plato, phaedrus (jowett trans.)
Post on 02-Jun-2018
260 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 1/99
T H E
D I A L O G U E S
OF
PLAT0
T R A N S L A T E D I N T O E N G L I S H
WZTH A N A L Y S E S AND INTRODUCl'IOiVS
BY
.B. JOWETT,
M.A.
I I A S T E R OF
B . < L L I O L CO LLELE
R E G I U S PR OFE S S OR OF G R E E K
I N
THE
U N i v m s i r Y
OP
oxvoxn
DOCTOR
IS
THEOLOGY OK
THE
L N I V C K S I T Y
OF
L E I D E N
T H I R D E D I T I O N
R E V I S E D A N D C O RR EC YZ 'D T H R O U G H O U T , WI T H AfAARGlNAL A N A L Y S E S
A N D A N I N D E X OF S U E I E C T S A N D P R O P E R . V A A f E S
0 X F 0 R D
P R E
S S
L O N D O N :
H U M P H R E Y M I L F O R D
U
N
I V E R
S I T Y
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 2/99
T O h l Y
F O R M E R P U P I L S
I N B A L L I O L C O L L E G E
.4ND I N T H E U N I V E R S I T Y OF O X F O R J )
W H O D U R I N G F I F T Y Y E A R S
H A VE B EE N T H E B E b T O F F R I E N D S T O h lE
T H E S E V O L U M E S A R E I N S C R I B E D
I N
G R A T E F U L R E C O G K I T I O N
1; T H E I R N E V ER F A I L IN G A T T A C H M E N T
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 3/99
P H A E D R U S .
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 4/99
I N T R O D U C T I O N .
THEPhaedrus is closely connected with the Symposium, and
Phacdrus.
may b e regarded eithe r as introducing o r following it. The two
I ~ ~
Dialogues together contain the whole philosophy of Plato on the
T1ON'
nature of love, which in the Republic and in the later writings
of'
the Ph ae dr us and Syniposium love and philosophy join hands, i -
lato is only introduced playfully or as a figure of speech . But in
and one is an asp ect of the other. T h e spiritual and emotional
part is elevated into the ideal, to which in the Symposium man-
kind ar e described as looking forward, and w hich in the Pha edrus ,
as well a s in the Phaedo, they a re seeking to recover from a former
state of existence. W he th er the subject of the D ialogue is love or
rhetoric, or the union of the two, or the relation of philosophy
to
love and to art in general, and to the human soul, will be here-
after considered. And p erh aps we may arrive at some conclusion
such as the following-that th e dialogue is not strictly confined
to a single subject, but p asse s from one to a noth er with the natural
freedom of conversation.
Steph.
Phaedrus has been spending the m orning with Lysias, the
*'7
celebrated rhetorician, and is going to refresh himself by taking a
walk outside the wall, when he is met by Socrates, who professes
that he will not leave him until he has delivered up the speech
a 2 8 with which Lysias has regaled him, and which he is carrying
about in his mind, or more probably in a book hidden under his
cloak, and is intending
to
study as he walks. T h e imputation is
not denied, and the two agree to direct their steps out of the
public way along the stream of the Ilissus towards a plane-tree
which is seen in the distance. Th ere , lying down amidst pleasant
sounds and scents, they will read the speech
of
Lysias.
T h e
2 2 9
country
is
a novelty to Socrates, who never goes out of the town
;
ANALYSI S .
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 5/99
394
An.aGysis 2 29-2 3
7.
Phludm~.
and hence he
is
full of admiration for the beauties of nature, which
.4.ALYsIs. he seem s to be d rinking in for the first time.
A s the y are on their way, Phaedrus asks the opinion of Socrates
respecting the local tradition of Boreas and Oreithyia. Socrates,
after a satirical allusion to the ‘rationalizers’ of his day, replies
that he has no time for these
‘
nice
’
interpretations of mythology,
and he pities any one who has.
W hen you once begin ther e is no
end of them, and the y sp ring f p m an uncritical philosophy after
all.
‘
The proper study of mankind is man ; and h e is a far more
complex and wonderful being than the se rpen t Typho. Soc rates
zjo
as yet does not know himself; and w hy should he care to know
about unearthly monsters ? Engaged in such conversation, they
arrive at the plane -tree; when they have found a convenient
resting-place, Phaedrus pulls out the speech and reads :-
The speech consists of a foolish paradox which is to the effect
that the non-lover ought to be accepted ra ther than th e lover- 231
because he is more rational, more agreeable, more enduring, less
suspicious, less hurtful, less boastful, less engrossing, and because
there are more
of
them, and for a great m any other reasons which
are equally unmeaning..
Phaedrus is captivated with the beauty of
the periods, and wants to make Socrates say that nothing was or
ever could be written better. Socrates doe s not think m uch of
235
the matter, but then he
has
only attended to the form, and in that
he has detected several repetitions and other marks
of
haste. He
cannot agree with Phaedrus in the extreme value which he sets
upon this performance, because he is afraid of doing injustice to
Anacreon and Sappho and other great writers, and is almost
inclined to think that he himself, or rather some power residing
within him, could make a speech better than that of Lysias on the
same theme, and also different frcm his, if he may be allowed the 236
use of a few commonplaces which all speake rs must equally
employ.
Phaedrus is delighted at the prospect of having another speech,
.an d prom ises that he will set u p a golden statue of Socrates at
Delphi, if he keeps his word. Some raillery ensues, and at length
Socrates, conquered by the threat that he shall never again
hear a speech
of
Lysias un less he fulfils his promise, veils h is face 237
and begins.
First, invoking the Muses and assumiogironically the person of
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 6/99
-dJZ@J‘Si.i 237-242. 395
the non-lover (who is a lover all the same), he will enquire into
Phacdtw.
the n atur e and pow er of love.
Fo r this is a necessary preliminary A ~ ~
to the oth er question --How is th e non-lover to be distinguished
from the lov er ? In all of u s ther e are two principles-a better
and a worse-reason and desire, which a re generally at w ar with
one another
;
and th e victory of the rational is called tem peran ce,
and the victory of the irrational intemperance
or
excess. The
23s latter take s many forms and ha s m any bad nam es -gluttony,
drunke nne ss, and the like. But of all the irrational de sire s
or
excesses the greatest is that which is led away by desires of a
kindred na ture to the enjoyment of personal beauty. And this
is
the master power
of
love.
H er e So cra tes fancies that he de tects in himself an unusual flow
of elo qu er ce -th is newly-found gift he can only attribute to the
inspiration of the place, which appears to be dedicated to the
Starting again from the philosophical basis which has
been laid down, he proceeds to show how many advantages the
non-lover has over the lover. T he one encourages softness and
effeminacy and exclusiveness
;
he cannot endure any superiority
in his beloved
;
he will train him in luxury, he will keeD him out
240
of society, he will deprive him of parents, friends, money, know-
ledge, and of every oth er good, that he may have him all to himself.
Then again his ways are not ways of pleasantness
;
he is mighty
disagreeable
; ‘
crab bed age and youth cann ot live together.’ At
every hour of the night and day he
is
intruding upon him
;
there
is
the same old withered face and the remainder to match--and
he
is
always repeating, in season
or
out of season, the praises
or
disp raise s of his beloved, which a re bad enough w hen he is sob er,
2 4 1
and published all over the world when he is dru nk. At length
his love crases
;
he is converted into an ene my, and the spectacle
*
may be seen of the lover running away from the beloved, who
pursue s him with vain reproaches, and dem ands his rewa rd which
the othe r refuses to pay. Too late the beloved le arn s, after all his
pains and dissgreeables, that As wolves love lambs
so
lovers love
their
loves.’
H e r e
is
the end; the ‘other’
or
‘
non-lover
’
part of the speech had better be understood, for if in
the.censure of the lover Socrates has broken out in verse, what
H e has said his
say and is preparing to go away.
239 nymphs.
(Cp.
Char.
155
D.)
242
will
115
not do in his praise
of
the non-lover?
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 7/99
396
A
naGysis
2 2-24
7
Phu.cdms.
A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , s .
Phaedrus begs him to remain, at any rate until the heat of noon
has passed; he would like to have a little more conversation
before they go. Socrates, wh o has risen, recognizes the oracular
sign which forbids him to depart until he has done penance.
conscience has been aw akened, and like Stes icho rus w he n h e had
reviled
the lovely Helen he will sing a palinode for having
blasphem ed the majesty of love. H is palinode takes th e form of
a myth.
he divides into four kinds: first, there is the ayt
of
divination
or
prophecy-this, in a vein similar to that pervading th e Cratylus
and Io, he connects w ith ma dness by an etymological explanation
(pavrirrj,
pavmj-compare O ~ O V O ~ U T ~ K ~ ~ ,
i o v i m m j , '
tis all one reckon-
ing, save the ph rase is a little variations')
;
secondly, there is the
ar t of purification by mysteries ; thirdly,, poetry or the inspiration 24
of the M uses ( c p Ion, 533
foll.),
without which
n o
man can
ente r the ir temple. All this show s that ma dness is one
of
heaven's blessings, and may sometimes be a great deal better
than sense. There
is
also a fourth kind of madness-that
of'
love-which cannot be explained without enquiring into the
nature of the soul.
All soul is immortal, for she is the source of all motion both in
herself and in others.
a composite nature made up of a charioteer and a pair of winged
steeds. T h e steeds of the gods ar e immortal, but ours are one
mortal and the other immortal. T h e immortal soul soa rs upw ards
into the heavens, but the mortal drops her plumes and settles
upon the earth.
Now the use of the wing is to rise and carry the downward
element into the upp er world-there to behold beauty, wisdom ,
goodness, and the other things of God by which the soul
is
nourished.
in a winged chariot
;
and an array of gods and demi-gods and
of
human souls in the ir train, follows him. T he re a re glorious and
blessed sights in the interior of heaven, and he
who
will may
freely behold them . The grea t vision of all is seen at the feast of
the gods, wh en the y ascend the heights of the empyrean-all but
Hestia, who is left at home to keep house. Th e chariots of the
gods glide readily upwards and stand upon the outside; thc
His 243
So cra tes begins his tale with a glorification of madness, w hich 244
H e r form may be described in a figure as 246
On a certain day Z eus the lord of heaven goes forth 247
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 8/99
Analys is 247-249. 397
revolution of the spheres carries them round, and they have a
P h d w s .
vision of the world beyond.
But the others labour in vain; for A ~ ~
the mortal steed, if he ha s not been properly trained, ke eps them
dow n and sin ks them towards the earth. Of the world which is
beyond the heavens, who can tell ? Th ere is an essence formless,
colourless, intangible, perceived by the mind only, dwelling in t he
region of true knowledge.
The divine mind in her revolution
enjoys this fair prospect, and beholds justice, temperance, and
knowledge in the ir everlasting essence . W hen fulfilled with the
sight
of
them she returns home, and the charioteer puts up the
248
horses in their stable, and gives them ambrosia to eat and nectar
to drink. Th is is the life of the g od s; the hum an soul tries to
reach the same heights, but hardly succeeds
;
and sometinies the
head of the charioteer
rises
above, and sometimes sinks below,
the fair vision, and he is at last obliged, after much contention, to
turn away and leave the plain
of
truth.
But if th e, so ul has
followed in the train of her god and once beheld truth she is
pres erved from harm, and is carried round in t he next revolution of
the spheres
;
and
if
always following, and always seeing the tru th,
is
then for ever unharmed. If, however, sh e drop s h er wings and
falls to the earth, then she takes the form of man, and the soul
which has seen most of the truth passes into a philosopher or
lover
;
that which has see n truth in th e second degree, into a king
or warr ior
;
the third, into a householder or money-maker; the
fourth, into a gymnast: the fifth, into a prophet
o r
mystic; the
sixth, into a poet o r imitator
;
he seventh, into a husbandman or
craftsman
;
the eighth, into a sophist or demagogue ; the ninth,
into a tyrant. All the se a re state s of probation, wh erein he who
lives righteously is improved, and he w ho lives unrighteously
deteriorates. After death comes the jud gm ent ; the bad dep art
to houses of correction under the earth, the good to places of joy
in heaven. W h en a thousand ye ars have elapsed the
souls
meet
together and choose th e lives which they will lead for another
period
of
existence. T he soul which th ree times in succession
has chosen the life
of
a philosopher or
of
a lover who is not
without philosophy receives her wings at the close of the third
millenn ium; th e rem ainder have to complete a cycle of ten thousand
ye ars before their wings ar e restored to them. Each time ther e
T he soul of a. man may descend into a
49 is fuil liberty of choice.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 9/99
398
AnaGysis
249-2
j3.
Phludru~.
beast, and retu rn again into the form of man. But the form of
A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ .
an will only be taken by the soul which has once seen truth
and acquired som e conception of the universal:-this is the
recollection of the know ledge which sh e a ttained wh en in the
com pany of the Gods. And men in gene ral recall only with
difficulty the things of another world, but the mind of the
philosopher has a better remembrance of them. For wh en he
beholds the visible beauty of earth his enraptured soul passes
in thought to those glorious sights of justice and wisdom and z jo
temperance and truth which sh e- onc e gazed upon in heaven.
Then she celebrated holy mysteries and beheld blessed appari-
tions shining in pure light, herself pure, and not as yet entombed
in the body. And still, like a bird eager to quit its cage, sh e
flutters and looks upw ards, and is therefore deem ed mad. Such
a recollection of past days she receives through sight, the keenest
of our senses, because beauty, alone of the ideas, has any re-
presentation on earth
:
wisdom is invisible to mortal eyes. But
the corrupted nature, blindly excited by this vision of beauty,
rus he s on to enjoy, and would fain wallow like a brute beast in
sensual pleasures. W hereas the true mystic, who has see n the
many sights of bliss, when he beholds a god-like form or face is
amazed with delight, and if he were not afraid of being thought
mad he would fall down and worship. Th en the stiffenect wing
begins to relax and grow again ; esire which has been imprisoned
pours over the soul of the lover; the germ of the wing unfolds,
and stings, and pangs of birth, like the cutting of teeth, ar e every-
wh ere felt. (Cp. Sym p.
206
foll.) Fa ther and mother, and goods
2 5 2
and laws and proprieties are nothing to him; his beloved
is
his
physician, who can. alone cure his pain. An apoc rypha l sacred
writer s ays that the power which th us works in him is by mortals
called love, but the immortals call him dove, or the winged one, in
orde r to represent the force of his wings-such at any rate is his
nature. Now the characters of lovers depend upon the god whom
they followed in the other world ; and they choose their loves in
this world accordingly. T he followers of A re s ar e fierce and
253
violent
;
those of Zeus seek out some philosophical and imperial
nature; the attendants of Here find a royal lo ve; and in like
mann er the followers of eve ry god seek a love who is like
their god ; and to him the y communicate the nature which they
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 10/99
AzaL'ysis
253-257. 399
have received from their god.
The manner in which they take PhIUd71ts.
I
told you about the charioteer and his two steeds, th e one a
noble animal who is guided by word and admonition only, the
other an ill-looking villain who will hardly yield to blow
or
spur.
