<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-eng2:97-116</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0059.tlg004.perseus-eng2:97-116</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="97"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">By Zeus,</q> said he, <q type="spoken">I am far from thinking that I know the
                    cause of any of these things, I who do not even dare to say, when one is added
                    to one, whether the one to which the addition was made has become two, or the
                    one which was added, or the one which was added and <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="97"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="97a"/>
            the one to which it was added
                    became two by the addition of each to the other. I think it is wonderful that
                    when each of them was separate from the other, each was one and they were not
                    then two, and when they were brought near each other this juxtaposition was the
                    cause of their becoming two. And I cannot yet believe that if one is divided,
                    the division causes it to become two; for this is the opposite of 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="97b"/>
            the cause which produced two in the former case; for
                    then two arose because one was brought near and added to another one, and now
                    because one is removed and separated from other. And I no longer believe that I
                    know by this method even how one is generated or, in a word, how anything is
                    generated or is destroyed or exists, and I no longer admit this method, but have
                    another confused way of my own.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/>Then one
                    day I heard a man reading from a book, as he said, by Anaxagoras, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="97c"/>
            that it is the mind that arranges and causes all
                    things. I was pleased with this theory of cause, and it seemed to me to be
                    somehow right that the mind should be the cause of all things, and I thought,
                    <q type="thought">If this is so, the mind in arranging things arranges everything and establishes
                    each thing as it is best for it to be. So if anyone wishes to find the cause of
                    the generation or destruction or existence of a particular thing, he must find
                    out what sort of existence, or passive state of any kind, or activity is best
                    for it. And therefore in respect to 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="97d"/>
            that
                    particular thing, and other things too, a man need examine nothing but what is
                    best and most excellent; for then he will necessarily know also what is
                    inferior, since the science of both is the same.</q> As I considered these things I
                    was delighted to think that I had found in Anaxagoras a teacher of the cause of
                    things quite to my mind, and I thought he would tell me whether the earth is
                    flat or round, and when 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="97e"/>
            he had told me that,
                    would go on to explain the cause and the necessity of it, and would tell me the
                    nature of the best and why it is best for the earth to be as it is; and if he
                    said the earth was in the center, he would proceed to show that it is best for
                    it to be in the center; and I had made up my mind that <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="98"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="98a"/>
            if he made those things clear to
            me, I would no longer yearn for any other kind of cause.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="98"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><q type="spoken" rend="merge">And I had determined
                    that I would find out in the same way about the sun and the moon and the other
                    stars, their relative speed, their revolutions, and their other changes, and why
                    the active or passive condition of each of them is for the best. For I never
                    imagined that, when he said they were ordered by intelligence, he would
                    introduce any other cause for these things than that it it is best for them to
                    be as they are. 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="98b"/>
            So I thought when he assigned
                    the cause of each thing and of all things in common he would go on and explain
                    what is best for each and what is good for all in common. I prized my hopes very
                    highly, and I seized the books very eagerly and read them as fast as I could,
                    that I might know as fast as I could about the best and the worst.
                            <milestone ed="P" unit="para"/>My glorious hope, my friend, was quickly snatched
                    away from me. As I went on with my reading I saw that the man made no use of
                    intelligence, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="98c"/>
            and did not assign any real
                    causes for the ordering of things, but mentioned as causes air and ether and
                    water and many other absurdities. And it seemed to me it was very much as if one
                    should say that Socrates does with intelligence whatever he does, and then, in
                    trying to give the causes of the particular thing I do, should say first that I
                    am now sitting here because my body is composed of bones and sinews, and the
                    bones are hard and have joints which divide them and the sinews 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="98d"/>
            can be contracted and relaxed and, with the flesh
                    and the skin which contains them all, are laid about the bones; and so, as the
                    bones are hung loose in their ligaments, the sinews, by relaxing and
                    contracting, make me able to bend my limbs now, and that is the cause of my
                    sitting here with my legs bent. Or as if in the same way he should give voice
                    and air and hearing and countless other things of the sort as causes for our
                    talking with each other, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="98e"/>
            and should fail to
                    mention the real causes, which are, that the Athenians decided that it was best
                    to condemn me, and therefore I have decided that it was best for me to sit here
                    and that it is right for me to stay and undergo whatever penalty they order.
                    <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="99"/>
<milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="99a"/>
                        For, by
                    Dog, I fancy these bones and sinews of mine would have been in <placeName key="perseus,Megara">Megara</placeName> or <placeName key="tgn,7002683">Boeotia</placeName> long ago, carried thither by an opinion of what was
                    best, if I did not think it was better and nobler to endure any penalty the city
                    may inflict rather than to escape and run away. </q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="99"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><q type="spoken" rend="merge">
                    
                    But it is most absurd to call
                    things of that sort causes. If anyone were to say that I could not have done
                    what I thought proper if I had not bones and sinews and other things that I
                    have, he would be right. But to say that those things are the cause of my doing
                    what I do, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="99b"/>
            and that I act with intelligence
                    but not from the choice of what is best, would be an extremely careless way of
                    talking. Whoever talks in that way is unable to make a distinction and to see
                    that in reality a cause is one thing, and the thing without which the cause
                    could never be a cause is quite another thing. And so it seems to me that most
                    people, when they give the name of cause to the latter, are groping in the dark,
                    as it were, and are giving it a name that does not belong to it. And so one man
                    makes the earth stay below the heavens by putting a vortex about it, and another
                    regards the earth as a flat trough supported on a foundation of air; but they do
                    not look for 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="99c"/>
            the power which causes things to
                    be now placed as it is best for them to be placed, nor do they think it has any
                    divine force, but they think they can find a new Atlas more powerful and more
                    immortal and more all-embracing than this, and in truth they give no thought to
                    the good, which must embrace and hold together all things. Now I would gladly be
                    the pupil of anyone who would teach me the nature of such a cause; but since
                    that was denied me and I was not able to discover it myself or to learn of it
                    from anyone else, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="99d"/>
            do you wish me,
                    Cebes,</q> said he, <q type="spoken">to give you an account of the way in which I have
                    conducted my second voyage in quest of the cause?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">I wish it with all my heart,</q> he
                        replied.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">After this, then,</q> said
                    he, <q type="spoken">since I had given up investigating realities, I decided that I must
                    be careful not to suffer the misfortune which happens to people who look at the
                    sun and watch it during an eclipse. For some of them ruin their eyes unless they
                    look at its image in water 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="99e"/>
            or something of
                    the sort. I thought of that danger, and I was afraid my soul would be blinded if
                    I looked at things with my eyes and tried to grasp them with any of my senses.
