwards and not upwards.                     
  What do you mean? he asked.                                               
  You, I replied, have in your mind a truly sublime conception of           
our knowledge of the things above. And I dare say that if a person          
were to throw his head back and study the fretted ceiling, you would        
still think that his mind was the percipient, and not his eyes. And         
you are very likely right, and I may be a simpleton: but, in my             
opinion, that knowledge only which is of being and of the unseen can        
make the soul look upwards, and whether a man gapes at the heavens          
or blinks on the ground, seeking to learn some particular of sense,         
I would deny that he can learn, for nothing of that sort is matter          
of science; his soul is looking downwards, not upwards, whether his         
way to knowledge is by water or by land, whether he floats, or only         
lies on his back.                                                           
  I acknowledge, he said, the justice of your rebuke. Still, I              
should like to ascertain how astronomy can be learned in any manner         
more conducive to that knowledge of which we are speaking?                  
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 225}
  I will tell you, I said: The starry heaven which we behold is             
wrought upon a visible ground, and therefore, although the fairest and      
most perfect of visible things, must necessarily be deemed inferior         
far to the true motions of absolute swiftness and absolute slowness,        
which are relative to each other, and carry with them that which is         
contained in them, in the true number and in every true figure. Now,        
these are to be apprehended by reason and intelligence, but not by          
sight.                                                                      
  True, he replied.                                                         
  The spangled heavens should be used as a pattern and with a view          
to that higher knowledge; their beauty is like the beauty of figures        
or pictures excellently wrought by the hand of Daedalus, or some other      
great artist, which we may chance to behold; any geometrician who           
saw them would appreciate the exquisiteness of their workmanship,           
but he would never dream of thinking that in them he could find the         
true equal or the true double, or the truth of any other proportion.        
  No, he replied, such an idea would be ridiculous.                         
  And will not a true astronomer have the same feeling when he looks        
at the movements of the stars? Will he not think that heaven and the        
things in heaven are framed by the Creator of them in the most perfect      
manner? But he will never imagine that the proportions of night and         
day, or of both to the month, or of the month to the year, or of the        
stars to these and to one another, and any other things that are            
material and visible can also be eternal and subject to no deviation        
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 230}
--that would be absurd; and it is equally absurd to take so much pains      
in investigating their exact truth.                                         
  I quite agree, though I never thought of this before.                     
  Then, I said, in astronomy, as in geometry, we should employ              
problems, and let the heavens alone if we would approach the subject        
in the right way and so make the natural gift of reason to be of any        
real use.                                                                   
  That, he said, is a work infinitely beyond our present astronomers.       
  Yes, I said; and there are many other things which must also have         
a similar extension given to them, if our legislation is to be of           
any value. But can you tell me of any other suitable study?                 
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 235}
  No, he said, not without thinking.                                        
  Motion, I said, has many forms, and not one only; two of them are         
obvious enough even to wits no better than ours; and there are others,      
as I imagine, which may be left to wiser persons.                           
  But where are the two?                                                    
  There is a second, I said, which is the counterpart of the one            
already named.                                                              
  And what may that be?                                                     
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 240}
  The second, I said, would seem relatively to the ears to be what the      
first is to the eyes; for I conceive that as the eyes are designed          
to look up at the stars, so are the ears to hear harmonious motions;        
and these are sister sciences --as the Pythagoreans say, and we,            
Glaucon, agree with them?                                                   
  Yes, he replied.                                                          
  But this, I said, is a laborious study, and therefore we had              
better go and learn of them; and they will tell us whether there are        
any other applications of these sciences. At the same time, we must         
not lose sight of our own higher object.                                    
  What is that?                                                             
  There is a perfection which all knowledge ought to reach, and             
which our pupils ought also to attain, and not to fall short of, as         
I was saying that they did in astronomy. For in the science of              
harmony, as you probably know, the same thing happens. The teachers of      
harmony compare the sounds and consonances which are heard only, and        
their labour, like that of the astronomers, is in vain.                     