Together all three, who are a figure of the
soul,
approach the
2 5 4 vision of love. And now a fierce conflict begins. T he ill-
conditioned steed rushes on to enjoy, but the charioteer, who
beholds the beloved with awe, falls back in adoration, and forces
both the steeds
on
their haunches; again the evil steed rushes
forwards and pulls shamelessly. T h e conflict grow s more and
more severe; and at last the charioteer, throwing himself back-
wards, forces the bit out
of
the clenched teeth of the brute,
and pulling harder than ever at the reins, covers his tongue and
jaws with blood, and forces him to rest his legs and haunches
with pain upon the g round. W he n this has happened several
times, th e villain is tamed and humbled, and from tha t time
forward the soul of the lover follows the beloved in modesty and
255 holy fear. An d now their bliss is consum mated ; the same image
of love dwe ls in the b reast of ei th er; and if th ey have self-
control, they pass their lives in the greatest happiness which is
attainable by man-they continue mas ter s of themselves, and
2 5 6
conquer in one of th e thre e heav enly victories. But if the y choose
the lower life of ambition they may still have a happy destiny,
though inferior, because they have not the approval of the whole
soul. A t last the y leave the body and proceed on the ir pilgrim's
progress, and those who have once begun can never
go
back.
When the time comes they receive their wings and fly away, and
the lovers have th e sam e wings.
their lbve is as follows :-
ANALYSN.
Socrates concludes :-
Th ese ar e the blessings of love, and thus have I made my
recantation in finer language than before: I did
so
in order to
please Phaedrus. If
I
said what was wrong at first, please to
attribute my error to Lysias, who ought to study philosophy
instead of rhetorit, and then he will not mislead his disciple
Phaedrus.
Phaedrus is afraid that he will lose conceit of Lysias, and that
Lysias will be out of conceit with himself, and leave
off
making
speeches,
for
the politicians have been deriding him. So cra tes is
257
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 11/99
400
Analysis 257-265.
Phardrus. of opinion that there is small danger of this; the politicians are
A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .hemselveqthe great rhetoricians of the age, who desire to attain 2
58
4mm ortality by the authorship of laws. An d ther efore there is
nothing w ith which they can reproach L ysias in being a writ er
;
but there may be disgrace in being a bad one.
And what is good or bad writing or sp eak ing? W hile the sun
is hot in the sky above us, let us ask that question: since by
rational conversation man lives, and not by the indulgence of
bodily pleasures. An d the gras sho ppe rs who a re c hirru ping
259
around may c arry our wo rds to the Muses, who are their
patronesses
;
for the grasshop pers w ere human beings them-
selves in a world before the Muses, and when the Muses came
the y died of hunger for the love of song. And the y ca rry to them
260
T he first rule of good speaking is to know an d speak the truth
;
as a S partan proverb
says,
true art is tr ut h’ ; w hereas rhetoric is
261
an a rt of enchantment, which makes thing s appea r good and evil,
like and unlike, as the spe aker pleases. Its use is not confined, a s
people commonly suppose,
to
arguments in the law courts and
speeche s in the assembly
;
it
is
rat he r a part of the art of disputa-
tion, under which are included both the rules of Gorgias and the
eristic of Zeno. But it is not wholly devoid of truth. Su pe rio r
knowledge enables us
to
deceive another by the help
of
resem-
blances, and to escape from such a deception when employed
against ourselves. W e see therefore that even in rhetoric an
element of truth is required.
w e can neither m ake the gradual dep artur es from truth by
which men are most easily deceived, nor guard ourselves against
deception.
illustrations of the art of rhetoric
;
first distinguishing betw een the
debatable and undisputed class
of
subjects. In the debatable
class there ought to be a definition of all disputed matters. But
264
the re w as no such definition in th e speech of Lysias
;
nor is there
any order
or
connection in his words a ny m ore than
in
a
nursery
rhyme. W ith this he compares the regular divisions of the o ther
26;
speech, which was his o w n (and yet not his own, for the local
deities must have inspired him). Although only a playful com-
position, it will be found
to
embody two principles : irst, that of
in heaven the repo rt of those who honour them on earth.
For if we do not know the truth, 262
Socrates then proposes that they shall use the two speeches as 263
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 12/99
AnaGysis
266-274.
401
266
synthesis
or
the com prehension of pa rts in a whole; secondly,
p h a ~ d r ~ ~ .
analysis, or t h e resolution of the w hole into parts.
These are the A ~ ~ ~ ~
processes of division and generalization which are
so
dear to th e
dialectician, tha t king of men. T hey a re effected b y dialectic, and
not by rhetoric, of which the remains are but scanty after order
and arra ng em en t have been subtracted. T he re
is
nothing left
but a heap of ’ologies’ and other technical terms invented by
267
Polus, Theodorus, Evenus, Tisias, Gorgias, and others, who have
rule s for everything, and w ho teach how to be sh ort o r long at
pleasure. Prodicus showed his good sen se w hen he said that
there w as a better thing than either to be sho rt or long, which
w as to be
of
convenient length.
268 Still, notwithstanding the absurdities of Polus and others,
rhetoric h as great power in public assemblies. Th is power,
however, is not given by any technical rules, but is the
gift of
genius. T h e real a rt is always being confused by rhetoricians
269
with the pre lim inar ies of the art. T h e perfection of oratory is
like th e perfection of anything else ; natural power must be aided
by a rt. But the a rt is not tha t which is taught in th e schools of
rhetoric ; t is ne ar er akin to philosophy. Pericles, for instance, who
270 was the most accomplished
of
all speakers, derived his eloquence
not from rhetoric but from th e philosophy of na tur e which he
lear nt of Anaxago ras. T r u e rhetoric is like medicine, and the
271 rhetorician has to consider th e na ture s of men’s souls as t he
physician considers the natures
of
their bodies. Such and such
person s a re to be affected in this w ay, such an d such other s in
that
;
and he m ust know the time s and the season s for saying this
Th is is not an e asy task, and this, if ther e be such an art,
is the art of rhetoric.
I
know that there a re some professors of the a rt who maintain
probability to be strong er than truth . But w e maintain that
probability is engendered by likeness of the truth which can only
be attained by the knowledge of it, and that the aim of the good
274
man should not b e to please o r persuad e his fellow-servants, but to
please his good masters w ho are the gods. Rhetoric has a fair
beginning in this.
Eno ugh of the a rt of speaking ; et us now proceed to consider
the true use of writing. T he re is an old Egy ptian tale of Th euth ,
the inventor of writing, showing his invention to the god Thamus,
272 or that.
273
VOL. .
D d
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 13/99
402
Alza .US
275-2 79.
Phaedrar. who told him that he would only spoil men’s memories and take 2 7 5
A N A ~ Y ~ , ~ . way the ir understandings. From this tale, of which young
Ath ens will probably make fun, ma y be gathered the lesson tha t
writing is inferior to speech. For it
is
like a picture, which can
give no answer to a question, and has only a deceitful likeness of
a
living crea ture. It has
no
power of adaptation, but uses the
sam e wo rds for all. It i s not a legitimate
son
of knowledge,
but a bastard, and when a n attack is made upon this bastard
276
neith er pa rent nor any one else is there to defend it.
The
husbandman will not seriously incline to sow his seed in such a
hot-bed or garden of Adonis; he will rather sow in the natural
277
soil of the human soul which has depth of earth; and he will
anticipate the inner growth of the mind, by writing only, if at all,
a s a rem edy against old age. T he natural process will be far
nobler, and will bring forth fruit in the minds of others as well
as
in his own.
T he conclusion of the whole m at ter is ju st this,-that until a
man knows the truth, and the man ner of adapting the truth to the
natures of other men, he cannot be a good orator; also, that the
278
living
is
better than the written word, and that the principles of
justice and truth when delivered by word of mouth are the
legitimate offspring of a man’s own bosom, and their lawful
descendants take up their abode in others. Such an orator a s he
is wh o is possessed of them , you and I would fain become. And
to all composers in the world, poets, orators, legislators, we
hereby announce that if their compositions are based up6n these
principles, then they are not only poets, orators, legislators, but
philosophers. All othe rs a re mere flatterers and putte rs together
of words. Th is is the message which Phae drus undertakes to
ca rry to Lysias from t he local deities, and So cra tes himself will
279
carry a similar message to his favourite Isocrates, whose future
distinction as great rhetorician he prophesies. T he heat of the
day has passed, and after offering
up
a prayer to Pan and the
nymphs, Socrates and Phaed rus depart.
INTROLW
There are two principal controversies which have been raised
about the Phaedrus; the first relates to the subject, the second
to
the date
of
the Dialogue.
There seems to be a notion that the work
of
a great artist
T I O N .
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 14/99
The subjt.rt of the Uialogtce.
403
like Plato cannot fail in unity, and that the unity of a dialfgue
P ~ W ~ P U S .
requires a single subject.
But the conception of unity really
INTRODUC.
applies in very different degrees and ways to different kinds
T1ON*
of
a r t ; to a statue, for example, far more than to any kind of
literary composition, and to som e species of literature far m ore
than to others.
Nor does the dialogue appear to be a style of
composition in which the requirement of unity is most stringent ;
nor should the idea of unity derived from one s o r t of art be
hastily transferred to another.
The double titles of several of
the Platonic Dialogues ar e a furth er proof that the severer rule
was not observed b y Plato. T he Republic is divided between
the search after justice and the construction of the ideal state;
the Parmenides between the criticism of the Platonic
ideas and
of the Eleatic one or being; the Gorgias between the art of
speaking and the nature of the good; the Sophist between the
detection of the Sophist and the correlation of ideas. T he
Theaetetus, the Politicus, and the Philebus have also digressions
which are but remotely connected with the main subject.
T hu s the comparison of Plato's other writings, as well a s the
reason of the thing, lead u s to the conclusion that we must not
expect to find one idea pervading a whole work, but one, two, or
more, as the invention of the writer may suggest, or his fancy
wander. If each dialogue were confined to the development of a
single idea, this would appear on th e face of thed ialogue, nor could
any controversy be raised as to whether the Phaedrus treated
of love o r rhetoric. But the tru th is that Plato subjects himself
to no rule
of
this sort, Like every g reat artist he gives unity
uf
form to the different and apparently distracting topics which
he brings together.
H e works freely and is not to be supposed
to have arranged every part of the dialogue before he begins
to write. H e fastens or weaves together the frame of his dis-
course loosely and imperfectly, and which is the warp and which
is the woof cannot alwa ys be determined.
The subjects of the Phaedrus (exclusive of the short intro-
ductory passage about m ythology which is suggested by the
local tradition) are first the false or conventional art of rhetoric
;
secondly, love or the inspiration of beauty and knowledge, which
is described as madnesi; thirdly, dialectic or the art of com-
position and division ; fourthly, the true rhetoric, which is based
D d 2
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 15/99
404
The sulijct of the D z a d o p .
Yhaedrus.
upop dialectic, and is ne ither th e ar t of persuasion nor knowledge
i h ~ a o D v c .
of the tru th alone, but th e art of persuasion founded on knowledge
of truth and knowledge
of
character
;
fifthly, the superiority
of
the spoken over the written word. T he continuous thread which
appears and reappears throughout is rhetoric : this
is
the ground
into which the rest of th e Dialogue is worked, in parts embroidered
with fine words which are not in Socrates' manner, as he says,
'i n ord er to please Phaedrus.' T he speech of Lysias which
has throw n Phaedrus into an ecstacy is adduced a s an example
of the false rhe to ric; t he first speech of Socrates, though an
improvement, partakes of the same character
;
his second speech,
which
is
full of that higher element said to have been learned
of Anaxagoras by Pericles, and which in the midst of poetry
does not forget order, is an illustration of the higher or true
rhetoric. Th is highe r rhetoric is based upon dialectic, and
dialectic
is
a sort of inspiration akin to love (cp. Symp.
21
oll.) ;
i n these two aspects of philosophy the technicalities of rhetoric
are absorbed.
And so the example becomes also the deeper
theme of discourse. The true knowledge of things in heaven
and earth is
based upon enthusiasm
or
love of the ideas going
before u s and ever present to u s in this world and in another;
and the true order of speech or writing proceeds accordingly,
Love, again, has three degrees
: first, of
interested love corre-
sponding to the conventionalities of rhetoric
;
secondly, of dis-
interested or mad love, fixed on objects of sense, and answering,
perhaps, to poetry
;
hirdly, of disinterested love directed towards
the unseen, answering
to
dialectic
or
the science of the ideas.
Lastly, the art of rhetoric in the lower sens e
is
found to rest on a
knowledge of the natures and characters of men, which Socrates
at the commencement of the Dialogue has described as his own
peculiar study.
T hu s amid discord a harmony begins to a p p ea r; there are
many links of connection which a re not visible at first sigh t.
At the same time the Phaedrus, although one of the most
beautiful of the Platonic Dialogues,
is
also niore irregular than
any other. For insight into the world, for sustained irony, for
depth of thought, there is no Dialogue superior, or perhaps
equal to it. Nevertheless the form of the work has tended to
obscure some of Plato's higher aims
TION.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 16/99
The s-eerh
of
Lysias
atid the f i r s t
speech
of Sorrates.
40
The first speech is composed ‘in that balanced style in which
Phcxcdru~.
the wise love to talk’ (Symp. 185 C). The characteristics of I ~ ~
rhetoric are insipidity, mannerism, and monotonous parallelism
T’oH‘
of clauses. There is more rhythm than reason; the creative
power of imagination is wanting.
“Tis
Greece, but living Greece no more.’
Plato has seized by anticipation the spirit which hung over Greek
literature for a thousand years afterwards. Yet doubtless there
we re some who, like Phaedrus, felt a delight in the harmonious
cadence and the pedantic reasoning of the rhetoricians newly
imported from S icily, which had ceased to be awakened in
them by really great works, such as the odes of Anacreon or
Sap pho or the orations of Pericles. That
the
first speech was
really written by Lysias is improbable. Like the poem of Solon,
or the story
of
Thamus and Theuth, or the funeral oration
of
Xspasia (if genuine),
or
the pretence of Socrates in the Cratylus
that his knowledge of philology is derived from Euthyphro, the
invention is really due to the imagination of Plato, and may
be compared to the parodies of the Sophists in the Protagoras.
Numerous fictions of this sort occur in the Dialogues, and the
gravity of Plato has sometimes i pp os ed upon his commentators.
The introduction
of
a considerable writing of another would
seem not to be in keeping with a great work of art, and has
no parallel elsewhere.
In the second speech Socrates is exhibited as beating the
rhetoricians at their own weapons ; he ( a n unpractised man
and they masters of the art.’ T ru e to his character, he must,
however, profess that the speech which he makes is not his
own, for he knows nothing of himself.
(Cp.
Symp. 201
U.)
Re-
garded as a rhetorical exercise, the superiority of his speech
seems to consist chiefly in a better arrangement
of
the topics;
he begins with a definition of love, and he gives weight to his
words by going back to general maxims; a lesser merit is the
greater liveliness of Socrates, which hurries him into verse and
relieves the monotony
of
the style.
