按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
and other
precious metals； these are at last refined away by the use of tests；
until the gold is left quite pure。
Y。 Soc。 Yes； that is the way in which these things are said to be
done。
Str。 In like manner； all alien and uncongenial matter has been
separated from political science； and what is precious and of a
kindred nature has been left； there remain the nobler arts of the
general and the judge； and the higher sort of oratory which
is an ally
of the royal art； and persuades men to do justice； and assists in
guiding the helm of States：…How can we best clear away all these；
leaving him whom we seek alone and unalloyed？
Y。 Soc。 That is obviously what has in some way to be attempted。
Str。 If the attempt is all that is wanting； he shall certainly be
brought to light； and I think that the illustration of music may
assist in exhibiting him。 Please to answer me a question。
Y。 Soc。 What question？
Str。 There is such a thing as learning music or handicraft arts in
general？
Y。 Soc。 There is。
Str。 And is there any higher art or science； having power to
decide which of these arts are and are not to be learned；…what do
you say？
Y。 Soc。 I should answer that there is。
Str。 And do we acknowledge this science to be different from the
others？
Y。 Soc。 Yes。
Str。 And ought the other sciences to be superior to this； or no
single science to any other？ Or ought this science to be the
overseer and governor of all the others？
Y。 Soc。 The latter。
Str。 You mean to say that the science which judges whether we
ought to learn or not； must be superior to the science which is
learned or which teaches？
Y。 Soc。 Far superior。
Str。 And the science which determines whether we ought to persuade
or not； must be superior to the science which is able to persuade？
Y。 Soc。 Of course。
Str。 Very good； and to what science do we assign the power of
persuading a multitude by a pleasing tale and not by teaching？
Y。 Soc。 That power； I think； must clearly be assigned to rhetoric。
Str。 And to what science do we give the power of
determining whether
we are to employ persuasion or force towards any one； or to refrain
altogether？
Y。 Soc。 To that science which governs the arts of speech and
persuasion。
Str。 Which； if I am not mistaken； will be politics？
Y。 Soc。 Very good。
Str。 Rhetoric seems to be quickly distinguished from
politics； being
a different species； yet ministering to it。
Y。 Soc。 Yes。
Str。 But what would you think of another sort of power or science？
Y。 Soc。 What science？
Str。 The science which has to do with military operations against
our enemies…is that to be regarded as a science or not？
Y。 Soc。 How can generalship and military tactics be regarded as
other than a science？
Str。 And is the art which is able and knows how to advise when we
are to go to war； or to make peace； the same as this or different？
Y。 Soc。 If we are to be consistent； we must say different。
Str。 And we must also suppose that this rules the other； if we are
not to give up our former notion？
Y。 Soc。 True。
Str。 And； considering how great and terrible the whole art of war
is； can we imagine any which is superior to it but the truly royal？
Y。 Soc。 No other。
Str。 The art of the general is only ministerial； and therefore not
political？
Y。 Soc。 Exactly。
Str。 Once more let us consider the nature of the righteous judge。
Y。 Soc。 Very good。
Str。 Does he do anything but decide the dealings of men with one
another to be just or unjust in accordance with the standard which
he receives from the king and legislator…showing his own peculiar
virtue only in this； that he is not perverted by gifts； or fears； or
pity； or by any sort of favour or enmity； into deciding the suits of
men with one another contrary to the appointment of the legislator？
Y。 Soc。 No； his office is such as you describe。
Str。 Then the inference is that the power of the judge is
not royal；
but only the power of a guardian of the law which ministers to the
royal power？
Y。 Soc。 True。
Str。 The review of all these sciences shows that none of them is
political or royal。 For the truly royal ought not itself to act； but
to rule over those who are able to act； the king ought to
know what is
and what is not a fitting opportunity for taking the initiative in
matters of the greatest importance； whilst others； should execute
his orders。
Y。 Soc。 True。
Str。 And； therefore； the arts which we have described； as they
have no authority over themselves or one another； but are
each of them
concerned with some special action of their own； have； as they ought
to have； special names corresponding to their several actions。
Y。 Soc。 I agree。
Str。 And the science which is over them all； and has charge of the
laws； and of all matters affecting the State； and truly weaves them
all into one； if we would describe under a name characteristic of
their common nature； most truly we may call politics。
Y。 Soc。 Exactly so。
Str。 Then； now that we have discovered the various classes in a
State； shall I analyse politics after the pattern which weaving
supplied？
Y。 Soc。 I greatly wish that you would。
Str。 Then I must describe the nature of the royal web； and show
how the various threads are woven into one piece。
Y。 Soc。 Clearly。
Str。 A task has to be accomplished； which although difficult；
appears to be necessary。
Y。 Soc。 Certainly the attempt must be made。
Str。 To assume that one part of virtue differs in kind
from another；
is a position easily assailable by contentious disputants； who
appeal to popular opinion。
Y。 Soc。 I do not understand。
Str。 Let me put the matter in another way： I suppose that you
would consider courage to be a part of virtue？
Y。 Soc。 Certainly I should。
Str。 And you would think temperance to be different from courage；
and likewise to be a part of virtue？
Y。 Soc。 True。
Str。 I shall venture to put forward a strange theory about them。
Y。 Soc。 What is it？
Str。 That they are two principles which thoroughly hate one
another and are antagonistic throughout a great part of nature。
Y。 Soc。 How singular！
Str。 Yes very…for all the parts of virtue are commonly said to be
friendly to one another。
Y。 Soc。 Yes。
Str。 Then let us carefully investigate whether this is universally
true； or whether there are not parts of virtue which are at war with
their kindred in some respect。
Y。 Soc。 Tell me how we shall consider that question。
Str。 We must extend our enquiry to all those things which we
consider beautiful and at the same time place in two
opposite classes。
Y。 Soc。 Explain； what are they？
Str。 Acuteness and quickness； whether in body or soul or in the
movement of sound； and the imitations of them which painting
and music
supply； you must have praised yourself before now； or been present
when others praised them。
Y。 Soc。 Certainly。
Str。 And do you remember the terms in which they are praised？
Y。 Soc。 I do not。
Str。 I wonder whether I can explain to you in words the thought
which is passing in my mind。
Y。 Soc。 Why not？
Str。 You fancy that this is all so easy： Well； let us
consider these
notions with reference to the opposite classes of action under which
they fall。 When we praise quickness and energy and acuteness；
whether of mind or body or sound； we express our praise of
the quality
which we admire by one word； and that one word is manliness or
courage。
Y。 Soc。 How？
Str。 We speak of an action as energetic and brave； quick and
manly； and vigorous too； and when we apply the name of which I speak
as the common attribute of all these natures； we certainly praise
them。
Y。 Soc。 True。
Str。 And do we not often praise the quiet strain of action also？
Y。 Soc。 To be sure。
Str。 And do we not then say the opposite of what we said of the
other？
Y。 Soc。 How do you mean？
Str。 We exclaim How calm！ How temperate！ in admiration of the slow
and quiet working of the intellect； and of steadin