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 245}
  Yes, by heaven! he said; and 'tis as good as a play to hear them          
talking about their condensed notes, as they call them; they put their      
ears close alongside of the strings like persons catching a sound from      
their neighbour's wall --one set of them declaring that they                
distinguish an intermediate note and have found the least interval          
which should be the unit of measurement; the others insisting that the      
two sounds have passed into the same --either party setting their ears      
before their understanding.                                                 
  You mean, I said, those gentlemen who tease and torture the               
strings and rack them on the pegs of the instrument: might carry on         
the metaphor and speak after their manner of the blows which the            
plectrum gives, and make accusations against the strings, both of           
backwardness and forwardness to sound; but this would be tedious,           
and therefore I will only say that these are not the men, and that I        
am referring to the Pythagoreans, of whom I was just now proposing          
to enquire about harmony. For they too are in error, like the               
astronomers; they investigate the numbers of the harmonies which are        
heard, but they never attain to problems-that is to say, they never         
reach the natural harmonies of number, or reflect why some numbers are      
harmonious and others not.                                                  
  That, he said, is a thing of more than mortal knowledge.                  
  A thing, I replied, which I would rather call useful; that is, if         
sought after with a view to the beautiful and good; but if pursued          
in any other spirit, useless. Very true, he said.                           
  Now, when all these studies reach the point of inter-communion and        
connection with one another, and come to be considered in their mutual      
affinities, then, I think, but not till then, will the pursuit of them      
have a value for our objects; otherwise there is no profit in them.         
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 250}
  I suspect so; but you are speaking, Socrates, of a vast work.             
  What do you mean? I said; the prelude or what? Do you not know            
that all this is but the prelude to the actual strain which we have to      
learn? For you surely would not regard the skilled mathematician as         
a dialectician?                                                             
  Assuredly not, he said; I have hardly ever known a mathematician who      
was capable of reasoning.                                                   
  But do you imagine that men who are unable to give and take a reason      
will have the knowledge which we require of them?                           
  Neither can this be supposed.                                             
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 255}
  And so, Glaucon, I said, we have at last arrived at the hymn of           
dialectic. This is that strain which is of the intellect only, but          
which the faculty of sight will nevertheless be found to imitate;           
for sight, as you may remember, was imagined by us after a while to         
behold the real animals and stars, and last of all the sun himself.         
And so with dialectic; when a person starts on the discovery of the         
absolute by the light of reason only, and without any assistance of         
sense, and perseveres until by pure intelligence he arrives at the          
perception of the absolute good, he at last finds himself at the end        
of the intellectual world, as in the case of sight at the end of the        
visible.                                                                    
  Exactly, he said.                                                         
  Then this is the progress which you call dialectic?                       
  True.                                                                     
  But the release of the prisoners from chains, and their                   
translation from the shadows to the images and to the light, and the        
ascent from the underground den to the sun, while in his presence they      
are vainly trying to look on animals and plants and the light of the        
sun, but are able to perceive even with their weak eyes the images          
in the water (which are divine), and are the shadows of true existence      
(not shadows of images cast by a light of fire, which compared with         
the sun is only an image) --this power of elevating the highest             
principle in the soul to the contemplation of that which is best in         
existence, with which we may compare the raising of that faculty which      
is the very light of the body to the sight of that which is                 
brightest in the material and visible world --this power is given,          
as I was saying, by all that study and pursuit of the arts which has        
been described.                                                             
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 260}
  I agree in what you are saying, he replied, which may be hard to          
believe, yet, from another point of view, is harder still to deny.          
This, however, is not a theme to be treated of in passing only, but         
will have to be discussed again and again. And so, whether our              
conclusion be true or false, let us assume all this, and proceed at         
once from the prelude or preamble to the chief strain, and describe         
that in like manner. Say, then, what is the nature and what are the         
divisions of dialectic, and what are the paths which lead thither; for      
these paths will also lead to our final rest?                               
  Dear Glaucon, I said, you will not be able to follow me here, though      
I would do my best, and you should behold not an image only but the         
absolute truth, according to my notion. Whether what I told you             
would or would not have been a reality I cannot venture to say; but         
you would have seen something like reality; of that I am confident.         