But
Plato had doubtless a higher purpose than to exhibit
Socrates as the rival or superior of the Athenian rhetoricians.
Even in the speech
of
Lysias there is a germ of truth, and
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 17/99
406 Lou a i d
warriage.
I’ha~drus.
this is furth er developed in the parallel oration
of’
Socrates. First,
I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -assionate love is overthrown by the sophistical or intetested,
and then both yield to thqt higher view of love which is after-
w ards revealed to
us.
T h e ex treme of commonplace
is
contrasted
with the most ideal and imaginative of specu lations. Socrates,
half in jest and to satisfy his own wild humour, takes the disguise
of Lysias, but he is also in profound ea rnes t a nd in a de ep er
vein of iron y than usual. Ha ving improvised his own speech,
which is based upon t h e model of the preceding, he condem ns
them both. Yet the condemnation is not to be taken seriously,
for he is evidently trying to express an aspect of the truth.
To
understand him, w e mu st m ake abstraction of morality and of
the Greek m ann er of regardin g the relation of the sexes. In
this, a s in his o ther discussions about love, what Pla to sa ys of the
loves of men m ust be tra nsfe rred to th e loves of women before
we can attach an y serious meaning to his words. H ad h e lived
in our times he would have made the transposition himself.
But seein g in his own age t he impossibility of woman being
th e intellectual helpmate o r friend of man (excep t in th e r ar e
insta nce s of a Diotima or an A spasia), see ing that, even
a s
to personal beauty, her place was taken by young mankind
instead of womankind, he tries to work out the problem of
love without reg ard to the distinctions of nature. And full
of
the evils which he recognized as flowing from the spurious
form of love, he proceeds w ith a de ep meaning, though p artly
in joke, to show that the ‘non-lover’s’ love is better than the
W e may raise the sa me question in ano ther form
:
I s marriage
pref erab le with or without love ?
‘
Am ong ourselves,’ as w e m ay
say, a little parodying th e words of Pausanias in th e Sympo sium,
‘t h er e would be one an sw er to this question
:
the practice and
feeling of some foreign countries appears to be more doubtful.’
Suppose a modern Socrates, in defiance of the received notions of
society and the sentimental literature of the day, alone against
all th e writers and readers of novels, to suggest this enquiry,
would not the younger ‘part of the world be ready to take
off
its coat and run at him might and main ? ’ (R ep. v.
474.)
Yet,
if like Peisthetaerus in Aristophanes, he could persuade the
‘birds’ to hear him, retiring a little behind a rampart, not of pots
TION.
lover’s.’
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 18/99
Love
n i ~d
awiagc.
407
and dishes, but of unreadable books, he might have something P ~ U U J .
to say for himself.
Might he not argue, ‘that a rational being I ~ ~
should not follow the dictates of passion in the most important
act of his or he r life’? W ho would willingly e nter into a contract
at first sight, almost without thought, against the advice and
opinion of his friends, at a tim e when he acknowledges that he
is not in his right mind ? And yet they are praised by the authors
of romances, who reject the warnings of their friends or parents,
rathe r than thos e who listen to them in such matters. Two
inexperienced persons, ignorant of the world and of one another,
how can they be said to choose ?-they draw lots, whence also the
saying, ‘m arri ag e is a lottery.’ Then h e would describe their
way of life after marriage; how they monopolize one another’s
affections to the exclusion of friends and rel atio ns : how the y
pass their days in unmeaning fondness or trivial conversa-
tion ; how the inferior of the two drags the other down to
his
or
her level; how the cares of a family ‘breed mean-
ness in their souls.’ In the fulfilment of military
or
public
duties, they are not helpe rs
but
hinderers of one another
:
they
cannot undertake a ny noble enterprise, such as makes the nam es
of men and wom en famous, from domestic considerations. Too
late their ey es ar e opened ; they were taken unaw ares and desire
to pa rt company. Better, he would say , a ‘little love at the
beginning,’ for heaven might have increased i t ; but now their
foolish fondness has changed into mutual dislike. In the days
of the ir honeymoon th ey never understood that they must provide
against offences, that they must have interests, that they must
learn th e a rt of living as well a s loving. Our misogamist will
not appeal to Anacreon or Sappho for a confirmation of h is view,
but to the universal experience
of
mankind. Ho w much nobler,
in conclusion, he will say, is friendship, which does not receive
unm eaning p rais es from novelists and poets, is not exacting or
exclusive, is not impaired by familiarity, i s much less expensive,
is not so likely to take offence, seldom changes, and may be
dissolved from time to time without the assistance
of
the courts.
Reside.s, he will remark that there is a much greater choice of
friends than of wives-you may have more of them and they
will
be far mo re improving to your mind. The y will not keep
you dawdling at home,
or
dancing attendance upon them; or
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 19/99
408 The true
dove.
Phadrus.
withdraw you from th e great world and stirr ing sc ene s of life
I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , , ~ .
nd action which would make a man of you.
In such a manner, turning th e sea m y side outwards, a modern
Socrates might describe the evils of married and domestic life.
T he y a re evils which mankind in general have agreed to conceal,
partly because they ar e compensated by greater goods. Socra tes
or Archilochus would soon have to s ing a palinode for the injustice
done to lovely Helen, or some misfortune worse than blindness
might befall them. Th en they would take
up
their parable again
and sa y :-that the re w ere two loves,
a
highe r an d a lower, holy
and unholy, a love of the mind and a love of the body.
TION.
‘ L e t me n o t to the marriage
of
t rue minds
Ad mit impediments . Love is not love
Which al ters when
it
alteration f inds.
* *
* * * *
Love’s not t ime’s fool, though rosy lips aud cheeks
Within his bending sickle’s compass come
;
Love alters no t with
his
brief hours
and
weeks,
But bears it out even to the edge of doom.’
But this true love of the mind cannot exist between two
souls
until they are purified from the grossness of earthly passion:
they must pass through a time of trial and conflict first
;
in the
language of religion they mu st be converted or born again. T he n
they would see the world transformed into a scene of heavenly
bea uty; a divine idea would accomp any them in all the ir thou ghts
and actions. Somethin g too of th e recollections of childhood
might float about them still
;
they might regain that old simplicity
which had been theirs in other days at their first entrance on
life. And although the ir love of one another wa s ever present to
them, they would acknowledge also a higher love of duty and
of God, which united them . A nd their happ iness would d ep en d
upon their pre serv ing in them this principle-not losing the ideals
of justice and holiness and truth, but renewing them
at
the foun-
tain of light. W h e n th ey have attained to this exalted state, let
the m m arry (something too may be conceded to the animal nature
of ma n) :
or
live together in holy and innocent friendship. T h e
poet m ight describe in eloquent wo rds th e n atur e of such a union ;
how after many struggles the true love was found : how the two
passed their lives togeth er in th e service of God and man; how
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 20/99
Love and marriage.
409
their characters were reflected upon one ano ther, and seem ed
Phaedrus.
to grow more like year by year
;
how the y read in one another’s
iNTnoDuc.
eyes the thoughts, wishes, actions of the other
;
how they saw
each oth er in God
;
how in a figure they grew wings like doves,
and were ‘ re ad y to fly away together and be at rest.’ And lastly,
he might tell how, after a time at no long intervals, first one
and then the other fell asleep, and ‘appeared to the unwise’
to die, but w ere reunited in another sta te of being, in which
they saw justice and holiness and truth, not according to the
imperfect copies of them which are found in this world, but
justice absolute in existence absolute, and
so
of the rest. And
they would hold converse not only with each other, but with
blessed souls everywhere ; and would be employed in the ser-
vice
of
God, every soul fulfilling his own nature and character,
and would see into th e wonders of earth and heaven, and trace
the works of creation to their author.
So, partly in jest but also ‘with a certain degree of serious-
ness,’ we may appropria te to ourse lves the words of Plato. The
use
of
such a parody, though very imperfect, is to transfer his
thoughts to our sphere of religion and feeling, to bring him
nearer to
us
and
us
to him. Like th e Scriptures, Plato admits
of
endless applications, if w e allow for th e difference of times
and manners ; and w e lose the better half of him w hen we regard
his Dialogues merely as literary compositions. An y ancient
work which i s worth reading has a practical and speculative
as well as a literary interest. And in Plato, more than in any
other Greek writer, the local and transitory is inextricably
blended with what is spiritual and eternal. Socrates is neces-
sarily ironical
;
for he has to withdraw from th e received opinions
and beliefs of mankind.
We
cannot separate the transitory from
the permanent; nor can we translate the language
of
irony
into that
of
plain reflection and common sense. But we can
imag ine th e mind of Socrates in another age and country ; and we
can interpret him by analogy with reference to the errors and
prejudices w hich prevail ‘among ourselves.
T o
return to the
Phaedrus
:-
Both speeches
are
strongly condemned by Socrates as sinful
and blasphem ous towards the god Love, and a s worthy only of
some haunt
of
sailors to which good manners were unknown.
TION.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 21/99
4 1
The i y t h aud i t s izkr retnLiotc.
P i i a c d ~ .T he meaning of this and ot he r wild language to the sam e effect,
I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .hich is introduced by way of contrast to the formality of the
two speech es (Socrates has a sen se of relief w he n he has escaped
from the tramm els of rhetoric , see m s to be that the two speec hes
proceed upon the supposition that love is and ought to be in-
terested, and that
no
such thing a s a real o r disinterested passion,
which would be at the same time lasting, could be conceived.
‘ But did I call this “ ove ”
? 0
God, forgive my blasphemy,
Thi s is not love.
But there is
another kingdom of love, a kingdom not of this world, divine,
eternal.
Th en follows the famous my th, which is a s or t of parable,
and like other parables ought not to receive too minute an in-
terpretation. In all such allegories th er e is a great deal which
is merely ornamental, and the interpreter has
to
separate the
important from the unimportant. So crate s himself ha s given
the right clue when, in using his own discourse afterwards as
the text for his examination of rhetoric, he characterizes it as
a ‘partly true and tolerably credible mythus,’ in which amid
poetical figures, ord er and a rra ng em en t w er e not forgotten..
T h e soul is described in magnificent language a s the self-moved
and the source of motion in all oth er things. Th is is th e philo-
sophical theme
or
proem of th e whole. But idea s must be given
through something, and under the pretext that to realize the
true nature of th e soul would be not only tedious but impossible,
we at once pass on to describe the souls of gods as well
as
men under the figure of two winged ste eds an d a charioteer.
No
connection is traced between th e soul as the great motive power
and the triple soul which is thus imaged. T h er e is no difficulty
in seeing that the charioteer represents the reason, or that the
black ho rse is th e symbol of th e sensual o r concupiscent element
of hum an nature. T h e white ho rse also rep resen ts rational im-
pulse, but the description in a53, ‘a lov er of hono ur and m odesty
and temperance, and a follower of true glory,’ though similar,
does not at once recall th e ‘sp irit’ (B r p b s ) of the
Republic.
T h e two stee ds really correspond in a figure mo re nearly to th e
appetitive and moral or sem i-rational soul of Aristotle. An d thus,
for the first time perhaps in the history of philosophy, we have
represented to us the threefold division of psychology. The
TION.
Ra ther it is the love of the w orld.
An d this other love
I
will now sho w you in a m ystery.’
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 22/99
The iztyth and i ts
interprttatiotz,
411
image
of
the charioteer and the steeds has been compared with a
Phacdm.
similar image which occurs in the verses of Parmenides; but I , , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
it is important
to
remark that the horses of Parmenides have
'
no allegorical meaning, and that the poet is only describing his
own approach in a chariot to the regions of light and the house of
the goddess
of
truth.
T he triple soul has had a previous existence, in which following
in the train of some god, from whom sh e derived her character,
sh e beheld partially and imperfectly the vision of absolute truth.
All her after existence, passed in many forms of men and
animals, is sp en t in regaining this. Th e stages of the conflict are
many and various; and she is sorely let and hindered by the
animal des ires of the inferior or concupiscent steed. Again and
again she beholds the flashing beauty of the beloved. But before
that vision can be finally enjoyed the animal desires must be
subjected.
The moral or spiritual element in man is represented by the
immortal steed which, like Bupbs in the' Republic, always sides
with th e reason. Both are dragged out of their course by the
furious impulses of desire. In the end something is'conceded
to the desires, after they have been. finally humbled and over-
powered. And yet the way of philosophy, or perfect love of
the unseen, is total abstinence from bodily delights.
'But all
men cannot receive this saying
'
: in the lower life of ambition
they may be taken
off
their guard and stoop to folly unawares,
and the n, although th ey do not attain to the highest bliss,,yet
if they have once conquered they may be happy enough.
The language of the Meno and the Phaedo as well as of the
Phaedrus seems to show that at one time of his life Plato was
quite serious in maintaining a former state of existence. His
mission was to realize the abstract ; in that, all good and truth,
all the hopes of this and another life seemed to centre.
To
him abstractions, as we call them, were another kind of know-
ledge-an inne r and unsee n world, which seemed to exist far
more truly than the fleeting objects of sense which were without
him. W he n we a re once able to imagine the intense power
which abstract ideas exercised over the mind of Plato, we
see that there was no more difficulty to him in realizing the
eternal existence of them and of the human minds which were
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 23/99
412
Phacdrus.
associated with them, in the past and future than in the
INTEODUC.
present. T he difficulty w as not how they could exist, but how
they could fail to exist. In th e attem pt to regain this ‘sa vin g’
knowledge of the ideas, the sen se w as found to be a s great
an enemy as th e desires; and hence two things which to
u s
seem quite distinct ar e inextricably blended in th e representation
of Plato.
Thus far we may believe that Plato was serious in his con-
ception of the soul as a motive power, in his reminiscence of
a former state
of
being, in his elevation of the reason over sense
and passion, and perhaps in his doctrine
of
transmigration.
W a s he equally serious in the r es t? For exam ple, ar e w e to
attrib ute his tripartite division of the soul to the go ds ? O r is
this merely assigned to them by w ay of parallelism with m e n ?
T h e latter is the m ore pro bable; for the horse s of the gods
are both white, i.e. their every impulse is in harmony with
reaso n; their dualism, on the other hand, only carries out the
figure of the chariot. Is he serious, again, in regarding love as
‘a madness ’? Tha t s eems
to
arise out of the antithesis to the
form er conception of love. At the sa m e time h e ap pe ar s to
intimate here, as in the Ipn, Apology, Meno, and elsewhere,
that there is a faculty in man, whether to be te rm ed in mod ern
language genius, or inspiration,
or
imagination, or idealism, or
communion with God, which cannot b e reduced to rule an d
measure. Pe rha ps, too, h e is ironically rep eatin g the common
language of mankind a b u t philosophy, and is turning their
jes t into a sort of earn est. (Cp. Phaedo,
61
B; Symp.
218
B.)
O r
is
he serious in holding that each
soul
bears the character
of a god ? H e may have had no o ther account to give of the
differences of human characters to which he afterwards refers.
