<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0059.tlg004.perseus-eng2:71-72</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0059.tlg004.perseus-eng2:71-72</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text xml:lang="eng"><body><div type="translation" n="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0059.tlg004.perseus-eng2" xml:lang="eng"><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="71"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And if it becomes
                    smaller, <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="71"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="71a"/>
            it
                    must have been greater and then have become smaller?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">That is true,</q> said he.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And the weaker is generated from the stronger, and the
                    slower from the quicker?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Certainly.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And the
                    worse from the better and the more just from the more unjust?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Of course.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then,</q> said he, <q type="spoken">we have this fact sufficiently
                    established, that all things are generated in this way, opposites from
                        opposites?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Certainly.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Now then, is
                    there between all these pairs of opposites what may be called 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="71b"/>
            two kinds of generation, from one to the other and back
                    again from the other to the first? Between a larger thing and a smaller thing
                    there is increment and diminution and we call one increasing and the other
                    decreasing, do we not?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Yes,</q>
                    said he.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And similarly analyzing and
                    combining, and cooling and heating, and all opposites in the same way. Even if
                    we do not in every case have the words to express it, yet in fact is it not
                    always inevitable that there is a process of generation from each to the
                        other?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Certainly,</q> said
                    he. 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="71c"/>
            <q type="spoken">Well then,</q> said Socrates,
                    <q type="spoken">is there anything that is the opposite of living, as being awake is the
                    opposite of sleeping?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Certainly,</q> said Cebes.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">What?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Being
                    dead,</q> said he.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then these two are
                    generated from each other, and as they are two, so the processes between them
                    are two; is it not so?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Of
                        course.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Now,</q> said
                    Socrates, <q type="spoken">I will tell about one of the two pairs of which I just spoke to
                    you and its intermediate processes; and do you tell me about the other. I say
                    one term is sleeping and the other is being awake, and being awake is generated
                    from sleeping, and sleeping from being awake, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="71d"/>
            and the processes of generation are, in the latter case, falling asleep, and
                    in the former, waking up. Do you agree, or not?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Certainly.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Now do you,</q> said he, <q type="spoken">tell me in this way about life and
                    death. Do you not say that living is the opposite of being
                        dead?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">I do.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And that they are generated one from the
                        other?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Yes.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Now what is it which is generated from the
                        living?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">The dead,</q> said
                        he.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And what,</q> said Socrates,
                    <q type="spoken">from the dead?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">I can say only
                    one thing—the living.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">From the
                    dead, then, Cebes, the living, both things and persons, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="71e"/>
            are generated?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Evidently,</q> said he.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then,</q> said Socrates, <q type="spoken">our souls exist in the other
                        world.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">So it
                        seems.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And of the two processes
                    of generation between these two, the one is plain to be seen; for surely dying
                    is plain to be seen, is it not?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Certainly,</q> said he.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Well
                    then,</q> said Socrates, <q type="spoken">what shall we do next? Shall we deny the
                    opposite process, and shall nature be one-sided in this instance? Or must we
                    grant that there is some process of generation the opposite of
                        dying?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Certainly we must,</q>
    said he.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">What is this process?</q>
    <milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Coming to life again.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="72"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then,</q> said Socrates, <q type="spoken">if there be such a
                    thing as <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="72"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="72a"/>
            coming to life again, this would be the process of generation from the dead to
                    the living?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Certainly.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">So by this
                    method also we reach the conclusion that the living are generated from the dead,
                    just as much as the dead from the living; and since this is the case, it seems
                    to me to be a sufficient proof that the souls of the dead exist somewhere,
                    whence they come back to life.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">I
                    think, Socrates, that results necessarily from our previous
                        admissions.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Now here is another
                    method, Cebes, to prove, as it seems to me, that we were right in making those
                    admissions. 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="72b"/>
            For if generation did not proceed
                    from opposite to opposite and back again, going round, as it were in a circle,
                    but always went forward in a straight line without turning back or curving,
                    then, you know, in the end all things would have the same form and be acted upon
                    in the same way and stop being generated at all.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">What do you mean?</q> said he.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">It is not at all hard,</q> said Socrates, <q type="spoken">to
                    understand what I mean. For example, if the process of falling asleep existed,
                    but not the opposite process of waking from sleep, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="72c"/>
            in the end, you know, that would make the sleeping Endymion
                    mere nonsense; he would be nowhere, for everything else would be in the same
                    state as he, sound asleep. Or if all thing were mixed together and never
                    separated, the saying of Anaxagoras, all things are chaos, would soon come true.
                    And in like manner, my dear Cebes, if all things that have life should die, and,
                    when they had died, the dead should remain in that condition, is it not
                    inevitable that at last all things would be dead 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="72d"/>
            and nothing alive? For if the living were generated from any
                    other things than from the dead, and the living were to die, is there any escape
                    from the final result that all things would be swallowed up in
                        death?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">I see none,
                    Socrates,</q> said Cebes. <q type="spoken">What you say seems to be perfectly
                        true.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">I think, Cebes,</q>
                    said he, <q type="spoken">it is absolutely so, and we are not deluded in making these
                    admissions, but the return to life is an actual fact, and it is a fact that the
                    living are generated from the dead and that the souls of the dead 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="72e"/>
            exist.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And besides,</q> Cebes rejoined, <q type="spoken">if it is true, Socrates, as
                    you are fond of saying, that our learning is nothing else than recollection,
                    then this would be an additional argument that we must necessarily have learned
                    in some previous time what we now remember.</q></said></p></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>