                    So I thought I must have recourse to conceptions and examine in them the truth
                    of realities.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="100"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><q type="spoken" rend="merge">
                            Now perhaps my metaphor <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="100"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="100a"/>
            is not quite accurate; for I do not grant in the
                    least that he who studies realities by means of conceptions is looking at them
                    in images any more than he who studies them in the facts of daily life. However,
                    that is the way I began. I assume in each case some principle which I consider
                    strongest, and whatever seems to me to agree with this, whether relating to
                    cause or to anything else, I regard as true, and whatever disagrees with it, as
                    untrue. But I want to tell you more clearly what I mean; for I think you do not
                    understand now.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Not very well,
                    certainly,</q> said Cebes. 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="100b"/>
            <q type="spoken">Well,</q> said Socrates, <q type="spoken">this is what I mean. It is nothing
                    new, but the same thing I have always been saying, both in our previous
                    conversation and elsewhere. I am going to try to explain to you the nature of
                    that cause which I have been studying, and I will revert to those familiar
                    subjects of ours as my point of departure and assume that there are such things
                    as absolute beauty and good and greatness and the like. If you grant this and
                    agree that these exist, I believe I shall explain cause to you and shall prove
                    that 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="100c"/>
            the soul is immortal.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">You may assume,</q> said Cebes, <q type="spoken">that I
                    grant it, and go on.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then,</q>
                    said he, <q type="spoken">see if you agree with me in the next step. I think that if
                    anything is beautiful besides absolute beauty it is beautiful for no other
                    reason than because it partakes of absolute beauty; and this applies to
                    everything. Do you assent to this view of cause?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">I do,</q> said he.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Now I do not yet, understand,</q> he went on, <q type="spoken">nor can I
                    perceive those other ingenious causes. If anyone tells me that what makes a
                    thing beautiful is its lovely color, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="100d"/>
            or its
                    shape or anything else of the sort, I let all that go, for all those things
                    confuse me, and I hold simply and plainly and perhaps foolishly to this, that
                    nothing else makes it beautiful but the presence or communion (call it which you
                    please) of absolute beauty, however it may have been gained; about the way in
                    which it happens, I make no positive statement as yet, but I do insist that
                    beautiful things are made beautiful by beauty. For I think this is the safest
                    answer I can give to myself or to others, and if I cleave fast to this,
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="100e"/>
            I think I shall never be overthrown, and
                    I believe it is safe for me or anyone else to give this answer, that beautiful
                    things are beautiful through beauty. Do you agree?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">I do.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And
                    great things are great and greater things greater by greatness, and smaller
                    things smaller by smallness?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Yes.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="101"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And you would not
                    accept the statement, if you were told that one man was greater or smaller than
                    another by a head, <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="101"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="101a"/>
            but you would insist that you say only that every greater
                    thing is greater than another by nothing else than greatness, and that it is
                    greater by reason of greatness, and that which is smaller is smaller by nothing
                    else than smallness and is smaller by reason of smallness. For you would, I
                    think, be afraid of meeting with the retort, if you said that a man was greater
                    or smaller than another by a head, first that the greater is greater and the
                    smaller is smaller by the same thing, and secondly, that 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="101b"/>
            the greater man is greater by a head, which is small, and
                    that it is a monstrous thing that one is great by something that is small. Would
                    you not be afraid of this?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/>And Cebes
                    laughed and said, <q type="spoken">Yes, I should.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then,</q> he continued, <q type="spoken">you would be afraid to say that ten
                    is more than eight by two and that this is the reason it is more. You would say
                    it is more by number and by reason of number; and a two cubit measure is greater
                    than a one-cubit measure not by half but by magnitude, would you not? For you
                    would have the same fear.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Certainly,</q> said he.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Well,
                    then, if one is added to one 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="101c"/>
            or if one is
                    divided, you would avoid saying that the addition or the division is the cause
                    of two? You would exclaim loudly that you know no other way by which any thing
                    can come into existence than by participating in the proper essence of each
                    thing in which it participates, and therefore you accept no other cause of the
                    existence of two than participation in duality, and things which are to be two
                    must participate in duality, and whatever is to be one must participate in
                    unity, and you would pay no attention to the divisions and additions and other
                    such subtleties, leaving those for wiser men to explain. You would distrust
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="101d"/>
            your inexperience and would be afraid,
                    as the saying goes, of your own shadow; so you would cling to that safe
                    principle of ours and would reply as I have said. And if anyone attacked the
                    principle, you would pay him no attention and you would not reply to him until
                    you had examined the consequences to see whether they agreed with one another or
                    not; and when you had to give an explanation of the principle, you would give it
                    in the same way by assuming some other principle which seemed to you the best of
                    the higher ones, and so on until 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="101e"/>
            you reached
                    one which was adequate. You would not mix things up, as disputants do, in
                    talking about the beginning and its consequences, if you wished to discover any
                    of the realities; for perhaps not one of them thinks or cares in the least about
                    these things.