Or, again, in his absurd derivation of pavtrxrj and O ~ U I G T I K ~ nd
Zpcpos (cp. Cratylus)
?
It is characteristic of th e irony of Socrates
to mix
up
sense and nonsense in such a way that no exact l ine
can b e dra w n between them. An d allegory helps to increase this
sort
of confusion.
A s is often th e case in th e parables and prophecies
of
Scripture,
the meaning is allowed to break through the figure, and the
details are not always consistent. W h e n the charioteers and their
steeds stand upon th e do m e of heaven the y behold the intangible
The
myth ana’
i ts intt.rfretation.
T l 0 N .
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 24/99
The myth and its interpretation.
413
invisible essences which a re not objects
of
sight. Th is is because
~ h a e d , ~ ~ .
the force of language can no further go.
Nor can we dwell
I ~ ~
much on the circumstance, that at the completion of ten
thousand years ail are to return to the place from whence
they came
;
because h e rep resents their return a s dependent
on their own good conduct in the successive stages of existence.
Nor again can we attribute anything to the accidental inference
which would also follow, that even a tyrant may live righteously
in th e condition of life to which fate has called him (,‘he aiblins
might, I dinn a ken’). But to suppose this would be at variance
with Plato himself and with Greek notions generally. He is
much more serious in distinguishing men from animals by
their recognition of the universal which they have known in
a former state, and in denying that this gift of reason can ever
be obliterated or lost. In the language of some modern theo-
logians he might be said to maintain the ‘final perseverance’
of those who have ente red on their pilgrim’s progress. Other
intimations of a ‘metaphysic’ or ‘theology’ of the future may
also be discerned in him : (I) The moderate predestinarianism
which here, a s in th e Republic, acknowledges the element
of
chance in human life, and yet asserts the freedom and respon-
sibility of man;
2)
The recognition of a moral
as
well as an
intellectual principle in man under the image of an immortal
steed ;
(3)
The notion that the divine nature exists by the
contemplation of ideas
of
virtue and justice -or, in other words,
the assertion
of
the essentially moral nature of God
; (4)
Again,
the re is the hint that human life
is
a life of aspiration only,
and that the true ideal
is
not to be found in art;
5 )
There
occurs the first trace of the distinction between necessary and
contingent matter; (6) The conception of the soul itself as the
motive power and reason of the universe.
The conception of the philosopher,
or
the philosopher and
lover in one, as a sort of madman, may be compared with
the Republic and Theaetetus, in both
of
which the philosopher
is regarded a s a stranger and monster upon the earth. T he
whole myth, like the other myths of Plato, describes in
a
figure
things which are beyond the range of human faculties, or in-
accessible to the knowledge
of
the age. Tha t philosophy sholdd
be re presented a s the inspiration of Iove is a conception that
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 25/99
4 ’4
Z%e ambiguities
of
the Phaedms .
Phmu’rus.
has already become familiar to
u s
in the Symposium, and
is
I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .
he expression partly of Plato’s enthusiasm for the idea, and
is also an indication of the real power exercised by the passion
of friendship over the mind of the Greek. T h e master in th e
art of love kne w that ther e w as
a
mystery in these feelings
and their associations, and especially in the contrast of the
sensible and permanent which is afforded by them; and he
sought to explain this, a s h e expla ined universal ideas, by a
reference to a former state of existence. T h e capriciousness
of love is also derived by-him from an attachment to some
god in
a
former world. T h e singular rem ark that th e beloved
is
more affected than the lover at the final consummation of
their love, seems likewise to hint at a psychological truth.
noN.
It is difficult to exhaust the meanings of a word like the
Phae drus, which indicates
so
much more than i t expresses ;
and
is
full of inconsistencies and ambiguities which were not
perceived by Plato himself. Fo r examp le, w hen h e is speaking
of the soul does he mean the human
or
the divine sou l? and
are they both equally self-moving and constructed on the same
threefold principle
?
W e should certainly be disposed to rep ly
that the self-motive is to be attributed to God only; and on
the other hand that the appe titive and passionate elements
have no place in
His
nature.
So
we should infer from the
reason of the thing, but there is no indication in Plato’s own
writings that this was his meaning. Or, again, wh en he exp lains
the different characters of men by referring them back to the
natu re of the God whom they se rv ed in a form er state of exist-
ence, we aie inclined to ask whether he is serious:
Is
he
not r athe r using a mythological figure, he re a s elsew her e, to
draw a veil over things which are beyond the limits of mortal
kno wled ge? Once more, in speaking of beauty is he really
thinking of some external form such as might have been
expressed in the works of Phidias
or
Praxiteles
;
and not
rather of an imaginary beauty,
of
a
sort which extinguishes
rather than stimulates vulgar love
254
E),-a heaven ly beauty
like that which flashed from time to time before the eyes of
Dante or Bunyan
I Su rely the latter. Bu t it would be idle
to reconcile all the details of the passage : it
is
a picture, not
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 26/99
Lovt?
ll
the
Phuedms
n j ; w e of spc.ech.
4 ' 5
a system, and a picture which is for the greater part an allegory, ~ h a ~ d + u s .
and an allegory which allows th e m eaning to come through.
The INnoovc.
image of the charioteer and his steeds is placed side by side 'IoN.
with the absolute forms of justice, temperance, and the like,
which are abstract ideas only, and which are seen with the
eye of the soul in he r heavenly journey . The first impression
of such a passage, in which no attempt is made to separate the
substance from the form,
is
far trqer than an elaborate philo-
sophical analysis.
It is too often forgotten that the whole of the second discourse
of
Socrates is only an allegory, or figure of speech . For this
reason, it is unnecessary to enquire whether the love
of
which
Plato speaks
is
the love of men or of women. It is really a
general idea which includes both, and in which the sensual
element, though not wholly eradicated, is reduced to order and
measure. W e m ust not attribute a meaning to every fanciful
detail. Nor is th er e any need to call up revolting associations,
which as a matter of good taste should be banished , and which
were far enough away from the mind of Plato. Th ese and similar
passages should be interpre ted by the Law s, book viii. 36. Nor is
the re anything in the Sy mp osium ,arg, or in the C harmides, I
55
d,
in reality inconsistent with the sterner rule which Plato lays
down in the Laws. At the same time it is not to be denied that
love and ph iloso phpare described by Socrates in figures of speech
which would not be used in Christian times; or that nameless
vices were prevalent at Athens and in other Greek cities ; or that
friendships between men w ere a more sacred tie, and had a more
important social and educational influence than among ourselves.
(S ee note on Symposium, sub fin.).
In the P ha edr us, as well as in the Symposium, there a re two
kinds of love, a lower and a higher, the one answering to the
natural wants of the animal, the other rising above them and
contemplating with religious awe the forms of justice, temperance,
holiness, yet finding them also 'too dazzling bright for mortal
eye,' and
shrinking from them in amazement. Th e opposition
between these two kinds of love may be compared to the
opposition between the flesh and the spirit in the Epistles
of
St. Paul. It would be unmeaning to suppose that Plato, in
describing the spiritual combat, in which the rational soul
is
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 27/99
416 Rhton‘c and dialectic.
Aa ns.
finally victor and ma ster of both the stee ds, condescends to
iRTaoDUc.
allow a ny indulgence
of
unnatural lusts.
Two other thoughts about love are suggested by this passage.
First of all, love is repre sented here, a s in the Symposium, a s
one of the great powers of nature, which takes many forms
and
two
principal ones, having a pre dom inant influence over
the lives of men.
And these
two,
though opposed, are not
absolutely sep ara ted the one from the o ther . Plato, with his
great knowledge
of
human nature, w as w ell aware how easily
one is transformed into the other, or how soon the noble but
fleeting aspiration may return into the nature of the animal,
while the lower instinct which is laten t alway s remains. T h e
intermediate sentimentalism, which has exercised so great an
influence on th e literatu re of mo dern E urope , had
no
place in the
classical times of Hellas ; the higher love, of which Plato speaks,
is th e subject, not of poe try or fiction, but of philosophy .
Secondly, there seems to be indicated a natural yearning of
the human mind that the great ideas of justice, temperance,
wisdom, should be expressed in some form of visible beauty,
like the absolute p urity and goodness which Christian ar t has
sought to realize in the person of th e Madonna. But although
human na ture h as often attempted to represe nt outwardly what
can be only ‘spiritually discerned,’ men feel that in
pictures
and images, whether painted or carved, or described in words
only, we have not the substan ce but the shadow of the truth
which is in heaven.
There is no reason to suppose that in the
fairest works of Greek art, Plato ever conceived himself to
behold a n image, how eve r faint, of ideal tru ths .
‘Not in that
way was wisdom seen
’
250
D).
TION.
We
may now pass on to the second part of the Dialogue,
which is a criticism on the first.
Rhetoric is assailed on various
gro un ds: first, as d esiring to persuad e, without a knowledge
of the truth ; and secondly, as ignoring the distinction between
certain and probable matter. T h e thr ee speeches ar e then
passed in review: the first
of
them has n o definition
of
the
nature of love, and no order in the topics (being in these
respects far inferior to the second); while the third of them
is found (though
a
fancy of the hour) to be framed upon real
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 28/99
Crz’ticism and Creative powee7.. 417
dialectical principles. But dialectic is not rhe toric ; nothing on P h d m s .
that subject is to be found in the endless treatises of rhetoric, I ~ ~
how ever prolific in hard names. W hen P lato has sufficiently ’IoN’
put them to the test of ridicule he touches, as with the point
of a needle, the real error, which is the confusion of preliminary
knowledge with creative power.
No
attainments will provide
the speaker with genius; and the sort of attainments which
can alone be of any value are the higher philosophy and the
power of psychological analysis, which is given by dialectic,
but not by the rules of the rhetoricians.
In
this latter portion of the Dialogue there are many texts
which may help us to speak and to think. T he names dialectic
and rhetoric a re passing out of use ; we hardly examine seriously
into the ir natur e and limits, and probably the ar ts both
of
speaking
and of conversation have been unduly neglected by us. But the
mind of So cra tes pie rce s through the differences of times and
countries into the essential nature of man; and his words
apply equally to the modern world and to the Athenians of
old. W ould he not have asked of
us,
or rather
is
he not asking
of us Whether we have ceased to prefer appearances t o reality
?
Let us take a survey of the professions to which he refers and
try them by his standard. Is not all literature passing into
criticism, just as Athenian literature in the age of Plato was
degenerating into sophistry and rheto ric? W e can discourse
and write about poems and paintings, but we seem to have
lost th e gift of creating them. Can we wonder that few of them
‘ come sweetly from nature,’ while ten thousand reviewers
6 0
upioc)
a re engaged in dissecting th em ? Young men, like
Phaedrus, are enamoured of their o w n literary clique and have
but a feeble sympathy with the master-minds of former ages.
They recognize
‘a
poetical necessity in the writings of their
favourite author, even when he boldly wrote off just what
came in his head.’ Th ey are beginning to think that Art is
enough, j us t at the time when Art is about to disappear from
the world. And would not a great painter, such
as
Michael
Angelo, or
a
great poet, such as Shakespeare, returning to
earth, ‘courteously rebuke’ us-would he not sa y that we a re
putting ‘in the place of Art the preliminaries of Art,’ confusing
Art the expression of mind and truth with Art the composition
VOL.
1. E e
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 29/99
4x8 Mottern
applications of
Plato.
Phaeiirus.
of colours and forms; and perhaps he might more severely
chastise some of u s for trying to invent ‘ a new shu dder’ instead
of bringing to the birth living and healthy creations? These he
would regard as the signs of an age wanting in original power.
Turning from literature and the arts to law and politics, again
we fall under the lash of Socrates.
For
do we not often make
1
the worse appear the better cause
;
and do not ‘both parties
sometimes agree to tell lies
’ ? Is
not pleading
‘
an a rt of speaking
unconnected with the truth’
?
There is an oth er text of Socrates
which must not be forgotten in relation to this subject. In the
endless maze of English law
is
ther e any dividing the whole into
parts or reuniting the par ts into a whole’-any semblance of an
organized being having h ands and feet and other me mb ers
’
Instead of a system there is the Chaos of Anaxagoras (dpoij admn
X p j p a m ) and no Mind or Order. The n again in the noble ar t of
politics, who thinks of first principles and of true id ea s? W e
avowedly follow not the truth but the will of the many (cp. Rep.
493).
Is
not legislation too a sort of literary effort, and might not
statesmanship be described a s the art of enchanting
’
the house
?
While there are some politicians who have no knowledge
of
the
truth, but only of what is likely to be approved by the many who
sit in judgment,’ there are others who can give no form to their
ideal, neither having learned ‘the art of persuasion,’
nor
having
any insight into the ‘characters of men.‘ Once more, ha s not
medical science become a professional routine, w hich many
‘practise without being able to say who w ere their instructors’-
the application
of
a few drugs taken from a book instead
of
a
life-long study of the natures and constitutions of human beings
?
DO e see a s clearly as Hippocrates that the nature of the body
can only be understood a s a whole
’ ?
270
C
;
cp. Charm.
156 E).
And a re not they held to be the wisest physicians who have the
greatest distrust of their art
?
What would Socrates think of our
newspapers, of our theology? Pe rh ap s he would be afraid to
speak of them ;-the one vox populi, the other
vox
Dei, he might
hesitate to attack them;
or
he might trace
a
fanciful connexion
between them, and ask doubtfully, w heth er they ar e not equally
inspired? H e would remark th at we a re always searching
for
a
belief and deploring our unbelief, seeming to prefer popular
opinions unverified and contradictory to unpopular truths which
TION
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 30/99
Speech and writing. 419
ar e assured to US by the most certain proofs : that our preachers Plaedr.us.
a re in the habit of praising God ‘witho ut regard to truth and INTRODUC.
falsehood, attributing to Him every species of greatness and
T’oN’
glory, saying that H e is all this and the ca use of all that, in or de r
that w e may exhibit H im a s the fairest and be st of all’ (S ym p.
I ),
without any consideration of His real nature and character
or
of the laws by which H e governs the world-seeking for a
‘private judgment’ and not for the truth
or
‘God’s judgment.’
What would he say of the Church, which we praise in like
manner, ‘meaning ourselves ’
(a58
A), without regard to history
or
exp erience ? Might he not ask, wh ether we ‘care more
for
the
truth of religion, or for the speaker and the country from which
the truth co m es ’? or, whe ther the ‘select wise’ are not ‘t h e
man y’ af ter al l?
(Symp. 194 C.) So we may fill up the sketch
of Socrates , lest,
as
Phaedrus says, the argument should be too
‘abstract and barren
of
illustrations.’ ICp. Syrnp.,
Apol.,
Euthy-
phro.)
He next proceeds with enthusiasm
to
define the royal art of
dialectic as the power
of
dividing a whole into parts, and of
uniting the par ts in a whole, and which may also be regarded
(cp. Soph.)
as
the process
of
the mind talking with herself. T h e
latter view has probably led Plato to the paradox that speech is
superior to writing, in which he may seem also to be doing an
injustice to himself. Fo r th e
two
Cannot be fairly compared in
the ma nn er which Plato suggests. The contrast of the living and
dead word, and th e exam ple of Socrates, which he has repre-
sen ted in the form of th e Dialogue, seem to have misled him.