  Doubtless, he replied.                                                    
  But I must also remind you, that the power of dialectic alone can         
reveal this, and only to one who is a disciple of the previous              
sciences.                                                                   
  Of that assertion you may be as confident as of the last.                 
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 265}
  And assuredly no one will argue that there is any other method of         
comprehending by any regular process all true existence or of               
ascertaining what each thing is in its own nature; for the arts in          
general are concerned with the desires or opinions of men, or are           
cultivated with a view to production and construction, or for the           
preservation of such productions and constructions; and as to the           
mathematical sciences which, as we were saying, have some apprehension      
of true being --geometry and the like --they only dream about being,        
but never can they behold the waking reality so long as they leave the      
hypotheses which they use unexamined, and are unable to give an             
account of them. For when a man knows not his own first principle, and      
when the conclusion and intermediate steps are also constructed out of      
he knows not what, how can he imagine that such a fabric of convention      
can ever become science?                                                    
  Impossible, he said.                                                      
  Then dialectic, and dialectic alone, goes directly to the first           
principle and is the only science which does away with hypotheses in        
order to make her ground secure; the eye of the soul, which is              
literally buried in an outlandish slough, is by her gentle aid              
lifted upwards; and she uses as handmaids and helpers in the work of        
conversion, the sciences which we have been discussing. Custom terms        
them sciences, but they ought to have some other name, implying             
greater clearness than opinion and less clearness than science: and         
this, in our previous sketch, was called understanding. But why should      
we dispute about names when we have realities of such importance to         
consider?                                                                   
  Why indeed, he said, when any name will do which expresses the            
thought of the mind with clearness?                                         
  At any rate, we are satisfied, as before, to have four divisions;         
two for intellect and two for opinion, and to call the first                
division science, the second understanding, the third belief, and           
the fourth perception of shadows, opinion being concerned with              
becoming, and intellect with being; and so to make a proportion: --         
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 270}
-                                                                           
  As being is to becoming, so is pure intellect to opinion.                 
  And as intellect is to opinion, so is science to belief, and              
understanding to the perception of shadows.                                 
-                                                                           
But let us defer the further correlation and subdivision of the             
subjects of opinion and of intellect, for it will be a long enquiry,        
many times longer than this has been.                                       
  As far as I understand, he said, I agree.                                 
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 275}
  And do you also agree, I said, in describing the dialectician as one      
who attains a conception of the essence of each thing? And he who does      
not possess and is therefore unable to impart this conception, in           
whatever degree he fails, may in that degree also be said to fail in        
intelligence? Will you admit so much?                                       
  Yes, he said; how can I deny it?                                          
  And you would say the same of the conception of the good?                 
  Until the person is able to abstract and define rationally the            
idea of good, and unless he can run the gauntlet of all objections,         
and is ready to disprove them, not by appeals to opinion, but to            
absolute truth, never faltering at any step of the argument --unless        
he can do all this, you would say that he knows neither the idea of         
good nor any other good; he apprehends only a shadow, if anything at        
all, which is given by opinion and not by science; --dreaming and           
slumbering in this life, before he is well awake here, he arrives at        
the world below, and has his final quietus.                                 
  In all that I should most certainly agree with you.                       
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 280}
  And surely you would not have the children of your ideal State, whom      
you are nurturing and educating --if the ideal ever becomes a               
reality --you would not allow the future rulers to be like posts,           
having no reason in them, and yet to be set in authority over the           
highest matters?                                                            
  Certainly not.                                                            
  Then you will make a law that they shall have such an education as        
will enable them to attain the greatest skill in asking and                 
answering questions?                                                        
  Yes, he said, you and I together will make it.                            
  Dialectic, then, as you will agree, is the coping-stone of the            
sciences, and is set over them; no other science can be placed              
higher --the nature of knowledge can no further go?                         
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 285}
  I agree, he said.                                                         
  But to whom we are to assign these studies, and in what way they are      
to be assigned, are questions which remain to be considered?                
  Yes, clearly.                                                             
  You remember, I said, how the rulers were chosen before?                  