                    
                   They are so clever that they succeed in being well pleased with
                    themselves even when they mix everything up; <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="102"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="102a"/>
            but if you are a philosopher, I think
                    you will do as I have said.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="102"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">That is
                    true,</q> said Simmias and Cebes together.</said></p><p><said who="#Echecrates"><label>Echecrates.</label> By Zeus, Phaedo, they were right. It seems to me that he made those matters
                    astonishingly clear, to anyone with even a little sense.</said></p><p><said who="#Phaedo"><label>Phaedo.</label> Certainly, Echecrates, and all who were there thought so, too.</said></p><p><said who="#Echecrates"><label>Echecrates.</label> And so do we who were not there, and are hearing about it now. But what was said
                    after that?</said></p><p><said who="#Phaedo"><label>Phaedo.</label> As I remember it, after all this had been admitted, and they had agreed that
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="102b"/>
            each of the abstract qualities exists
                    and that other things which participate in these get their names from them, then
                    Socrates asked: <q type="spoken">Now if you assent to this, do you not, when you say that
                    Simmias is greater than Socrates and smaller than Phaedo, say that there is in
                    Simmias greatness and smallness?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Yes.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">But,</q> said
                    Socrates, <q type="spoken">you agree that the statement that Simmias is greater than
                    Socrates is not true as stated in those words. For Simmias is not greater than
                    Socrates 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="102c"/>
            by reason of being Simmias, but by
                    reason of the greatness he happens to have; nor is he greater than Socrates
                    because Socrates is Socrates, but because Socrates has smallness relatively to
                    his greatness.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">True.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And again, he is
                    not smaller than Phaedo because Phaedo is Phaedo, but because Phaedo has
                    greatness relatively to Simmias’s smallness.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">That is true.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then Simmias
                    is called small and great, when he is between the two, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="102d"/>
            surpassing the smallness of the one by exceeding him in
                    height, and granting to the other the greatness that exceeds his own
                    smallness.</q> And he laughed and said, <q type="spoken">I seem to he speaking like a
                    legal document, but it really is very much as I say.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/>Simmias agreed.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">I am
                    speaking so because I want you to agree with me. I think it is evident not only
                    that greatness itself will never be great and also small, but that the greatness
                    in us will never admit the small or allow itself to be exceeded. One of two
                    things must take place: either it flees or withdraws when 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="102e"/>
            its opposite, smallness, advances toward it, or it has
                    already ceased to exist by the time smallness comes near it. But it will not
                    receive and admit smallness, thereby becoming other than it was. So I have
                    received and admitted smallness and am still the same small person I was; but
                    the greatness in me, being great, has not suffered itself to become small. In
                    the same way the smallness in us will never become or be great, nor will any
                    other opposite which is still what it was, ever become or be also its own
                    opposite. It either goes away or loses its existence in the change.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="103"><milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="103"/><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="103a"/><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">That,</q> said Cebes, <q type="spoken">seems to me quite
                        evident.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/>Then one of those
                    present—I don’t just remember who it was—said: <q type="spoken">In Heaven’s
                    name, is not this present doctrine the exact opposite of what was fitted in our
                    earlier discussion, that the greater is generated from the less and the less
                    from the greater and that opposites are always generated from their opposites?
                    But now it seems to me we are saying, this can never happen.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/>Socrates cocked his head on one side and listened.
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="103b"/>
            <q type="spoken">You have spoken up like a
                    man,</q> he said, <q type="spoken">but you do not observe the difference between the
                    present doctrine and what we said before. We said before that in the case of
                    concrete things opposites are generated from opposites; whereas now we say that
                    the abstract concept of an opposite can never become its own opposite, either in
                    us or in the world about us. Then we were talking about things which possess
                    opposite qualities and are called after them, but now about those very opposites
                    the immanence of which gives the things their names. We say that these latter
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="103c"/>
            can never be generated from each
                        other.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/>At the same time he looked at
                    Cebes and said: <q type="spoken">And you—are you troubled by any of our friends’
                        objections?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">No,</q> said
                    Cebes, <q type="spoken">not this time; though I confess that objections often do trouble
                        me.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Well, we are quite
                    agreed,</q> said Socrates, <q type="spoken">upon this, that an opposite can never be
                    its own opposite.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Entirely
                    agreed,</q> said Cebes.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Now,</q> said
                    he, <q type="spoken">see if you agree with me in what follows: Is there something that you
                    call heat and something you call cold?</q> <milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Yes.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Are they the same
                    as snow and fire?</q> 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="103d"/>
            <q type="spoken">No, not at
                        all.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">But heat is a different
                    thing from fire and cold differs from snow?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Yes.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Yet I fancy you
                    believe that snow, if (to employ the form of phrase we used before) it admits
                    heat, will no longer be what it was, namely snow, and also warm, but will either
                    withdraw when heat approaches it or will cease to exist.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Certainly.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And similarly fire, when cold approaches it, will either withdraw or
                    perish. It will never succeed in admitting cold and being still fire, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="103e"/>
            as it was before, and also cold.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">That is true,</q> said he.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">The fact is,</q> said he, <q type="spoken">in some such cases,
                    that not only the abstract idea itself has a right to the same name through all
                    time, but also something else, which is not the idea, but which always, whenever
                    it exists, has the form of the idea. But perhaps I can make my meaning clearer
                    by some examples. In numbers, the odd must always have the name of odd, must it
                    not?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Certainly.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="104"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">But is this the only thing so called (for this is
                    what I mean to ask), or is there something else, which is not <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="104"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="104a"/>
            identical with the
                    odd but nevertheless has a right to the name of odd in addition to its own name,
                    because it is of such a nature that it is never separated from the odd? I mean,
                    for instance, the number three, and there are many other examples. Take the case
                    of three; do you not think it may always be called by its own name and also be
                    called odd, which is not the same as three? Yet the number three and the number
                    five and half of numbers in general are so constituted, that each of them is odd
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="104b"/>
            though not identified with the idea of
                    odd. And in the same way two and four and all the other series of numbers are
                    even, each of them, though not identical with evenness. Do you agree, or
                        not?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Of course,</q> he
                        replied.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Now see what I want to make
                    plain. This is my point, that not only abstract opposites exclude each other,
                    but all things which, although not opposites one to another, always contain