For speech and writing have really different functions; the one
is more transitory, mo re diffuse, more elastic an d capable of
adaptation
to
moods and times; the other is more permanent,
more concentrated, and
is
uttered not to this
or
that person
or
audience, but
to
all the world. In the Politicus (294 foll.) the
paradox is camed further; the mind
or
will of the king is
preferred to the written law; he
is
supposed to be the Law
personified, the ideal made Life.
Yet in both these statements there is also contained a truth;
they m ay be compared with o ne another, and also with th e other
famous paradox, that
‘
now ledge cannot be taught.’ Socra tes
means to say, that what is truly written is written in the soul,
E e 2
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 31/99
420
Date of
the
DiuZogw.
IWS~ODUC.
TION.
just as what is truly taught grows up in the soul from within and
is not forced upon it from without. W hen planted in a congenial
soil
the little seed beconies a tree, and ‘the birds of the air build
their nests in the branches.‘ Th ere is an echo
of this in the
pray er at the end of the Dialogue, ‘Give me beauty in the inward
soul, and may the inward and outward man be at one.’ W e may
furth er compare the words of St. Paul, W ritte n not on tables of
stone, but
on
fleshly tables
of
the heart
;
and again,
‘
Ye are my
epistles known an d read of all men.‘ T he re m ay be a use in
writing as a preserva tive against th e forgetfulness of old age, but
to live is higher far,
to
be ourselves t he book, or th e epistle, the
tru th embodied in a person, the W ord made flesh. Something
like this we may believe to have passed before Plato’s mind when
he affirmed that speech was superior to writing.
S o
in other
ages, weary of literature and criticism, of making many books,
of writing articles in reviews, some have desired to live more
closely in communion with their fellow-men, to speak heart to
heart, to speak and act only, and not to write, following the
example of Socrates and of Christ.
.
.
.
Some other touches of inimitable grace and art and of the
deepest wisdom may be also no ted ; such as the pra yer
or
‘collect’ which has
just
been cited, ‘Give me beauty,’ etc.; or
‘the great name which belongs to God alone’ (278);or ‘ the
saying of wiser men than ourselves that a man of sen se should
try to please not his fellow-servants, but his good and noble
masters’ (a?+), ike St. Paul again; or the description of the
heavenly originals’ at p. 250.
.
.
.
T he chief criteria for determining the date of the Dialogue a re
( I ) th e age s of Lysias and Isocrates ;
2)
the character of th e work.
Lysias was born in the year 458; Isocrates in the year 436,
about seven ye ars before th e birth of Plato. T h e first of the two
great rhetoricians is described as in the zenith of his fame; the
second
is
still young and full of promise. Now it is argued that
this must have been written in the youth of Isocrates, when the
promise was not yet fulfilled. A nd th us w e should have to assign
the Dialogue to a year not later than 406, when Isocrates was
thirty and Plato twenty-three years of age, and while Socrates
himself was still alive.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 32/99
Date of
the Dialogue. 421
Those who argue in this way seem not to reflect how easily
PAa td w .
Plato can 'inv en t Egyptians o r anything else,' and how careless I ~ ~
he is of historical tru th
or
probability. W ho would suspect that
'IoN'
the wise Critias, the -vi rtuou s Charmides, had ended their lives
among the thirty tyr an ts? W ho would imagine that Lysias, who
is he re assailed by Socrates, is the son of his old friend Cephalus ?
or that Isocrates himself is the enem y of Plato and his scho ol?
No arguments can be drawn from the appropriateness or in-
appropriateness of the characters of Plato. (Else, perhaps, it
might be further argued that, judging from their extant remains,
insipid rhetoric is far more characteristic
of
Isocrates than of
Lysias.) But Plato makes use of nam es which have often hardly
any connexion with the historical charac ter s to whom they belong.
In this instance the comparative favour shown to Isocrates may
possibly be accounted for by the circumstance of
his
belonging to
the aristocratical, as Lysias to the democratical party.
Few persons will be inclined to suppose, in the superficial
manner of some ancient critics, that a dialogue which treats
of
love must necessarily have been written in youth. A s little
weight can be attached to the argum ent that Plato must have
visited Egypt before he wrote the story of Theuth and Thamus.
For there is no real proof that he ev er went to Egypt
;
and even
if he did, he might have known or invented Egyptian traditions
before he went there. T he late date of the Pha edru s will have to
be established by other argumen ts than thes e: the maturity
of
the thought, t he perfection of the style, the insight, the relation to
the other Platonic Dialogues, seem to contradict the notion that it
could have been the work of a youth of twenty o r twen ty-three
ye ar s of age. T h e cosmological notion of the mind as the
primurn
mobile,
and the admission of impulse into the immortal nature,
also afford grou nds for assigning a later date. (Cp. Tim., Soph.,
Laws.) Add to this that the picture of Socrates , though in some
lesser particulars,-e. g. his going without sandals, his habit of
remaining within the walls, his emphatic declaration that his
study is human nature,-an exact resemblance,
is
in the main the
Platonic and not the real Socrates. Can we suppose 't h e young
man to have told such lies' about his master while he was still
alive
?
Moreover, when two Dialogues are so closely connected
as the Phaedrus and Symposiun1, there
is
great improbability in
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 33/99
4 2 2
Pdato
’s
treatm?nt of
mythodogy.
Phacdrus. supposing that one of them w as written at least twenty yea rs
I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -
fter the other. T h e conclusion see m s to be, that the Dialogue
was written at some comparatively late but unknown period of
Plato’s life, after he had deserted the purely Socratic point of
view, but before he had ente red on the m ore abstract speculations
of the Soph ist or the Philebus. Ta king into account the divisions
of the soul, the doctrine of transm igratio n, the contemplative na ture
of the philosophic life, and the character of the style, we shall
not be far wrong in placing the Phaedrus in the neighbourhood
of the Republic; remarking only that allowance must be made
for the poetical element in the Phaedrus, which, while falling
short of the Republic in definite philosophic results, seems to
have glimpses
of
a truth beyond.
Two short passages, which
are
unconnected with the main
subject of the Dialogue, may seem to merit a more particular
notice
: (I)
the
locus classicus
about mythology;
2)
he tale of the
grasshoppers.
T he first passage is remarkable a s showing that Plato was
entirely free from what m ay be term ed the E uhem erism
of
his age.
For there were Euhemerists in Hellas long before Euhemerus.
Early philosophers, like Anaxagoras and Metrodorus, had found
in Ho me r and m ythology hidden m eanings. Plato, with a t ruer
instinct, rejects these attractive interpretations ; he regards the
inventor of them as ‘unfortunate;’ and they draw a man
off
from the know ledge of himself. T h e re is a latent criticism, and
also a poetical sen se in Plato, which ena ble him to discard them ,
and yet in another way to make use of poetry and mythology
as a vehicle of thoug ht and feeling. W h a t would he have said
of
the discovery of Christian doctrines in the se old G reek l eg en ds ?
While acknowledging that such interpretations are ‘very nice,’
would he not have remarked that they are found in all sacred
litera ture s? T he y cannot be tested by an y criterion
of
truth,
or used to establish any tru th; the y add nothing to the sum
of human knowledge
;
the y are-what w e please, an d if employed
as
‘peacemakers’ between the new and old ar e liable to serious
misconstruction,
as
he elsewhere remarks (Rep.
378 E).
And
therefore h e would have ‘bid Farewell to th e m ; the study of
them would tak e up too much of his tim e; and he ha s not
as
yet learne d the tru e natu re of religion.’ T h e ‘soph istical’
TION.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 34/99
Tale
of
the Grasshoppers : mysticism in Pdato.
4 2 3
inte res t of P ha edrus , th e little touch about the two versions of 1Diraedrur.
the story, the ironical manner in which these explanations are I ~ ~
set aside-'the common opinion about them is enough for m e '
ON'
-the allusion to the serpent Typho may be noted in passing;
also the general agreement between the tone of this speech and
the remark of Socrates which follows afterwards,
' I
am a diviner,
but a poor one.'
The tale of the grasshoppers is naturally suggested by the
surrounding scene. Th ey are also the representatives of the
Athen ians as children of the soil. Unde r the image of th e lively
chirruping gra ssh op pe rs who inform th e Muses in heaven about
those who honour them on earth, Plato intends to represent
an Athenian audience (rcrrIywuu
orrdrcs).
T he story is introduced,
apparently, to mark a change of subject, and also, like several
other allusions which occur in the course of the Dialogue, in order
to preserve the scene in the recollection of the reader.
N o
one can duly appreciate the dialogues of Plato, especially
the Phaedrus, Symposium, and portions of the Republic, who has
not a sympathy with mysticism. To the uninitiated, as he
would himself have acknowledged, they will appear to be th e
dreams of a poet who is disguised as a philosopher. The re is
a twofold difficulty in apprehending this aspect of the Platonic
writings. First, we do not immediately realize tha t und er the
marble exterior of G reek literature was concealed a soul thrilling
with spiritual emotion. Secondly, the forms or figures which
the Platonic philosophy assumes, are not like the images of
the prophet Isaiah, or of the Apocalypse, familiar to
us
in the
days of ou r youth. By mysticism we mean, not th e extravagance
of an er rin g fancy, but th e concentration of reason in feeling, th e
enthusiastic love of the good, the true, th e one, the sense of the in-
finity of knowledge and of the marvel of the human faculties.
When feeding upon such thoughts the 'wing of the soul' is
renewed and gains strength
;
sh e is raised above 't h e manikins
of earth' and their opinions, waiting in wonder to know, and
working with reverence to find out what God in this or in another
life may reveal to her.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 35/99
On the
declirie of
Greek
Litwature.
F‘hzedms.
ONEof the main purposes of Plato in the Ph ae dr us is to satirize
Rhetoric, or ra the r th e Professors of Rhetoric who swarm ed
at Athens in th e fourth centu ry before Christ. A s in th e opening
of the Dialogue h e ridicules the inte rpre ters of mytholog y; a s
in the Protagoras he mocks a t the Sophists ; as in the Euthy-
demus he makes fun of the word-splitting Eristics; as in the
Cratylus he ridicules the fancies of Etym ologers
; as
in the Meno
and
Gorgias and some other dialogues he makes reflections
and casts sly imputations upon th e higher classes at Athens
;
so
in the Phaedrus, chiefly in the latter part, he aims his shafts
at the rhetoricians. T h e profession of rhetoric w as the greatest
and most popular in Athens, necessary ‘ o a man’s salvation,’
or at any rate to his attainment of wealth or power; but Plato
finds nothing wholesome or genuine in th e purpose of it. It
is a veritable ‘sham,’ having
no
relation to fact, or to truth of
any kind. It is antipathetic to him no t only as a philosopher, but
also as a great writer. H e cannot abide the tricks of the rhetori-
cians, or the peda ntries and mann erisms which they introduce into
speech and writ ing. H e s ee s clearly how far removed they are
from the ways
of
simplicity and truth, and how ignorant of the
very elements of the ar t which the y ar e professing to teach. T h e
thing which is mo st n ecessary of all, th e knowledge of hum an
nature, is hardly if at all considered by them. T h e true rules
of
composition, which a re very few,
are
not to be found in their
voluminous systems. Th eir pretentiousness, their omn iscience,
their large fortunes, their impatience of argument, their in-
difference to first principles, their stupidity,
their progresses
through Hellas accompanied by a troop of their disciples-these
things were very distasteful to Plato, who esteemed genius far
above art, and was quite sensible of the interval which separated
them (Phaedrus,
269 D).
It is thc interval which scparates
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 36/99
Chararkristics
of
the decline.
425
Sophists and rhetoricians from ancient famous men and women
Phiracdrus.
such a s Hom er and Hesiod, Anacreon and Sappho, X sch ylu san d
Sophocles
;
and the Platonic Socrates
is
afraid that, if he approves
the former, he will be disowned by the latter ( a s B). The spirit
of rhetoric was soon to overspread all H ellas; and Plato with
prophetic insight may have seen, from afar, the grea t literary
waste o r dead level, or interminable marsh, in which Greek litera-
ture was soon to disappear. A similar vision of the decline of
the G reek drama and of the contrast of the old literature and the
new wa s present to the mind of Aristophan es after the death of the
three great tragedians (Frogs, 1.93
ff. .
After about a hundred, or
at most two hundred years if we exclude Homer, the genius of
Hellas had ceased to flower or blossom. T he drea ry waste which
follows, beginning with the Alexandrian writers and even before
them in the platitudes of Isocrates and his school, spreads over
much more than a thousand years. And from this decline the
Greek language and litera ture, unlike th e Latin, which has come to
life in new forms and been developed into the great European
languages, never recovered.
This monotony of literature, without merit, without genius
and without character, is a phenomenon which deserves more
attention than it has hitherto received
;
it is a phenomenon unique
in the literary history of the world. How could the re have been
so
much cultivation,
so
much diligence in writing, and
so
little
mind or real creative pow er ? W hy did a thousand years in-
vent nothing better than Sibylline books, Orphic poems, Byzan-
tine imitations of classical histories, Christian reproductions
of Greek plays, novels like the silly and obscene romances of
Longus and Heliodorus, innumerable forged epistles, a great
many epigrams, biographies of the meanest and most meagre
description, a sham philosophy which was the bastard progeny
of the union between H ellas and the E as t? Only in Plutarch,
in Lucian,
in
Longinus, in the Roman emperors Marcus
Aurelius and Julian, in some of the Christian fathers are
the re any traces of good se nse or originality, or any power
of arousing the interest of later ages. And when new
books
ceased to be written, why did hosts of grammarians and in-
terp re ters flock in, who never attain to any sound notion either of
grammar or interpretation
?
W h y did the physical sciences
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 37/99
426 Causes and symftonts
of
the decline.
Phuedrus. never arrive at any true knowledge or make any real progress?
W h y did poetry droop and languish
?
W h y did history degenerate
into fable
?
W h y did words lose their pow er of expression
?
W h y
were ages of external greatness and magnificence attended by
all the signs of decay in the hum an m ind which ar e possible ?
To
thes e questions many an sw ers may be given, which if not
the true causes, are at least to be reckoned among the symptom s
of the decline. T h e re is the want of method in physical science,
the w ant of criticism in h istory, the want of simplicity or delicacy
in poetry, the want of political freedom, which is the true
atmos phere of public spea king, in oratory. T h e ways of life
were luxurious and commonplace. Philosophy had become
extravagan t, eclectic, abstract, devoid of any real content. At
length it ceased to exist. It had spre ad words like plas ter over
the whole field of know ledge, It had grow n ascetic on one sid e,
mystical on the other. N eithe r of the se tendencies was favour-
able to literature.
T h er e was no sense of beauty either in
language or in art.
The Greek world became vacant, barbaric,
oriental.