  Certainly, he said.                                                       
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 290}
  The same natures must still be chosen, and the preference again           
given to the surest and the bravest, and, if possible, to the fairest;      
and, having noble and generous tempers, they should also have the           
natural gifts which will facilitate their education.                        
  And what are these?                                                       
  Such gifts as keenness and ready powers of acquisition; for the mind      
more often faints from the severity of study than from the severity of      
gymnastics: the toil is more entirely the mind's own, and is not            
shared with the body.                                                       
  Very true, he replied.                                                    
  Further, he of whom we are in search should have a good memory,           
and be an unwearied solid man who is a lover of labour in any line; or      
he will never be able to endure the great amount of bodily exercise         
and to go through all the intellectual discipline and study which we        
require of him.                                                             
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 295}
  Certainly, he said; he must have natural gifts.                           
  The mistake at present is, that those who study philosophy have no        
vocation, and this, as I was before saying, is the reason why she           
has fallen into disrepute: her true sons should take her by the hand        
and not bastards.                                                           
  What do you mean?                                                         
  In the first place, her votary should not have a lame or halting          
industry --I mean, that he should not be half industrious and half          
idle: as, for example, when a man is a lover of gymnastic and hunting,      
and all other bodily exercises, but a hater rather than a lover of the      
labour of learning or listening or enquiring. Or the occupation to          
which he devotes himself may be of an opposite kind, and he may have        
the other sort of lameness.                                                 
  Certainly, he said.                                                       
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 300}
  And as to truth, I said, is not a soul equally to be deemed halt and      
lame which hates voluntary falsehood and is extremely indignant at          
herself and others when they tell lies, but is patient of                   
involuntary falsehood, and does not mind wallowing like a swinish           
beast in the mire of ignorance, and has no shame at being detected?         
  To be sure.                                                               
  And, again, in respect of temperance, courage, magnificence, and          
every other virtue, should we not carefully distinguish between the         
true son and the bastard? for where there is no discernment of such         
qualities States and individuals unconsciously err and the State makes      
a ruler, and the individual a friend, of one who, being defective in        
some part of virtue, is in a figure lame or a bastard.                      
  That is very true, he said.                                               
  All these things, then, will have to be carefully considered by           
us; and if only those whom we introduce to this vast system of              
education and training are sound in body and mind, justice herself          
will have nothing to say against us, and we shall be the saviours of        
the constitution and of the State; but, if our pupils are men of            
another stamp, the reverse will happen, and we shall pour a still           
greater flood of ridicule on philosophy than she has to endure at           
present.                                                                    
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 305}
  That would not be creditable.                                             
  Certainly not, I said; and yet perhaps, in thus turning jest into         
earnest I am equally ridiculous.                                            
  In what respect?                                                          
  I had forgotten, I said, that we were not serious, and spoke with         
too much excitement. For when I saw philosophy so undeservedly              
trampled under foot of men I could not help feeling a sort of               
indignation at the authors of her disgrace: and my anger made me too        
vehement.                                                                   
  Indeed! I was listening, and did not think so.                            
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 310}
  But I, who am the speaker, felt that I was. And now let me remind         
you that, although in our former selection we chose old men, we must        
not do so in this. Solon was under a delusion when he said that a           
man when he grows old may learn many things --for he can no more learn      
much than he can run much; youth is the time for any extraordinary          
toil.                                                                       
  Of course.                                                                
  And, therefore, calculation and geometry and all the other                
elements of instruction, which are a preparation for dialectic, should      
be presented to the mind in childhood; not, however, under any              
notion of forcing our system of education.                                  
  Why not?                                                                  
  Because a freeman ought not to be a slave in the acquisition of           
knowledge of any kind. Bodily exercise, when compulsory, does no            
harm to the body; but knowledge which is acquired under compulsion          
obtains no hold on the mind.                                                
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 315}
  Very true.                                                                
  Then, my good friend, I said, do not use compulsion, but let early        
education be a sort of amusement; you will then be better able to find      
out the natural bent.                                                       
  That is a very rational notion, he said.                                  