                    opposites; these also, we find, exclude the idea which is opposed to the idea
                    contained in them, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="104c"/>
            and when it approaches
                    they either perish or withdraw. We must certainly agree that the number three
                    will endure destruction or anything else rather than submit to becoming even,
                    while still remaining three, must we not?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Certainly,</q> said Cebes.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">But
                    the number two is not the opposite of the number three.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">No.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then not
                    only opposite ideas refuse to admit each other when they come near, but certain
                    other things refuse to admit the approach of opposites.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Very true,</q> he said.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Shall we then,</q> said Socrates, <q type="spoken">determine if we can, what
                    these are?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Certainly.</q>
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="104d"/>
            <q type="spoken">Then, Cebes, will they be those
                    which always compel anything of which they take possession not only to take
                    their form but also that of some opposite?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">What do you mean?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Such
                    things as we were speaking of just now. You know of course that those things in
                    which the number three is an essential element must be not only three but also
                        odd.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Certainly.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Now such a thing can never admit the idea which
                    is the opposite of the concept which produces this result.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">No, it cannot.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">But the result was produced by the concept of the
                        odd?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Yes.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And the opposite of this is the idea 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="104e"/>
            of the even?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Yes.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then the idea of
                    the even will never be admitted by the number three.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">No.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then
                    three has no part in the even.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">No,
                    it has none.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then the number three
                            is uneven.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Yes.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="105"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Now I propose to determine what things, without
                    being the opposites of something, nevertheless refuse to admit it, as the number
                    three, though it is not the opposite of the idea of even, nevertheless refuses
                    to admit it, but always brings forward its opposite against it, and <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="105"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="105a"/>
            as the number two
                    brings forward the opposite of the odd and fire that of cold, and so forth, for
                    there are plenty of examples. Now see if you accept this statement: not only
                    will opposites not admit their opposites, but nothing which brings an opposite
                    to that which it approaches will ever admit in itself the oppositeness of that
                    which is brought. Now let me refresh your memory; for there is no harm in
                    repetition. The number five will not admit the idea of the even, nor will ten,
                    the double of five, admit the idea of the odd. Now ten is not itself an
                    opposite, and yet it will not admit the idea of the odd; 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="105b"/>
            and so one-and-a-half and other mixed fractions and
                    one-third and other simple fractions reject the idea of the whole. Do you go
                    with me and agree to this?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Yes, I
                    agree entirely,</q> he said, <q type="spoken">and am with you.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then,</q> said Socrates, <q type="spoken">please begin again at
                    the beginning. And do not answer my questions in their own words, but do as I
                    do. I give an answer beyond that safe answer which I spoke of at first, now that
                    I see another safe reply deduced from what has just been said. If you ask me
                    what causes anything in which it is to be hot, I will not give 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="105c"/>
            you that safe but stupid answer and say that it is
                    heat, but I can now give a more refined answer, that it is fire; and if you ask,
                    what causes the body in which it is to be ill, I shall not say illness, but
                    fever; and if you ask what causes a number in which it is to be odd, I shall not
                    say oddness, but the number one, and so forth. Do you understand sufficiently
                    what I mean?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Quite
                    sufficiently,</q> he replied.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Now
                    answer,</q> said he. <q type="spoken">What causes the body in which it is to be
                        alive?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">The soul,</q> he
                    replied. 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="105d"/>
            <q type="spoken">Is this always the
                        case?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Yes,</q> said he,
                    <q type="spoken">of course.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then if the soul
                    takes possession of anything it always brings life to it?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Certainly,</q> he said.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Is there anything that is the opposite of
                        life?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Yes,</q> said
                        he.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">What?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Death.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Now
                    the soul, as we have agreed before, will never admit the opposite of that which
                    it brings with it.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Decidedly
                    not,</q> said Cebes.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then what do we now
                    call that which does not admit the idea of the even?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Uneven,</q> said he.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And those which do not admit justice and music?</q> 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="105e"/>
            <q type="spoken">Unjust,</q> he replied, <q type="spoken">and
                        unmusical.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Well then what do we
                    call that which does not admit death?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Deathless or immortal,</q> he said.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And the soul does not admit death?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">No.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then the soul is
                        immortal.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Yes.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Very well,</q> said he. <q type="spoken">Shall we say
                    then that this is proved?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Yes, and
                            very satisfactorily, Socrates.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="106"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Well
                    then, Cebes,</q> said he, <q type="spoken">if the odd were necessarily imperishable,
                        <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="106"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="106a"/>
            would
                    not the number three be imperishable?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Of course.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And if that
                    which is without heat were imperishable, would not snow go away whole and
                    unmelted whenever heat was brought in conflict with snow? For it could not have
                    been destroyed, nor could it have remained and admitted the
                        heat.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">That is very true,</q>
                    he replied.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">In the same way, I think, if
                    that which is without cold were imperishable, whenever anything cold approached
                    fire, it would never perish or be quenched, but would go away
                        unharmed.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Necessarily,</q> he
                    said. 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="106b"/>
            <q type="spoken">And must not the same be said
                    of that which is immortal? If the immortal is also imperishable, it is
                    impossible for the soul to perish when death comes against it. For, as our
                    argument has shown, it will not admit death and will not be dead, just as the
                    number three, we said, will not be even, and the odd will not be even, and as
                    fire, and the heat in the fire, will not be cold. But, one might say, why is it
                    not possible that the odd does not become even when the even comes against it
                    (we agreed to that), but perishes, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="106c"/>
            and the
                    even takes its place? Now we cannot silence him who raises this question by