N o
one had anything ne w to say , or an y conviction of
truth . T h e age had no remem brance of the past, no pow er of
understanding what other ages thought and felt. T h e Catholic
faith had degenerated into dogm a and controversy. Fo r more
than a thousand y ea rs not a single write r of first-rate, or even of
second-rate, reputation h as a place in th e innum erable rolls of
Greek literature.
If we se ek to go deep er, we can still only describe the o utward
nature of the clouds or darkness which were spread over the
heavens during so many .ages without relief or light. W e may
say that this, like several oth er long perio ds in the history of
th e human race, w as destitute, or deprived of the moral qualities
which ar e the root of literary excellence. It had no life o r
aspiration, no national or political force, no desire for consis-
tency,
no
love of know ledge for its own sak e.
It did not attempt
to pierce the m ists which surrounded it. It did not propose to
itself to go forward and scale the heights of knowledge, but to
go backwards and seek at the beginning what can only be found-
towards the end.
It w as lost in doubt and ignorance. It rested
upon tradition and authority. It had none of the higher play
of fancy which c reates poetry
;
and wh ere there is no t rue po etry,
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 38/99
Parallel
of
Moderit Literature.
4 2 7
neither can th ere be any good prose.
It had no great characters, Phaedrus.
and therefore it had no great writers. It was incapable of dis-
tinguishing between words and things. It was
s o
hopelessly
below the ancient standard of classical Greek art and literature
that it had no pow er of understanding or of valuing them. It
i s
doubtful whether any Greek author was justly appreciated in
antiquity except by his own contemporaries ; and this neglect
of
the grea t authors
of
the past led to the disappearance of the larger
part of them, while the Greek fathers were mostly preserved.
There is no reason to suppose that, in the century before the
taking of Constantinople, much more was in existence than the
scholars of the Rena issance ca rried away with them to Italy.
The character
of
Greek literature sank lower as time went
on. It consisted more and more of com pilations, of scholia, of
extracts, of commentaries, forgeries, imitations. T he commen-
tator or interp reter had no conception of his author a s a whole,
and ve ry little of the context of any passage which he was ex -
plaining. T he least things were preferred by him to the greatest,
The question of
a
reading, or a grammatical form, or an accent,
or the uses of a word, took the place of the aim or subject of
the book. H e had no sen se of th e beauties of an author, and
very little light is thrown by him on real difficulties. H e in-
terprets past ages by
his
own. T he greatest classical w rite rs
are the least appreciated by him. T hi s seem s to be the reason
why so many of them have perished, why the lyric poets have
almost wholly disappeared; why, out of the eighty or ninety
tragedies of E sc hy lu s and Sophocles, only seven of each have
been preserved.
Such an age of sciolism and scholasticism may possibly once
more get the better
of
the literary world. Th ere are those who
prophesy that the signs
of
such a day are again appearing among
us, and that at the end of the present century no writer of the
first class will be still alive. They think that the Muse of Litera -
ture may transfer herself to other countries less dried up or
worn out than our
own.
They seem to see the withering effect
of criticism on original genius,
No
one can doubt that such a
decay or decline of literature and of art seriously affects the
manners and character of a nation. It takes away half the joys
and refinements of life ; it increases its dulness and grossncss.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 39/99
428 Can such a
&cline
b d arrested?
P?wdmr.
Hence it becomes
a
matter
of
great interest to consider how,
if at all, such a degeneracy may be averted. Is there any elixir
which can restore life and youth to the literature of a nation,
o r at an y rate which can prevent it becoming unmanned and
enfeebled ?
It is possible, and
&en probable, tha t th e extension of the m ean s of knowledge ov er
a wid er area and to person s living un de r ne w conditions ma y lead
to many ne w combinations of thoug ht and language. But, a s yet,
expe rience do es not favour the realization of such a hope or
promise. It may be trulyan swe red that at presen t the training of
teachers and the methods of education are very imperfect, and
therefore that we cannot judge of the future by the present.
When more of our youth are trained in the best literatures, and
in the best parts of them, their min ds may be expected to have a
larger growth, Th ey will have more interests, more thoughts,
more material for conversation
;
they will have a higher standard
and begin to think for themselves. T h e num ber of perso ns who
will have the opportunity of receiving the highest education
through the cheap press, and by the help of high schools and
colleges, may increase tenfold. It is likely that in every thousand
persons there is at least one who is far above the average in
natural capacity, but the seed which is in him dies for want of
cultivation. It has nev er had an y stimu lus to grow , o r an y field
in which to blossom a nd produc e fruit. H e re is a gre at reservoir
o r treasure-house of human intelligence out of which new wa ters
may flow and cover the earth. If at any time the great men of
the world should die out, and originality
or
genius appear to
suffer a partial eclipse, there is a bou ndless hop e in the m ultitude
of intelligences for future generations.
They may bring gif ts to
men such as the world has never received before.
They may
begin at
a
higher point and yet take with them all the results
of the past. T h e co-operation of m any ma y have effects not
less striking, though different in character from those which the
creative gen ius of a sin gle man, such as Bacon or Newton, form erly
produced.
Th ere is also great hope to be derived, not me rely
from the extension of education over a wider area, but from the
continuance of it d urin g many gene rations.
Educated parents
will have children fit to receive education ; and these again will
First the re is the p rog ress of education.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 40/99
Hope
for t h future 429
grow
up
under circumstances far more favourable to the growth
Pkmdmr.
of intelligence than any which have hitherto existed in our
own or in former ages.
Even if we were to suppose
no
more men of genius to be
produced, the great writers of ancient or of modern times will
remain to furnish abundant materials of education to the coming
generation. Now that eve ry nation holds communication with
every other, we may truly say in a fuller se ns e than formerly that
‘t h e thoughts of men ar e widened with the p rocess of the suns.’
They will not be ‘cribbed, cabined, and confined’ within a pro-
vince
or
an island.
T he E ast will provide elements of culture to the
W es t a s well as the W es t to the East. Th e religions and literatures
of the world will be open books, which he who wills may read.
The human race may not be always ground down by bodily toil,
but may have gr ea te r leisure for th e improvement of the mind.
The increasing se ns e of the greatness and infinity of nature will
tend to awaken in men larger and more liberal thoughts. The
love of mankind may be the source of a greater developm ent of
literature than nationality has ever been. The re may be a greater
freedom from prejudice and party ; we may better understand the
whereabou ts of truth, and therefore th ere may be more success
and fewer failures in th e search for it. Lastly, in the coming ages
we shall carry with us the recollection of the past, in which are
necessarily contained m any seeds of revival and renaissance in the
future.
So
far is the world from becoming exhausted,
so
ground-
less is the fear that literature will ever die out.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 41/99
P
H A
E
D
R LJ S.
PERSOIVS
O
THE DZALOGUX.
SOCRATES.
PHAEDROS.
SCENE -Under a plane-tree,by the banks
of
the Ilissus.
Steph
Socrates. My de ar Ph aedrus, w hence com e you, and w hither s ~ ~ ~ A ~ E ~
Phaedrus. I have come from Lysias the son of Cephalus, ~~$~~
and
I
am g oin g to tak e a walk outside the wall, for
I
have justleft
been sitting with him the whole morning
;
and our common
LYslG
the
orator,
is
friend Acum enys tells me that i t
is
much m ore refreshing to
abut
o
walk in the open air than to be shut
u p
in a cloister. take a walk
in the coun
SOC. h e re he is i -ight. Lysias then,
I
suppose, wa s in the t r y ,
when
town ?
he meets
Phaedr. Yes, he w as s taying with Epicrates, he re a t the
Socmtes*
P H A E D R W .
227 are you going
?
house of Morychus
;
that house which
is
near the temple of
Olympian Zeus.
SOC. nd how did he enter tain y o u ? Can
I
be wrong in
suppo sing that Lysias gave you a feast of discourse ?
Phaedr. You shall hear, if you can spare time to accom-
pany me.
Sac.
And should
I
not deem the conversation of you and
Lysias
‘ a
thing 6f higher import,’ as
I
may say in the words
of Pindar,
‘
han an y business
’ ?
Phaedr.
W ill you go on ?
SOC.
nd will you go on with th e na rrat io n?
Phaedr.
My tale, Socrates, is one
of
you r sort for love
Thetheme
wa s the them e which occupied us-love after a fashion: :k?zrn-
Lysias has been writing about a fair youth who was being d o x a b u t
tempted, but not by a lo ve r; and this was the point ; he love
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 42/99
432 Phaedrus
has learned by
head a speech
of Lysias.
Phtdrn .
ingenious ly proved tha t the non- lover should be accepted
soca*tn~, r a the r t han t he l over.
PH*RDR"n
SOC.
ha t i s noble of h im
I
wish tha t h e would say t he
poor man ra the r t han t he r ich, and t he o ld ma n ra th e r t han
the y oung on e ;-then h e wou ld mee t t h e case o f m e and o f
m a n y a man ; i s words would be qui te ref resh ing , and he
would be
a
publ ic benefactor . F o r my part '
I
d o
so
l ong to
he ar h i s speech , tha t if you walk a l l the way to M egara , and
when you have reached the wa ll come back , a s H erod icus
recommends, wi thout going in , I wil l keep you company.
Phaedr.
W h a t d o
you
m e an , m y g oo d S o c r a t e s ? H o w
can you imagine tha t my unpract ised mem ory can do jus t i ce 228
to a n e labora te work , which th e grea tes t rhe toric ian of t h e
ag e spe nt a long t ime in composing. Inde ed , I ca nn ot ;
I
would give a gre at deal if I could.
SOC. believe that
I
k n ow P h a e d r u s a b o u t a s w e ll a s
I
know myself, and
I
am very su r e t ha t t h e spe ech o f Lys i as
w as repe ated to h im, no t onc e only , bu t again an d again
;-
h e in si st ed o n hea r ing it ma ny t imes over and Lys i as was ve ry
will ing to gratify him
;
at l as t, wh en noth ing e l se would do ,
h e got ho ld of th e book, an d looked a t wha t h e mos t wanted
to see,- this occupied him du rin g the who le m orn ing ;-and
t h e n w h e n h e
was
t ired w i th s i t ting , h e we nt ou t to t ake
a walk, not unti l , by the dog, as
I
believe, h e ha d s imply
l ea rned by hea r t t he en t i r e d i scourse , un l ess i t was un -
usual ly long , and h e went to a p lace outs ide the wall tha t h e
might prac t i se h i s l esson . T h e re he saw a cer tain lover of
d i scourse who had
a
s imi lar weakness ; -he saw an d re-
jo iced; now thought he , ' I sha l l have a pa r tne r i n my
revels .' A nd h e invited him to come an d walk wi th him,
Bu t wh en th e lover of d i scourse begged tha t h e would re pea t
the ta le , he gave h imsel f a i r s and sa id , ' N o I cannot, ' as if
h e w ere i ndi sposed
;
al though, if the hea rer had refused, h e
would so on er o r l a ter have been compelled by h im
t o
l isten
whe ther h e wou ld o r no. There fo re , Phaedru s , b id h im do
a t once wha t h e will soon d o whe the r b idden
or
not.
Phaedr. I
see tha t you wi ll no t l e t me
off
unti l
I
speak in
some fash ion or ot he r ; ver ily therefore m y bes t p lan i s to
s p e ak a s
I
best can.
Thewaysof
rFzy
known to
Socmtes*
Soc.
A v e r y
true
remark, that
of
yours .
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 43/99
The walk aZong the IZissus.
4 3 3
Phaedr . I will d o as I say; but bel ieve me, Socrates , I d i d Phacdmr.
not l ea rn the ve ry words -0 n o ; neve r the le ss I have a
sOCRATES,
gen era l not ion of what he sa id , an d wi ll g ive you a s u m m a r y
pHAKDRus.
of th e p oints in which th e lover dif fered from the non- lover .
Le t me begin a t the beginning.
SOC. es, my sweet one; but you must f i rs t of a l l show
w h o o b -
what you hav e in you r le ft han d und er yo ur c loak, for tha t ~~~s~~~
roll, as I suspect , is th e ac tua l d iscourse . Now, much a s
the rol l
I
love you,
I
would n o t have you su ppose tha t
I
a m go i ng t o ::zhihi
have your memory exercised at my expense, i f you have cloak.
Lysias himself here .
Phaedr .
E n o u g h
; I
see tha t
I
have no hope of prac t i s ing
229my art upo n you. Bu t if I am to read, where would you
please to s i t ?
SOC. e t
u s
turn as ide and go by the I l i ssus ; we wi l l s i t
down a t som e quiet spot .
Phaedr . I am for tuna te in not hav ing my sanda ls, and as
you n eve r hav e any, I t h ink tha t we may go a long the b rook
an d cool ou r fee t in the water
;
his will be the easiest way,
a nd a t m idday a nd in t he s um m e r is far f rom b eing unpleasant .
SOC. ead on, an d look ou t for a place in which we can
si t down.
Phaedr . Do you see tha t ta l les t p lane- t ree in the d is tance?
SOC. es.
Phaedr .
T he r e a r e s ha de a nd ge n tl e b r ee ze s, a nd g r a s s on
SOC.Move forward.
Phaedr . I sho uld l ike to know, Socra tes, wh ether the p lace
On the \ray
which we m ay e i ther s i t o r l ie down.
is not som ewh ere he re a t which B oreas is said to have carr ied
off Ori thyia f rom the banks of the I l i ssus
?
Phaedrus
asks
the
opinion of
OC.
p c h is th e t radi tion.
Phaedr ,
A nd i s t h i s t he e xa c t s po t
?
The l i t t l e s t ream is
Socrates
del ightful ly c lear an d br ight
;
I can fancy tha t the re might
the
tnith
of a local
e m aiden s playing near .
soc.
I
be li eve tha t t he spo t
is
not exact ly here , but about
legend.
a qu ar te r of
a
mile lower down, w he re you c ross to the temple
of Ar temis , a nd t he re is, I think, some sor t of an a l tar of
Boreas a t t he p lace .
Phaedr . I hav e nev er noticed i t
;
but I beseech you to tell
me, Socrates , do you bel ieve this ta le
?
1’0L.
I. F f
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 44/99
434
The allegorical inteiy5retation o f nydhology.
PhlifYtS
SCCRATE%
PHABDRUS.
Socrates
desires to
know him-
self before
hc enquires
into the
newly found
philosophy
of myth-
ology.
Socrates,
who is an
inhabitant
of
the city,
is charmed
with the
sights and
sounds of
the country
which are
so
new lo
him.
SOC. h e wise a re doubtful , and I should not be singular
if, like them,
I
too doubted.
I
might have
a
rational ex-
planat ion that Ori thyia was playing with Pharmacia , when
a northern gust carr ied her over the neighbour ing rocks ;
and this being the m anner of her death, s h e was said to have
been carr ied away by Boreas. T h e re is a discrepancy, h o w
ever, about th e locali ty; according to anoth er version of the
story sh e was taken f rom the Areopagus, and
not
f rom th is
place. Now I quite acknowledge that these allegories are
very nice , but h e is not to b e envied who h as to invent them
;
much lab our and ing enu ity will be required of him
;
nd when
he ha s once begun, he must go on and rehabi l i ta te Hippo-
centati rs and chimeras dire . Go rgons and winged ste eds
flow in apace, and numberless other inconceivable and por-
tentous natures. An d if h e is sceptical about them, an d
would fain reduce them one after another to the rules of
probability, this sort of crud e philosophy will tak e
up
a grea t
deal of time.
