Now come, what do
you think of the man who wants to tell the truth, but never
sticks to what he says; when he shows you the way, tells you
first that the road runs east, then that it runs west; and when
he casts up figures, makes the total now larger, now
smaller?Why, I think he shows that he doesn’t know what he
thought he knew.
Are you aware
that some people are called slavish?Yes.To what do they owe the
name, to knowledge or to ignorance?To ignorance,
obviously.To ignorance of the smiths’ trade, shall we
say?Certainly not.Ignorance of carpentry perhaps?No, not to that
either.Of cobbling?No, to none of these: on the contrary,
those who are skilled in such trades are for the most part
slavish.Then is this name given to those who are ignorant
of the beautiful and good and just?That is my
opinion.
Then we must
strain every nerve to escape being slaves.Upon my word,
Socrates, I did
feel confident that I was a student of a philosophy that would
provide me with the best education in all things needful to one
who would be a gentleman. But you can imagine my dismay when I
realise that in spite of all my pains I am even incapable of
answering a question about things that one is bound to know, and
yet find no other way that will lead to my
improvement.Hereupon
Socrates exclaimed:
Tell me, Euthydemus, have you ever been to
Delphi?Yes, certainly; twice.Then did you notice
somewhere on the temple the inscription Know
thyself
?I did.And did you pay no heed to the inscription, or did
you attend to it and try to consider who you
were?Indeed I did not; because I felt sure that I knew that already;
for I could hardly know anything else if I did not even know
myself.
And what do you
suppose a man must know to know himself, his own name merely? Or
must he consider what sort of a creature he is for human use and
get to know his own powers; just as those who buy horses don’t
think that they know the beast they want to know until they have
considered whether he is docile or stubborn, strong or weak,
fast or slow, and generally how he stands in all that makes a
useful or a useless horse?That leads me to think that he who does
not know his own powers is ignorant of himself.
Is it not clear
too that through self-knowledge men come to much good, and
through self-deception to much harm? For those who know
themselves, know what things are expedient for themselves and
discern their own powers and limitations. And by doing what they
understand, they get what they want and prosper: by refraining
from attempting what they do not understand, they make no
mistakes and avoid failure. And consequently through their power
of testing other men too, and through their intercourse with
others, they get what is good and shun what is bad.
Those who do not know and are
deceived in their estimate of their own powers, are in the like
condition with regard to other men and other human affairs. They
know neither what they want, nor what they do, nor those with
whom they have intercourse; but mistaken in all these respects,
they miss the good and stumble into the bad.
Furthermore, those who know what
they do win fame and honour by attaining their ends. Their
equals are glad to have dealings with them; and those who miss
their objects look to them for counsel, look to them for
protection, rest on them their hopes of better things, and for
all these reasons love them above all other men.
But those who know not what they
do, choose amiss, fail in what they attempt and, besides
incurring direct loss and punishment thereby, they earn contempt
through their failures, make themselves ridiculous and live in
dishonour and humiliation.And
the same is true of communities. You find that whenever a state,
in ignorance of its own power, goes to war with a stronger
people, it is exterminated or loses its liberty.
Socrates,
answered Euthydemus, you may rest assured that I
fully appreciate the importance of knowing oneself. But where
should the process of self-examination begin? I look to you for
a statement, please.
Well,
said Socrates, I may assume, I take it, that you know what things
are good and what are evil?Of course, for if I don’t know so much as
that, I must be worse than a slave.Come then, state them
for my benefit.Well, that’s a simple matter. First health in
itself is, I suppose, a good, sickness an evil. Next the various
causes of these two conditions — meat, drink, habits — are good
or evil according as they promote health or
sickness.
Then health and
sickness too must be good when their effect is good, and evil
when it is evil.But when can health possibly be the cause of evil,
or sickness of good?Why, in many cases; for instance, a disastrous
campaign or a fatal voyage: the able-bodied who go are lost, the
weaklings who stay behind are saved.True; but you see, in
the successful adventures too the able-bodied take part, the
weaklings are left behind.Then since these bodily conditions
sometimes lead to profit, and sometimes to loss, are they any
more good than evil?No, certainly not; at least so it appears from the
argument.
But wisdom now,
Socrates, — that
at any rate is indisputably a good thing; for what is there that
a wise man would not do better than a fool?Indeed! have you not
heard how Daedalus was seized by Minos because of his wisdom,
and was forced to be his slave, and was robbed of his country
and his liberty, and essaying to escape with his son, lost the
boy and could not save himself, but was carried off to the
barbarians and again lived as a slave there?That is the story, of
course.And have you not heard the story of Palamedes?
Surely, for all the poets sing of him, how that he was envied
for his wisdom and done to death by Odysseus.Another well-known
tale!And how many others, do you suppose, have been kidnapped on
account of their wisdom, and haled off to the great King’s
court, and live in slavery there?
Happiness seems
to be unquestionably a good,
Socrates.It would be so,
Euthydemus, were it not made up of goods that are
questionable.But what element in happiness can be called in
question?None, provided we don’t include in it beauty or
strength or wealth or glory or anything of the
sort.But of course we shall do that. For how can anyone be happy
without them?
Then of course we
shall include the sources of much trouble to mankind. For many
are ruined by admirers whose heads are turned at the sight of a
pretty face; many are led by their strength to attempt tasks too
heavy for them, and meet with serious evils: many by their
wealth are corrupted, and fall victims to conspiracies; many
through glory and political power have suffered great
evils.
Well now, if I am
at fault in praising even happiness, I confess I know not what
one should ask for in one’s prayers.But perhaps you never
even thought about these things, because you felt so confident
that you knew them. However, as the state you are preparing
yourself to direct is governed by the people, no doubt you know
what popular government is?I think so, certainly.
Then do you
suppose it possible to know popular government without knowing
the people?Indeed I don’t.And do you know, then, what the
people consists of?I think so.Of what do you suppose it to
consist?The poorer classes, I presume.You know the poor,
then?Of course I do.And you know the rich too?Yes, just as well as the
poor.What kind of men do you call poor and rich
respectively?The poor, I imagine, are those who have not enough
to pay for what they want; the rich those who have more than
enough.
Have you
observed, then, that some who have very little not only find it
enough, but even manage to save out of it, whereas others cannot
live within their means, however large?Yes, certainly — thanks
for reminding me — I know, in fact, of some despots even who are
driven to crime by poverty, just like paupers.
Therefore, if
that is so, we will include despots in the people, and men of
small means, if they are thrifty, in the rich.I am forced to agree
once more, cried Euthydemus, evidently by my stupidity. I am inclined to think I had better
hold my tongue, or I shall know nothing at all
presently. And so he went away very dejected, disgusted
with himself and convinced that he was indeed a slave.
Now many of those who were brought to
this pass by Socrates, never
went near him again and were regarded by him as mere blockheads. But
Euthydemus guessed that he would never be of much account unless he
spent as much time as possible with
Socrates.
Henceforward, unless obliged to absent himself, he never left him,
and even began to adopt some of his practices.
Socrates, for his
part, seeing how it was with him, avoided worrying him, and began to
expound very plainly and clearly the knowledge that he thought most
needful and the practices that he held to be most excellent.