                    saying that it does not perish, for the odd is not imperishable. If that were
                    conceded to us, we could easily silence him by saying that when the even
                    approaches, the odd and the number three go away; and we could make the
                    corresponding reply about fire and heat and the rest, could we
                        not?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Certainly.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And so, too, in the case of the immortal; if it
                    is conceded that the immortal is imperishable, the soul would be imperishable as
                    well as immortal, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="106d"/>
            but if not, further
                    argument is needed.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">But,</q> he
                    said, <q type="spoken">it is not needed, so far as that is concerned; for surely nothing
                    would escape destruction, if the immortal, which is everlasting, is
                        perishable.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">All, I think,</q>
                    said Socrates, <q type="spoken">would agree that God and the Principle of life, and
                    anything else that is immortal, can never perish.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">All men would, certainly,</q> said he, <q type="spoken">and
                    still more, I fancy, the Gods.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Since, then, the immortal 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="106e"/>
            is also
                    indestructible, would not the soul, if it is immortal, be also
                        imperishable?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Necessarily.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then when death
                    comes to a man, his mortal part, it seems, dies, but the immortal part goes away
                    unharmed and undestroyed, withdrawing from death.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">So it seems.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="107"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Then, Cebes,</q> said he, <q type="spoken">it is perfectly certain <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="107"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="107a"/>
            that the soul is
                    immortal and imperishable, and our souls will exist somewhere in another
                        world.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">I,</q> said Cebes,
                    <q type="spoken">have nothing more to say against that, and I cannot doubt your
                    conclusions. But if Simmias, or anyone else, has anything to say, he would do
                    well to speak, for I do not know to what other time than the present he could
                    defer speaking, if he wishes to say or hear anything about those
                        matters.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">But,</q> said
                    Simmias, <q type="spoken">I don’t see how I can doubt, either, as to the result of the
                    discussion; but the subject is so great, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="107b"/>
            and
                    I have such a poor opinion of human weakness, that I cannot help having some
                    doubt in my own mind about what has been said.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Not only that, Simmias,</q> said Socrates, <q type="spoken">but
                    our first assumptions ought to be more carefully examined, even though they seem
                    to you to be certain. And if you analyze them completely, you will, I think,
                    follow and agree with the argument, so far as it is possible for man to do so.
                    And if this is made clear, you will seek no farther.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">That is true,</q> he said.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">But my friends,</q> he said, <q type="spoken">we ought to bear
                    in mind, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="107c"/>
            that, if the soul is immortal, we
                    must care for it, not only in respect to this time, which we call life, but in
                    respect to all time, and if we neglect it, the danger now appears to be
                    terrible. For if death were an escape from everything, it would be a boon to the
                    wicked, for when they die they would be freed from the body and from their
                    wickedness together with their souls. But now, since the soul is seen to be
                    immortal, it cannot escape 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="107d"/>
            from evil or be
                    saved in any other way than by becoming as good and wise as possible. For the
                    soul takes with it to the other world nothing but its education and nurture, and
                    these are said to benefit or injure the departed greatly from the very beginning
                    of his journey thither. And so it is said that after death, the tutelary genius
                    of each person, to whom he had been allotted in life, leads him to a place where
                    the dead are gathered together; then they are judged and depart to the other
                    world 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="107e"/>
            with the guide whose task it is to
                    conduct thither those who come from this world; and when they have there
                    received their due and remained through the time appointed, another guide brings
                    them back after many long periods of time.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="108"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><q type="spoken" rend="merge">
                            And the journey is not as Telephus
                    says in the play of Aeschylus; <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="108"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="108a"/>
            for he says a simple path leads to the lower world,
                    but I think the path is neither simple nor single, for if it were, there would
                    be no need of guides, since no one could miss the way to any place if there were
                    only one road. But really there seem to be many forks of the road and many
                    windings; this I infer from the rites and ceremonies practiced here on earth.
                    Now the orderly and wise soul follows its guide and understands its
                    circumstances; but the soul that is desirous of the body, as I said before,
                    flits about it, and in the visible world for a long time, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="108b"/>
            and after much resistance and many sufferings is led away
                    with violence and with difficulty by its appointed genius. And when it arrives
                    at the place where the other souls are, the soul which is impure and has done
                    wrong, by committing wicked murders or other deeds akin to those and the works
                    of kindred souls, is avoided and shunned by all, and no one is willing to be its
                    companion or its guide, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="108c"/>
            but it wanders about
                    alone in utter bewilderment, during certain fixed times, after which it is
                    carried by necessity to its fitting habitation. But the soul that has passed
                    through life in purity and righteousness, finds gods for companions and guides,
                    and goes to dwell in its proper dwelling. Now there are many wonderful regions
                    of the earth, and the earth itself is neither in size nor in other respects such
                    as it is supposed to be by those who habitually discourse about it, as I believe
                    on someone’s authority.</q><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="108d"/>
            And Simmias
                    said, <q type="spoken">What do you mean, Socrates? I have heard a good deal about the
                    earth myself, but not what you believe; so I should like to hear
                        it.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Well Simmias, I do not think
                    I need the art of Glaucus to tell what it is. But to prove that it is true
                    would, I think, be too hard for the art of Glaucus, and perhaps I should not be
                    able to do it; besides, even if I had the skill, I think my life, Simmias, will
                    end before the discussion could be finished. However, there is nothing to
                    prevent my telling 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="108e"/>
            what I believe the form
            of the earth to be, and the regions in it.</q>
                            <milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Well,</q> said Simmias, <q type="spoken">that will be enough.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="109"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">I am convinced, then,</q> said he, <q type="spoken">that
                    in the first place, if the earth is round and in the middle of the heavens, it
                    needs neither the air <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="109"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="109a"/>
            nor any other similar force to keep it from falling, but its
                    own equipoise and the homogeneous nature of the heavens on all sides suffice to
                    hold it in place; for a body which is in equipoise and is placed in the center
                    of something which is homogeneous cannot change its inclination in any
                    direction, but will remain always in the same position. This, then, is the first
                    thing of which I am convinced.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">And
                    rightly,</q> said Simmias.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Secondly,</q> said he, <q type="spoken">I believe that the earth is very large
                    and that we who dwell between the pillars of Hercules 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="109b"/>
            and the river <placeName key="tgn,7012263">Phasis</placeName> live in a small part of it about the sea, like ants or
                    frogs about a pond, and that many other people live in many other such regions.