  Do you remember that the children, too, were to be taken to see           
the battle on horseback; and that if there were no danger they were to      
be brought close up and, like young hounds, have a taste of blood           
given them?                                                                 
  Yes, I remember.                                                          
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 320}
  The same practice may be followed, I said, in all these things            
--labours, lessons, dangers --and he who is most at home in all of          
them ought to be enrolled in a select number.                               
  At what age?                                                              
  At the age when the necessary gymnastics are over: the period             
whether of two or three years which passes in this sort of training is      
useless for any other purpose; for sleep and exercise are unpropitious      
to learning; and the trial of who is first in gymnastic exercises is        
one of the most important tests to which our youth are subjected.           
  Certainly, he replied.                                                    
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 325}
  After that time those who are selected from the class of twenty           
years old will be promoted to higher honour, and the sciences which         
they learned without any order in their early education will now be         
brought together, and they will be able to see the natural                  
relationship of them to one another and to true being.                      
  Yes, he said, that is the only kind of knowledge which takes lasting      
root.                                                                       
  Yes, I said; and the capacity for such knowledge is the great             
criterion of dialectical talent: the comprehensive mind is always           
the dialectical.                                                            
  I agree with you, he said.                                                
  These, I said, are the points which you must consider; and those who      
have most of this comprehension, and who are more steadfast in their        
learning, and in their military and other appointed duties, when            
they have arrived at the age of thirty have to be chosen by you out of      
the select class, and elevated to higher honour; and you will have          
to prove them by the help of dialectic, in order to learn which of          
them is able to give up the use of sight and the other senses, and          
in company with truth to attain absolute being: And here, my friend,        
great caution is required.                                                  
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 330}
  Why great caution?                                                        
  Do you not remark, I said, how great is the evil which dialectic has      
introduced?                                                                 
  What evil? he said.                                                       
  The students of the art are filled with lawlessness.                      
  Quite true, he said.                                                      
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 335}
  Do you think that there is anything so very unnatural or inexcusable      
in their case? or will you make allowance for them?                         
  In what way make allowance?                                               
  I want you, I said, by way of parallel, to imagine a                      
supposititious son who is brought up in great wealth; he is one of a        
great and numerous family, and has many flatterers. When he grows up        
to manhood, he learns that his alleged are not his real parents; but        
who the real are he is unable to discover. Can you guess how he will        
be likely to behave towards his flatterers and his supposed parents,        
first of all during the period when he is ignorant of the false             
relation, and then again when he knows? Or shall I guess for you?           
  If you please.                                                            
  Then I should say, that while he is ignorant of the truth he will be      
likely to honour his father and his mother and his supposed                 
relations more than the flatterers; he will be less inclined to             
neglect them when in need, or to do or say anything against them;           
and he will be less willing to disobey them in any important matter.        
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 340}
  He will.                                                                  
  But when he has made the discovery, I should imagine that he would        
diminish his honour and regard for them, and would become more devoted      
to the flatterers; their influence over him would greatly increase; he      
would now live after their ways, and openly associate with them,            
and, unless he were of an unusually good disposition, he would trouble      
himself no more about his supposed parents or other relations.              
  Well, all that is very probable. But how is the image applicable          
to the disciples of philosophy?                                             
  In this way: you know that there are certain principles about             
justice and honour, which were taught us in childhood, and under their      
parental authority we have been brought up, obeying and honouring           
them.                                                                       
  That is true.                                                             
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 345}
  There are also opposite maxims and habits of pleasure which               
flatter and attract the soul, but do not influence those of us who          
have any sense of right, and they continue to obey and honour the           
maxims of their fathers.                                                    
  True.                                                                     
  Now, when a man is in this state, and the questioning spirit asks         
what is fair or honourable, and he answers as the legislator has            
taught him, and then arguments many and diverse refute his words,           
until he is driven into believing that nothing is honourable any            
more than dishonourable, or just and good any more than the reverse,        
and so of all the notions which he most valued, do you think that he        
will still honour and obey them as before?                                  