Now I have no le isure for such enquir ies;
shall
I
t e l l you why?
I
mu st first know myself, a s th e
Delphian inscription sa ys ; to be curious about that which is
230
not my con cern, while
I
am stil l in igno rance of my own self,
would be ridiculous.
And therefore I bid farewell to all th is ;
th e common opinion
is
enough for me.
For,
a s I wa s saying,
I want to know not about this, but about myself : am I a
mo nster m ore complicated an d swo llen with passion th an th e
serpe nt Typho, o r a creature of a gen t ler and simpler sor t,
to whom Na ture h as given a diviner and lowlier de st in y?
But let me ask you, fr iend : have we not reached the plane-
tree to which you were conducting
u s
?
Phnedr. Yes, this is the tree.
SOC.
y Here , a fair resting-place, full of sum me r so un ds and
scents. H e re is this lofty and sprea ding plane-tree , and the
ag nu s castus high and clustering, in the fullest blossom an d
the greates t f ragrance ; and the s t ream which flows beneath
th e plane-tree is deliciously cold
to
th e feet. Jud ging from
the ornaments and images, this must be a spot sacred to
Achelous and the Nymphs. H ow delightful is the breeze
:--
so very sweet ; and there is a sound in the a ir shr i l l and
summerl ike which makes answer to the choru s of th e
cicndae. Rut the greatest charm of all is
the grass, l ike
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 45/99
435
a p i l low gent ly s lop ing to the head .
M y d e a r P h a e d r u s , Phcredfirs.
you have been a n ad mi rab l e gu ide .
SocRArEs.
Phaedr.
W h a t an i ncomprehens ib l e be ing you a re,
PHAEDRUS.
Soc ra t es : wh en you a re i n t he coun t ry , a s you say , you
real ly are l ike some s t ranger who i s l ed about by a gu ide .
Do
y o u e v e r c ro s s t h e b o r d e r ?
I
r a the r t h ink t ha t you never
venture even outs ide the gates .
SOC.
ery t rue , my good f r iend ; a n d I hope tha t you wi l l H e i s a
excuse m e whe n you he a r t he r eason , wh ich is, tha t I a m a ~'~~~'e
lover of knowledge, an d the me n wh o dwel l in the c ity a re andofman-
my t eacher s , and no t t he tr ees o r t he coun try . T ho ug h
I
ki nd ,a nd
do inde ed believe tha t you hav e found a spell wi th which to a n o n l y h
d r a w m e o u t of the c ity in to the count ry , l ike a hu ng ry cow drawnout
of the city
before whom a bough o r a bunch of f ru i t
is
waved. For bythehelp
only hold
up
before me in l ike m an ne r a book, a nd you m ay
Ofa hook.
l ead me a ll roun d At t ica , an d ove r th e wide world .
A n d
now having arr ived,
I
i n t end to l ie down , and do you choose
an y pos ture in which you can read bes t.
You
know how mat t e r s s t and wi th me
;
231
and how, as I conceive, th i s a ffair may be ar ra ng ed for the
advantage of both of
us.
A n d I maintain that I o u g h t n o t
to fai l in m y suit , beca use I am no t your l over : fo r l over s
repen t of t he k indnesses wh ich t hey have shown when the i r
pass ion ceases , bu t to th e non- lovers w ho a r e f ree an d not
und er a n y compuls ion , no t ime of r epen t ance ever com es ;
for the y confer the i r benef i ts acc ord in g to the m easu re of
their abil ity, in t he way which is most cond ucive to th ei r
own interest .
of
t he ir l ove t hey have neg lec ted t he ir own concerns an d E;:: '''''':
r endered se rv i ce
to
o t h e r s : a n d w h e n
to
these benef i t s tothelover,
confe r red t hey add on t he t roub les wh ich t h ey have e ndured ,
?
t hey t h ink t ha t t hey have 1ong .ago m ade to t he be loved a ownmas-
very a m ple re turn .
But the non- lover has no such torment - ter, less
exacting,
ing
recol lect ions ; he has never neg l ec t ed h i s a f fa i r s
or
more
qua rre l led with h i s re la t ions
;
h e h a s n o t r o u b l e s t o a d d up to keep
or
excuses t o i nven t
;
and being wel l r id of all these evils ,
~ ~ ~ ~ f ' s
wh y shou ld h e no t f ree ly do what will g ra t ify the beloved
? less fickle,
I f you say t ha t t he l over i s more t o b e es teemed , because h i s
love
is
t hough t t o be g r e a t e r
;
or he is wi l ling to say a n d d o JCAOUS, less
what i s ha tefu l to o the r men, in o rd er to p lease h i s be loved ; exc'usive
;
therefore
Begin.
'
Phaedr. Listen.
T h en again , l over s cons ide r how by reason ~ k n o n -
F
f 2
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 46/99
436 The discourse of Lysias.
~hrrudrus. - that, if true, is only a p roof tha t he will prefer any future
L ~ ~ ~ ~ .
ove to his present, and will injure his old love at the
and there
pleasu re of the new. And how, in
a
matter of such infinite
ammore
importance, can a man be right in trusting himself
to
one
of
hem.
wh o is afflicted with a malady which n o exp erienced pe rso n
would attempt to cure, for the patient himself admits that he
is
not in his r ight mind, and acknowledges that he is wrong
in his mind, but sa ys that he is una ble to control hims elf?
And if he came to his r ight mind, would he ever imagine
that the de sires were go od which h e conceived when in his
wrong mind ? Once more, there are many more non- lovers
than lovers; and if you choose the best of the lovers, you
will no t have many to choose fro m ; but if from the no n-
lovers, the choice will be larger, and
you
will be far more
likely to f ind among them a person who is worthy of your
friendsh ip. If public opinion be your dread, and you would
avoid reproach, in all probabili ty the lover, who is always
thinking that other men are as emulous of him as he is of232
them, will boast to some on e of his succe sses, and m ake a
show
of
them openly in the pride of his heart;-he wa nts
others to know that his labour has not been lo st ; but the
non-lover is more his own master , and is desirous of solid
good, and not of the opin ion of ma nkin d. Again, th e lover
may be generally noted or seen following the beloved (this is
his reg ular occupation), an d when ever th ey ar e observed to
exchange two words they are supposed to meet about some
affair
of
love eith er past
or
in contemplation
;
but when non-
lovers meet, no one asks the reason why, because people
know that ta lking to another is natural , whether f r iendship
or
me re pleasu re be the motive. On ce more, if you fear th e
fickleness
of
f riendship, consider that in any othe r case a
quarrel might be a mutual calamity; but now, when you
have given up what
is
most precious to you, you will be the
greater loser , and therefore, you will have more reason in
being afraid of the lover, for his vexations are many, and he
is always fancying that every one is leagued against him.
W he refo re a lso he de ba rs his beloved f rom society; he will
not have
you
intimate with the wealthy, lest they shou ld
Reading T h i y c r v ;
cf.
infra,
74
8 1 ~ h i y r a 6 ~ 1 .
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 47/99
The lover ana' the non-lover.
437
exce ed him in wealth, o r with men of educatioo, lest they Phmdw.
should be h is super iors in und ers tand ing; an d he i s equal ly L~~~~
afraid of anybody's inf luence who has a ny oth er advantage
ov er himself . I f he ca n per sua de you to break with them,
you are left without a friend in the world; or if , out of a
regard to your own in terest , you have m ore se nse than to
comply with his de sire, you will have to qu arre l with him.
But those who are non-lovers , and whose success in love is
the reward of their merit , will not be jealous of the com.
panions of their beloved, and wil l rather hate those who
refuse to be his associates, thinking that their favourite is
s l ighted by the lat ter an d benefi ted by the fo rm er ; for more
love than hatred may be expected to come to him out of his
fr iendship with others . M any lovers too have loved the
person of a youth before they knew his cha racter o r his
belongings;
so
that w hen their pass ion h as passed away,
there i s
no
know ing whe the r the y will continue to be his
233 friends ; whereas , in th e case of non-lovers who -were
always friends, the friendship
is
not lessened by the favours
g ran ted
;
but the recollection of these remains with them,
an d is an ea rne st of good things to come. Further ,
1
s a y
Thenoil-
that you are likely to be improved by me, wherpas the lover
:::::
will spoil you. F o r they praise you r words and act ions in thelover
a wrong w ay ; partly, because they a re afraid of offending
wll*spoll,
you, an d also, their ju dg m en t is weakened by passion. ofh isaf -
Su ch ar e the fea ts which love exhib i ts ; he m akes th ings
fections.
painful
to
th e disappointed which give no pain to others
;
h e
compels the successful lover to praise what ought not to
give him pleasure, an d therefore the beloved is to be pitied
ra th er th an env ied. But if you listen to me, in th e first
place,
I,
in my intercourse with you, shall not merely regard
pre sen t enjoyment, but also futu re advantage, being not
mastered by love, but m y own m as te r ; no r for small causes
taking violent dislikes, but even when the cause is great,
slowly layin g up little wra th-unintention al offences
I
shall
forgive, and intentional ones I sha l l t ry to p reve n t ; and
these a re th e ma rks of a f r iendship which will las t.
think that a lover only can be a firm friend ? re fle ct :-if th is 2;:;
the
were true, we should se t small value on sons, o r fathers,
or friend: he
mothers ; nor should we ever have loyal f r iends, for our E$r
the
ObJect
Do you The non-
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 48/99
438 The su eriorir‘y of the non-Zwer.
Phedmr.
love of them arises not from passion, but from other asso-
L ~ ~ ~ ~ ,
iations. Fu rthe r, if we ou ght to show er favours on those
SocM.na
who are the most eager sui tors ,-on that pr inciple, we ought
more Of
* alwa ys to do good, not to the m ost virtuous, but to the mo st
giver
; his
loveismore
need y; for they ar e the person s wh o will be m ost relieved,
=%and
an d will therefore be the m ost grate ful;
and when you
is
never
censure&
make a feast you should invite not your friend, but the
beggar and the empty soul; for they wil l love you, a n d
attend you, and come about your doors, and will be the best
pleased, an d t he m ost grateful, an d will invok e many
a
bless ing on yo ur head. Y et surely you ought not
to
be
granting favours to those who besiege you with prayer, but
to those who ar e best ab le to reward yo u; nor to the lover
only, but to those who a re wo rthy of love
;
nor to those who
will enjoy the bloom of your youth, but to those who will
234
sh ar e their possessions with you in age ; no r to those who,
having succeeded, will glory in the ir success to o thers, but
to those who will be modest an d tell no tales
;
nor to those
who care about you for a moment only, but to those who
will continue your friends through life
;
nor to those who,
when their passion
is
over, will pick a quarrel with you, but
rather to those who, when t he charm ofy ou th h as left you, will
show their own virtue. Rem ember what I have sa id ; and
consider yet this fur ther point
:
fr iends admonish the lover
un de r the idea that his wa y of life is bad, but no on e of his
kindred eve r yet censu red the n on-lover,
or
thought that he
was ill-advised about his own interests.
‘Perhaps you wi l l ask me whether I propose that you
should indulge every non-lover. T o which
I
reply that not
even t he lover would advise you to ind ulge all lovers, for
the indiscriminate favour is less esteemed by the rational
recipient, and less easily hidden by him whd would escap e
th e cen sure of the world. Now love ou gh t to be for the
advantage of both parties, an d for the injury of neither.
‘I
believe that I have‘said enough
;
but i f there
is
any-
thing more which you desire or which in yo ur opinion need s
to be supplied, ask an d I will answer.’
Now, Soerates , what do you think ?
Is
not the discourse
excellent, more especially in the matter of the language ?
SOC.
es, quite admirable ; he effect on me was rav ishing.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 49/99
S o c m h s ' c?ZticisiIi
of
t h speech b
ysias.
439
And this
I
owe to you, Phaedrus , for
I
observed you while
Phmnvtis.
readin g to be in an ecs tasy, and th in kin g tha t you ar e mo re s ~ ~
experienced in these m atte rs than
I
am,
I
followed your
PXAEDRUS*
example, and, l ike you, my divine darling,
I
became inspired Socrates
has no great
with a phrenzy.
opinion of
Phaedr.
Ind eed , you ar e pleased to be m erry. the speech.
At first the
SOC. o you mean that
I
am not in earnes t
? effect on
Phaedr.
Now don't talk in th at way, Socra tes, but let m e h i m w a s
have your rea l opin ion;
I
ad jur e you, by Zeu s, th e god of
fr iendship, to tel l me whether you think that any Hellene
becausehe
could have said more
or
spok en bet ter on th e same subjec t.
SOC.
W ell , bu t ar e you a nd
I
expected
to
przise the sent i -
was m-
ments of the au thor , or only the clearness , a nd roundness , zp:;tt2
and finish , and tournure of the lan gu age ? A s t o the first he wi l l
worthy to form an opinion, having only at tended to the j udge m e n t ;
rhe to r ica l manner ; and I was doubt ing w hethe r th is could o f t h e m a n -
have been defended even by Lys ias h im sel f ;
I
thought ,
n o t t h i n k
though
I
speak under correct ion, that he repeated himself
much.
two o r three times, ei ther f rom want of words or from want
of pa in s ; and a lso , he a ppe ared to me os tenta tious ly to
exult in show ing how well he could say the same t hi ng ' in
two o r thre e ways.
Phaedr.
Nonsense , Socra tes ; what you call repetition was
the especial meri t of the speech ; or he omitted no topic of
which th e subject r ightly allowed, an d
I
do not th ink tha t
an y one 'could have spoken bet ter o r more exhaust ively.
Ancient sages ,
men an d women, who have spoken an d wri t ten of these
things, would rise up in ju dg m en t against me, if out of com-
plaisance
I asse nte d to you.
Phaedr,
W h o a re they, and where d id you hear any th ing
bet ter than th is
?
SOC.
am su re tha t
I
must have heard ; but a t th is
H e h a s
moment
I
do no t r emember f rom whom; pe rhaps f rom
~~~~~
Sa pp ho th e fa ir, o r Anacreon the wise
;
or, possibly, from
a speech, an d
p r o s e w r it er . W h y d o I say
so
? Why, because
I
perceive
E?
that my bosom i s full , an d that
I
could make an oth er speech
make
one
~~''' &
235 I will ingly submit to yo ur bet ter judg me nt , for I am no t submit to
Phaedrus's
ner he does
SOC.
h e r e
I
cannot go alo ng with you.