                    For I believe there are in all directions on the earth many hollows of very
                    various forms and sizes, into which the water and mist and air have run
                    together; but the earth itself is pure and is situated in the pure heaven in
                    which the stars are, the heaven which 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="109c"/>
            those
                    who discourse about such matters call the ether; the water, mist and air are the
                    sediment of this and flow together into the hollows of the earth. Now we do not
                    perceive that we live in the hollows, but think we live on the upper surface of
                    the earth, just as if someone who lives in the depth of the ocean should think
                    he lived on the surface of the sea, and, seeing the sun and the stars through
                    the water, should think the sea was the sky, and should, by reason of
                    sluggishness or 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="109d"/>
            feebleness, never have
                    reached the surface of the sea, and should never have seen, by rising and
                    lifting his head out of the sea into our upper world, and should never have
                    heard from anyone who had seen, how much purer and fairer it is than the world
                    he lived in. I believe this is just the case with us; for we dwell in a hollow
                    of the earth and think we dwell on its upper surface; and the air we call the
                    heaven, and think that is the heaven in which the stars move. But the fact is
                    the same, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="109e"/>
            that by reason of feebleness and
                    sluggishness, we are unable to attain to the upper surface of the air; for if
                    anyone should come to the top of the air or should get wings and fly up, he
                    could lift his head above it and see, as fishes lift their heads out of the
                    water and see the things in our world, so he would see things in that upper
                    world; and, if his nature were strong enough to bear the sight, he would
                    recognize that that is the real heaven <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="110"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="110a"/>
            and the real light and the real earth.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="110"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><q type="spoken" rend="merge">
                    For this earth of ours, and the stones and the whole region where we live, are
                    injured and corroded, as in the sea things are injured by the brine, and nothing
                    of any account grows in the sea, and there is, one might say, nothing perfect
                    there, but caverns and sand and endless mud and mire, where there is earth also,
                    and there is nothing at all worthy to be compared with the beautiful things of
                    our world. But the things in that world above would be seen to be even more
                    superior to those in this world of ours. 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="110b"/>
            If
                    I may tell a story, Simmias, about the things on the earth that is below the
                    heaven, and what they are like, it is well worth hearing.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">By all means, Socrates,</q> said Simmias;
                    <q type="spoken">we should be glad to hear this story.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">Well then, my friend,</q> said he, <q type="spoken">to begin with, the earth
                    when seen from above is said to look like those balls that are covered with
                    twelve pieces of leather; it is divided into patches of various colors, of which
                    the colors which we see here may be regarded as samples, such as painters use.
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="110c"/>
            But there the whole earth is of such
                    colors, and they are much brighter and purer than ours; for one part is purple
                    of wonderful beauty, and one is golden, and one is white, whiter than chalk or
                    snow, and the earth is made up of the other colors likewise, and they are more
                    in number and more beautiful than those which we see here. For those very
                    hollows of the earth which are full of water and air, present an appearance
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="110d"/>
            of color as they glisten amid the
                    variety of the other colors, so that the whole produces one continuous effect of
                    variety. And in this fair earth the things that grow, the trees, and flowers and
                    fruits, are correspondingly beautiful; and so too the mountains and the stones
                    are smoother, and more transparent and more lovely in color than ours. In fact,
                    our highly prized stones, sards and 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="110e"/>
            jaspers,
                    and emeralds, and other gems, are fragments of those there, but there everything
                    is like these or still more beautiful. And the reason of this is that there the
                    stones are pure, and not corroded or defiled, as ours are, with filth and brine
                    by the vapors and liquids which flow together here and which cause ugliness and
                    disease in earth and stones and animals and plants.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="111"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><q type="spoken" rend="merge">
                            And the earth there is
                    adorned with all the jewels and also with gold and <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="111"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="111a"/>
            silver and everything of the
                    sort. For there they are in plain sight, abundant and large and in many places,
                    so that the earth is a sight to make those blessed who look upon it. And there
                    are many animals upon it, and men also, some dwelling inland, others on the
                    coasts of the air, as we dwell about the sea, and others on islands, which the
                    air flows around, near the mainland; and in short, what water and the sea are
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="111b"/>
            in our lives, air is in theirs, and what
                    the air is to us, ether is to them. And the seasons are so tempered that people
                    there have no diseases and live much longer than we, and in sight and hearing
                    and wisdom and all such things are as much superior to us as air is purer than
                    water or the ether than air. And they have sacred groves and temples of the
                    gods, in which the gods really dwell, and they have intercourse with the gods by
                    speech and prophecies and visions, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="111c"/>
            and they
                    see the sun and moon and stars as they really are, and in all other ways their
                    blessedness is in accord with this.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/>Such then is
                    the nature of the earth as a whole, and of the things around it. But round about
                    the whole earth, in the hollows of it, are many regions, some deeper and wider
                    than that in which we live, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="111d"/>
            some deeper but
                    with a narrower opening than ours, and some also less in depth and wider. Now
                    all these are connected with one another by many subterranean channels, some
                    larger and some smaller, which are bored in all of them, and there are passages
                    through which much water flows from one to another as into mixing bowls; and
                    there are everlasting rivers of huge size under the earth, flowing with hot and
                    cold water; and there is much fire, and great rivers of fire, and many streams
                    of mud, some thinner 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="111e"/>
            and some thicker, like
                    the rivers of mud that flow before the lava in <placeName key="tgn,7003122">Sicily</placeName>, and the lava itself. These fill the various regions as
                    they happen to flow to one or another at any time. Now a kind of oscillation
                    within the earth moves all these up and down. And the nature of the oscillation
                    is as follows:</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="112"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><q type="spoken" rend="merge">
                            One of the chasms of the earth is greater than the rest,
                        <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="112"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="112a"/>
            and is
                    bored right through the whole earth; this is the one which Homer means when he
                        says:<quote type="verse"><l met="dactylic">Far off, the lowest abyss beneath
                            the earth;</l></quote>
               <note resp="Loeb" anchored="true" place="unspecified"><bibl n="Hom. Il. 8.14">Hom. Il. 8.14</bibl></note>and which elsewhere he and
                    many other poets have called Tartarus. For all the rivers flow together into
                    this chasm and flow out of it again, and they have each the nature of the earth
                    through which they flow. And the reason why all the streams flow in and out here
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="112b"/>
            is that this liquid matter has no bottom
                    or foundation. So it oscillates and waves up and down, and the air and wind
                    about it do the same; for they follow the liquid both when it moves toward the
                    other side of the earth and when it moves toward this side, and just as the
                    breath of those who breathe blows in and out, so the wind there oscillates with
                    the liquid and causes terrible and irresistible blasts as it rushes in and out.