  Impossible.                                                               
  And when he ceases to think them honourable and natural as                
heretofore, and he fails to discover the true, can he be expected to        
pursue any life other than that which flatters his desires?                 
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 350}
  He cannot.                                                                
  And from being a keeper of the law he is converted into a breaker of      
it?                                                                         
  Unquestionably.                                                           
  Now all this is very natural in students of philosophy such as I          
have described, and also, as I was just now saying, most excusable.         
  Yes, he said; and, I may add, pitiable.                                   
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 355}
  Therefore, that your feelings may not be moved to pity about our          
citizens who are now thirty years of age, every care must be taken          
in introducing them to dialectic.                                           
  Certainly.                                                                
  There is a danger lest they should taste the dear delight too early;      
for youngsters, as you may have observed, when they first get the           
taste in their mouths, argue for amusement, and are always                  
contradicting and refuting others in imitation of those who refute          
them; like puppy-dogs, they rejoice in pulling and tearing at all           
who come near them.                                                         
  Yes, he said, there is nothing which they like better.                    
  And when they have made many conquests and received defeats at the        
hands of many, they violently and speedily get into a way of not            
believing anything which they believed before, and hence, not only          
they, but philosophy and all that relates to it is apt to have a bad        
name with the rest of the world.                                            
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 360}
  Too true, he said.                                                        
  But when a man begins to get older, he will no longer be guilty of        
such insanity; he will imitate the dialectician who is seeking for          
truth, and not the eristic, who is contradicting for the sake of            
amusement; and the greater moderation of his character will increase        
instead of diminishing the honour of the pursuit.                           
  Very true, he said.                                                       
  And did we not make special provision for this, when we said that         
the disciples of philosophy were to be orderly and steadfast, not,          
as now, any chance aspirant or intruder?                                    
  Very true.                                                                
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 365}
  Suppose, I said, the study of philosophy to take the place of             
gymnastics and to be continued diligently and earnestly and                 
exclusively for twice the number of years which were passed in              
bodily exercise --will that be enough?                                      
  Would you say six or four years? he asked.                                
  Say five years, I replied; at the end of the time they must be            
sent down again into the den and compelled to hold any military or          
other office which young men are qualified to hold: in this way they        
will get their experience of life, and there will be an opportunity of      
trying whether, when they are drawn all manner of ways by                   
temptation, they will stand firm or flinch.                                 
  And how long is this stage of their lives to last?                        
  Fifteen years, I answered; and when they have reached fifty years of      
age, then let those who still survive and have distinguished                
themselves in every action of their lives and in every branch of            
knowledge come at last to their consummation; the time has now arrived      
at which they must raise the eye of the soul to the universal light         
which lightens all things, and behold the absolute good; for that is        
the, pattern according to which they are to order the State and the         
lives of individuals, and the remainder of their own lives also;            
making philosophy their chief pursuit, but, when their turn comes,          
toiling also at politics and ruling for the public good, not as though      
they were performing some heroic action, but simply as a matter of          
duty; and when they have brought up in each generation others like          
themselves and left them in their place to be governors of the              
State, then they will depart to the Islands of the Blest and dwell          
there; and the city will give them public memorials and sacrifices and      
honour them, if the Pythian oracle consent, as demi-gods, but if            
not, as in any case blessed and divine.                                     
                                                   {BOOK_VII ^paragraph 370}
  You are a sculptor, Socrates, and have made statues of our governors      
faultless in beauty.                                                        
  Yes, I said, Glaucon, and of our governesses too; for you must not        
suppose that what I have been saying applies to men only and not to         
women as far as their natures can go.                                       
  There you are right, he said, since we have made them to share in         
all things like the men.                                                    
  Well, I said, and you would agree (would you not?) that what has          
been said about the State and the government is not a mere dream,           
and although difficult not impossible, but only possible in the way         
which has been supposed; that is to say, when the true philosopher          
kings are born in a State, one or more of them, despising the               
honours of this present world which they deem mean and worthless,           

Electronically Enhanced Text (C) Copyright 1991 World Library, Incorporated.
--------------------------------------------------------------