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="112c"/>
            And when the water retires to the region
                    which we call the lower, it flows into the rivers there and fills them up, as if
                    it were pumped into them; and when it leaves that region and comes back to this
                    side, it fills the rivers here; and when the streams are filled they flow
                    through the passages and through the earth and come to the various places to
                    which their different paths lead, where they make seas and marshes, and rivers
                    and springs. Thence they go down again under the earth, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="112d"/>
            some passing around many great regions and others around
                    fewer and smaller places, and flow again into Tartarus, some much below the
                    point where they were sucked out, and some only a little; but all flow in below
                    their exit. Some flow in on the side from which they flowed out, others on the
                    opposite side; and some pass completely around in a circle, coiling about the
                    earth once or several times, like serpents, then descend to the lowest possible
                    depth and fall again into the chasm. 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="112e"/>
            Now it
                    is possible to go down from each side to the center, but not beyond, for there
                    the slope rises forward in front of the streams from either side of the
                    earth.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="113"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken" rend="merge">Now these streams are many and
                    great and of all sorts, but among the many are four streams, the greatest and
                    outermost of which is that called Oceanus, which flows round in a circle, and
                    opposite this, flowing in the opposite direction, is <placeName key="tgn,1120946">Acheron</placeName>, which flows through <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="113"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="113a"/>
            various desert
                    places and, passing under the earth, comes to the Acherusian lake. To this lake
                    the souls of most of the dead go and, after remaining there the appointed time,
                    which is for some longer and for others shorter, are sent back to be born again
                    into living beings. The third river flows out between these two, and near the
                    place whence it issues it falls into a vast region burning with a great fire and
                    makes a lake larger than our Mediterranean sea, boiling with water and mud.
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="113b"/>
            Thence it flows in a circle, turbid and
                    muddy, and comes in its winding course, among other places, to the edge of the
                    Acherusian lake, but does not mingle with its water. Then, after winding about
                    many times underground, it flows into Tartarus at a lower level. This is the
                    river which is called Pyriphlegethon, and the streams of lava which spout up at
                    various places on earth are offshoots from it. Opposite this the fourth river
                    issues, it is said, first into a wild and awful place, which is all of a dark
                    blue color, like lapis lazuli. 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="113c"/>
            This is
                    called the Stygian river, and the lake which it forms by flowing in is the Styx.
                    And when the river has flowed in here and has received fearful powers into its
                    waters, it passes under the earth and, circling round in the direction opposed
                    to that of Pyriphlegethon, it meets it coming from the other way in the
                    Acherusian lake. And the water of this river also mingles with no other water,
                    but this also passes round in a circle and falls into Tartarus opposite
                    Pyriphlegethon. And the name of this river, as the Poets say, is Cocytus.
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="113d"/>
            Such is the nature of these
                    things. Now when the dead have come to the place where each is led by his
                    genius, first they are judged and sentenced, as they have lived well and
                    piously, or not. And those who are found to have lived neither well nor ill, go
                    to the Acheron and, embarking upon vessels provided for them, arrive in them at
                    the lake; there they dwell and are purified, and if they have done any wrong
                    they are absolved by paying the penalty for their wrong doings, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="113e"/>
            and for their good deeds they receive rewards, each according to his merits. But those who
                    appear to be incurable, on account of the greatness of their wrongdoings,
                    because they have committed many great deeds of sacrilege, or wicked and
                    abominable murders, or any other such crimes, are cast by their fitting destiny
                    into Tartarus, whence they never emerge.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="114"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><q type="spoken" rend="merge">
                            Those, however, who are curable, but
                    are found to have committed great sins—who have, for example, in a moment
                    of passion done some act of violence against father or mother and <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="114"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="114a"/>
            have lived in
                    repentance the rest of their lives, or who have slain some other person under
                    similar conditions—these must needs be thrown into Tartarus, and when they
                    have been there a year the wave casts them out, the homicides by way of Cocytus,
                    those who have outraged their parents by way of Pyriphlegethon. And when they
                    have been brought by the current to the Acherusian lake, they shout and cry out,
                    calling to those whom they have slain or outraged, begging and beseeching them
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="114b"/>
            to be gracious and to let them come out
                    into the lake; and if they prevail they come out and cease from their ills, but
                    if not, they are borne away again to Tartarus and thence back into the rivers,
                    and this goes on until they prevail upon those whom they have wronged; for this
                    is the penalty imposed upon them by the judges. But those who are found to have
                    excelled in holy living are freed from these regions within the earth and are
                    released as from prisons; 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="114c"/>
            they mount upward
                    into their pure abode and dwell upon the earth. And of these, all who have duly
                    purified themselves by philosophy live henceforth altogether without bodies, and
                    pass to still more beautiful abodes which it is not easy to describe, nor have
                    we now time enough.<milestone ed="P" unit="para"/>But, Simmias, because
                    of all these things which we have recounted we ought to do our best to acquire
                    virtue and wisdom in life. For the prize is fair and the hope great. 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="114d"/>
          Now it would not be fitting for a man of
                    sense to maintain that all this is just as I have described it, but that this or
                    something like it is true concerning our souls and their abodes, since the soul
                    is shown to be immortal, I think he may properly and worthily venture to
                    believe; for the venture is well worth while; and he ought to repeat such things
                    to himself as if they were magic charms, which is the reason why I have been
                    lengthening out the story so long. This then is why a man should be of good
                    cheer about his soul, who in his life 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="114e"/>
            has
                    rejected the pleasures and ornaments of the body, thinking they are alien to him
                    and more likely to do him harm than good, and has sought eagerly for those of
                    learning, and after adorning his soul with no alien ornaments, but with its own
                    proper adornment of self-restraint and justice and <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="115"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="115a"/>
            courage and freedom and truth,
            awaits his departure to the other world, ready to go when fate calls him.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="115"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><q type="spoken" rend="merge">
               You, Simmias and Cebes and the rest,</q> he said, <q type="spoken">will go hereafter, each
                    in his own time; but I am now already, as a tragedian would say, called by fate,
                    and it is about time for me to go to the bath; for I think it is better to bathe
                    before drinking the poison, that the women may not have the trouble of bathing
                    the corpse.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/>When he had finished speaking,
                    Crito said: 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="115b"/>
            <q type="spoken">Well, Socrates, do you
                    wish to leave any directions with us about your children or anything
                    else—anything we can do to serve you?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">What I always say, Crito,</q> he replied, <q type="spoken">nothing new. If you
                    take care of yourselves you will serve me and mine and yourselves, whatever you
                    do, even if you make no promises now; but if you neglect yourselves and are not
                    willing to live following step by step, as it were, in the path marked out by
                    our present and past discussions, you will accomplish nothing, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="115c"/>
            no matter how much or how eagerly you promise at
                        present.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">We will certainly try
                    hard to do as you say,</q> he replied. <q type="spoken">But how shall we bury
                        you?</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><q type="spoken">However you please,</q>
                    he replied, <q type="spoken">if you can catch me and I do not get away from you.</q>
                    And he laughed gently, and looking towards us, said: <q type="spoken">I cannot persuade
                    Crito, my friends, that the Socrates who is now conversing and arranging the
                    details of his argument is really I; he thinks I am the one whom he will
                    presently see as a corpse, 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="115d"/>
            and he asks how
                    to bury me. And though I have been saying at great length that after I drink the
                    poison I shall no longer be with you, but shall go away to the joys of the
                    blessed you know of, he seems to think that was idle talk uttered to encourage
                    you and myself. So,</q> he said, <q type="spoken">give security for me to Crito, the
                    opposite of that which he gave the judges at my trial; for he gave security that
                    I would remain, but you must give security that I shall not remain when I die,
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="115e"/>
            but shall go away, so that Crito may
                    bear it more easily, and may not be troubled when he sees my body being burnt or
                    buried, or think I am undergoing terrible treatment, and may not say at the
                    funeral that he is laying out Socrates, or following him to the grave, or
                    burying him. For, dear Crito, you may be sure that such wrong words are not only
                    undesirable in themselves, but they infect the soul with evil.</q></said></p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="116"><p><said who="#Phaedo" rend="merge"><label>Phaedo.</label><q type="spoken" rend="merge">No, you must be
                    of good courage, and say that you bury my body,—and bury it <milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="116"/>
            
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="116a"/>
            as you think best
                    and as seems to you most fitting.</q><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/>When he
                    had said this, he got up and went into another room to bathe; Crito followed
                    him, but he told us to wait. So we waited, talking over with each other and
                    discussing the discourse we had heard, and then speaking of the great misfortune
                    that had befallen us, for we felt that he was like a father to us and that when
                    bereft of him we should pass the rest of our lives as orphans. And when he had
                    bathed 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="116b"/>
            and his children had been brought to
                    him—for he had two little sons and one big one—and the women of the
                    family had come, he talked with them in Crito’s presence and gave them such
                    directions as he wished; then he told the women to go away, and he came to us.
                    And it was now nearly sunset; for he had spent a long time within. And he came
                    and sat down fresh from the bath. After that not much was said, and the servant
                        
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="116c"/>
            of the eleven came and stood beside him
                    and said: <q type="spoken">Socrates, I shall not find fault with you, as I do with others,
                    for being angry and cursing me, when at the behest of the authorities, I tell
                    them to drink the poison. No, I have found you in all this time in every way the
                    noblest and gentlest and best man who has ever come here, and now I know your
                    anger is directed against others, not against me, for you know who are blame.
                    Now, for you know the message I came to bring you, farewell and try to bear what
                    you must 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="116d"/>
            as easily as you can.</q> And he
                    burst into tears and turned and went away. And Socrates looked up at him and
                    said: <q type="spoken">Fare you well, too; I will do as you say.</q> And then he said
                    to us: <q type="spoken">How charming the man is! Ever since I have been here he has been
                    coming to see me and talking with me from time to time, and has been the best of
                    men, and now how nobly he weeps for me! But come, Crito, let us obey him, and
                    let someone bring the poison, if it is ready; and if not, let the man prepare
                    it.</q> And Crito said: 
         
         <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="116e"/>
            <q type="spoken">But I
                    think, Socrates, the sun is still upon the mountains and has not yet set; and I
                    know that others have taken the poison very late, after the order has come to
                    them, and in the meantime have eaten and drunk and some of them enjoyed the
                    society of those whom they loved. Do not hurry; for there is still
                    time.</q></said></p></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>