Reading r a h d
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 50/99
440
P ~ ~ N S .
s good a s that of Lysias , an d different. No w
I
am certain
s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,hat this
is
not an invent ion of m y own, wh o am well aw are
PerEDRus.
that
I
know noth ing , and therefore
I
can only infer tha t
I
himself,not
have been f i l led through the ears , l ike a pi tcher , f rom the
ferent,
for
waters of another , though I have actual ly forgot ten in my
this
or
any
s tupidity who w as m y informant .
have
Phaedr. T h a t i s g ra nd :-but neve r mind wh ere you heard
s om e good
the d i scourse or from wh om ; le t tha t be a mys tery not to
topics
which are be divulged even a t my ear nes t desi re .
On ly , as y ou say,
common-
promise to make an othe r and bet ter orat ion, equal in length
and ent i rely new, on the same subject
;
a n d
I,
l ike the n ine
laces.
Archons, wi l l promise to set up a golden image a t Delphi ,
not only of myself, but of you, and as large a s life.
SOC. ou a r e a dear go lden as s i f you suppose me to
mean th a t Ly s ias has a l together missed t he mark , and tha t
I
can make a speech f rom which a l l h i s a rgum ents a re to be
excluded. T h e wors t o f au th ors will say som eth ing which is
to the point. W h o , for example, could spe ak on this thesis
of yo urs wi thout prais ing th e discret ion of the non-lover
236
and blaming the indiscret ion of the lover ? T h e s e a r e th e
comm onplaces of the su bject which mu st come in (for w ha t
else is there to be said ?) and must be al lowed and excused ;
the on ly mer i t i s in the ar rang em ent of them, for ther e can
be no ne in th e invention ; but wh en you leave the common-
places , then the re m ay be som e originali ty .
Phaedr.
I admi t tha t there i s reason in wh at
you
say , and
I too will be reasonable, and will allow
you
to s tar t wi th the
premiss tha t the lover i s mo re d i sord ered in h i s wi t s than
the l ion-lover ; i f in what remains
you
make
a
l o n g e r a n d
be t te r spee ch than Lysias, and use o the r a rgum en t s , t hen
I
say again, tha t a s tatue you sha l l hav e of beaten gold, an d
take you r place by the colossal offerings of tn e Cypsel ids at
Olympia.
SOC. ow profoundly in earnes t i s the lover , because to
tease him I lay a f inger upon his love A nd
so,
Phaedrus ,
you rea l ly imagine tha t
I
am going to improve upon the
ingenuity of Lysias ?
Phaedr.
T h e r e
I
have you as you had me, and you must
Banter of Pha.drus
and
Socrates.
entirely d lf-
speech
Oneat leas t
of Lysias'
common-
placesis
not
to
be
excluded.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 51/99
The parol+
of Socrates.
441
j u s t s pe a k
‘as
you best can.’
q u o q u e ’
as
in a farce , or compel m e to say to you as you socRAres
said to me,
‘ I
know Soc ra te s a s well a s
I
know m yse lf , an d
PH*EDRUs.
he wa s wa nt ing to speak, but h e gav e himse lf a irs .’ R a th er Fair play.
Phaedrus is
I
would hav e you con sider tha t from this p lace we s t i r not
det ermind
unt i l you hav e unbosomed yourse lf of the speec h ; or he re to extort a
a r e we a l l a lone , and I am s t ronge r , remember, an d younge r ~~~~
than you: -Wherefore perp end , an d d o not compel me to
Socrates
has dready
SOC.
ut , my sweet Ph aed rus , how ridiculous i t would be
the
speech
of me to compe te w i th Lys ia s in an ex temp ore spee ch F ~ o ~
H e i s a m a s t er in h is a r t an d I am an un taught man .
Phaedr.
You
s e e h o w m a t t e r s ’ s t a n d ;
and therefore le t
there be n o m ore pre t en ces ; for, indeed, I know the word
tha t
is
irresistible.
Do not le t u s e xc ha nge ‘ t u Phacdrus.
use violence.
extorted
self.
SOC. h e n don’ t say i t.
Phaedr. Yes, but
I
wil l ; and my word sha l l be an oa th .
‘ I
say, o r ra th er swear ’-but wh at god will be the wi tn ess
of my oa th ?-‘ By th i s p l ane -t r ee I swear , that unless you
repea t the d isc ourse here in the face of th i s very plane- tree ,
I will never tel l you an ot he r ; nev er le t you have word of
a no t he r ’
SOC.
i l lain I am con que red ; the poor love r
of
dis-
cour se has no more to say .
Phaedr. T h en why a r e you s ti ll a t your t ri cks?
SOC. am not g oing to p lay t r icks now tha t you have taken
Phaedr.
Proceed.
SOC. ha l l
I
te l l you what
I
will do ?
Phaedr.
W h a t ?
SOC
will vei l my face an d gal lop thro ug h the discourse
as
fas t a s
I
can, for if
I
see you
I
shal l feel ashamed and not
know w hat to say.
Phaedr. O nl y
go
on a nd you m a y do any thing e lse which
you please.
SOC.
ome,
0
y e Muses , melodious , a s ye a re ca lled ,
whether you have rece ived th is name f rom the charac te r
of yo ur s t ra ins , o r because the Mel ians ’ are a musical race,
the oath, for I cannot a l low myself to be s tarved.
237
In
the original,
hbytrar,
Akyucr.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 52/99
442 Socyaks has become iitspired
Phmdm. help, 0 help me in the tale which my good friend here
s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .
esires me to rehearse , in order that his f r iend whom he
always deemed wise may seem to him to be wiser now than
ever.
Before
we Once upon a t ime there was a fair boy, or , more properly
:AE
speaking, a youth ; he was very fa ir and had a great many
ther the
lovers; and there was on e special cunning one, who had
non-loveror persuaded the youth that he did not love him, but he really
bepreferred loved him a l l the sam e; and on e day w h en he was paying
wemusten- his addresses to him, he used this very argument-that he
quire into
thenature
ought to accept the non- lover ra ther than the lover ; his
oflove.
words were
as
follows:-
‘All good counsel begins in the same w ay ; a man should
know what he
is
advising about, or his counsel will all come
to nought. But people imagine that they know abou t th e
natu re of things, wh en th ey don’t know ab out them, and,
not having come to an understanding at f i rs t because they
think that they know, they end, as might be expected, . in
contradicting on e an ot he r and themselves. Mow you and
I must not be guilty of this fundamental error which we
condemn in o thers ;
but as our quest ion is whether the
lover or non-lover is to be preferred, let us first of all
agree in def ining the nature and power of love, and then,
keeping our eyes upon .the definition a nd to th is appealing,
let us . fur ther enquire whether love br ings advantage or
disadvantage.
‘
Eve ry one sees that love is a desire, an d we know also
that non-lovers desire the beautiful an d good. Now in
what way
is
the lover to be dist inguished f rom the non-
There are l ove r ?
Le t us note that in every on e of us there ar e two
p,esinman,
guiding and rul ing pr inciples which lead
u s
whither they
rational de- will ; one is th e natural desire of pleasure , the other . is an
and
jr- acquired opinion which aspires after the best
;
and these two
rational
:
thelatteris are sometimes in harmony an d then again a t war, an d some-
the power
t imes the one, sometimes the other conquers. W h en opinion
of love.
by the help of reason leads us to the best , the conquer ing
principle is called temperance ; but when desire, which is 238
devoid of reason, rule s in
us
a nd d r a gs
u s
to pleasure, that
power of misrule is called excess. Now excess ha s many
names, and many members, and many forms, and any of
lover is
to
two princi-
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 53/99
with
a
new
sort
of
discourse.
443
these forms wh en very marked gives a name, ne i ther honour- ~ h a d m s .
able no r c redi table , to the beare r of the name, T h e des i re
socaArHC
of ea t ing, for example , which ge ts the be t te r of the h igher
PHAmRus.
reason a nd the o the r des i res , i s ca lled gluttony, and he
who is possessed by i t is called a glut ton
;
the tyrannica l
desire of dr ink, which incl ines the possessor of the desire to
dr ink , ha s a nam e which is only too obvious, and there can
be as l i t t l e doubt by what name any other appe t i te of the
sam e family wou ld be called ;-it will be the name of that
which happens to be dominant .
A n d n o w
I
th ink tha t you
wil l perceive the dr i f t of my discourse
;
but as every spoken
word is in a manner p la iner than the unspoken, I had be t te r
sa y fur ther that th e i r ra t ional d esire which overcomes the
tendency of opinion towards r ight , and is led away to the
enjoyment
of
beauty, an d especial ly of p ersonal beauty, by
th e desires which ar e he r own kindred-that su pre m e desire ,
I say, which by leading co nq ue rs an d by th e force of passion
is reinforced, from th is very force, receivin g a n ame, is called
love
(+pop iuos
+os).’
And now, dea r Phaedrus ,
I
sha l l pause for an ins tant
Socratesat-
to ask wh ether you do not th ink me, as I app ear to myse lf ,
;$
inspired
?
the f low of
Phaedr. Yes, Socrates , you seem to have a very unusual ~ ~ ~o
flow of wo rds. unusual
SOC. is ten to me, then, in s i lence ; or surely the place is wl l rn*
holy;
so
that you must not wonder , if, a s I proceed, I a ppe a r
to be in a divine fury, for a l ready
I
am ge t t ing in to d i thy-
rambics.
Phaedr, Nothing can be t ruer .
SOC he responsibi l i ty res t s wi th you.
But hea r wha t
fol lows, and perhaps the f i t may
be
aver ted ; l l is in their
hands above.-
I
will
go
on ta lking to my youth. Listen
:-
Th us , my f riend, we have dec la red an d defined the na tu re
of the subject . K eep ing the def init ion in view, le t u s now en-
qui re what advantage
or
disadvantage
is
l ikely to en su e f rom
the lover
or
th e non- lover to h im who accepts the i r advances.
He w ho is th e vic tim of his passions a nd t he s lave of plea .
su re will
of
course des i re
to
make his beloved
as
agreeable
to himself as possible . Now to him who h as a mind diseased
Reading y.rfi.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 54/99
444
Pkdrus .
SOWUTFS.
Th e lover
desires
to
secure the
inferiority
and subser-
viency
of
thebeloved.
H e
will
banish from
him society
and philo-
sophy.
H e w ill
choose
an
effeminate
person
for his be-
loved, and
train him
to be more
effeminate.
The elder&
lover, disagreeubZe
while Zoving,
any th ing i s agreeable which i s no t opposed to h im, bu t tha t
which i s equal o r supe r ior
is
hateful to him, and therefo re
the lover will no t b rook any sup er ior i ty o r equal ity on the
part of his beloved
;
h e is always employed in reducing h im
239
to inferiori ty . An d the ign ora nt i s th e infer ior of th e wise,
th e coward of the brave , the s low
of
spee ch of the speaker ,
the dul l of t he c l ever . Th ese , and no t these on ly , a re t h e
men tal defects of the beloved ; -defects which, w he n im-
planted by nature, are necessari ly a del ight to the lover ,
and, when not implanted, he must contr ive to implant them
in him, i f he would not be deprived of his f leet ing joy.
A nd therefore he cannot he lp being jea lous, and will d eb ar
his beloved from the advantages
of
society which would
make a man
of
him, and especial ly from tha t society which
would have g iven h im w isdom, an d there by h e can not fail to
do h im great harm. T h a t i s to say , in h i s excessive fear l es t
he should come to be desp ised in h i s e ye s he will be com-
pelled to banish f rom him d iv ine phi losoph y; an d the re is
no g rea ter in jury which h e can infl ic t upon h im tha n th is .
H e will cont r ive tha t h i s be loved shal l be whol ly ignorant ,
and i n e very th ing sha l l look to him ; he i s to be th e del igh t
of the lover’s heart , an d a cu rse to himself. Ve ri ly, a lov er
is
a prof i t ab le guard ian and associa te for h im in a l l tha t
relates to his mind.
L e t
u s
next see how his master , whose law of l i fe i s plea-
su re an d not good, will keep an d t ra in th e body
of
his servant .
Wi l l he no t choose a be loved who
is
de l i ca t e r a the r t han
s t u r d y a n d s t r o n g ? O n e b r o u g h t u p i n s h a d y b o w e rs a n d
not in the br igh t sun , a s t ran ge r to m anly exerc i ses an d the
sweat of toil , accustomed only to a soft an d lu xu riou s diet ,
ins tead of the h ue s of hea lth h av ing t he co lou rs
of
pa in t and
ornamen t , and t he r es t of
a
piece? -such a life as a n y o n e
can imagine an d which
I
nee d not de ta il a t l ength . But I
may sum up a ll t ha t I have t o s a y i n a word , and pass on .
S u c h a p e r s o n i n w a r, o r in a n y
of
t he g rea t c r i s es
of
life,
wi ll be t he anx ie ty of his f r i ends and a l so of h i s lover ,
and ce r t a in ly no t t he t e r ro r of h i s e n e m i e s ; w h i c h n o b o d y
can deny.
And now le t
u s
te ll wha t advan tage o r d i sadvan tage the
beloved wil l receive from the guardianship and society of
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 55/99
and
when ceasing
t o
Cove, utteerdy detestadle.
445
his lover in th e m at ter of h is proper ty ; th is i s th e ne xt
Phacdrur.
point to be considered.
what, indeed, will be sufficiently evident to all men, that
he desires above all things to deprive his beloved of his H e w i l l d e -
240
de ares t a nd best an d holiest possessions, father, mother,
$
kindred, f riends, of al l w hom he thinks may be hinde rers o r
parents,
reprovers of the i r mos t sweet converse
;
he wil l even cast
:::zy'
a jea lous eye upon h is gold and s i lver or o ther proper ty ,
everyother
because the se m ake him a less e asy prey, an d when caught
god
less manageable
;
hen ce he is of necessi ty displeased a t his
possess ion of them an d rejoices at their loss
;
an d he would
like him to be wifeless, childless, homeless, as well ; and the
longer the bet ter , for the longer he is all this , the longer he
will enjoy him.
T he re ar e some sor t of an imals, such as f la tterers , who
Thef la t -
are dangerous and mischievous enough, and yet na ture has
mingled a tem po rary pleasure and gr ac e in their composi- s a n m a y k
tion.
approve of such cre atures an d their pract ices , and yet for the
pern,clous,
t ime the y ar e very pleasant.
But
the lover
is
not only
b u t t h e o l d
hurtful to his love; he is also an extremely disagreeable
lovermust
companion. T h e o ld proverb says tha t 'b i rds of a fea ther always be
flock together ' ;
1 suppose that equality of years inclines the ob-
them to th e sam e pleasures , an d s imilari ty begets f r iendship
;
ject of
his
yet you may have more than enough even of this
;
and ver ily
constraint is always said to be grievous. Now the lover is
not only unlike his beloved, but he forces himself upon him.
F o r h e is old and his love is young, and nei ther day nor
night will he leave him if he can help; necessity and the
sting of des ire drive him on, and allure him with t he
pleasure which he receives from seeing, hearing , touching,
perceiving him in every way. And therefore he is de-
lighted to fasten upon him and to minister to him. But
what ple asu re o r consolation can the beloved be receiving
all this t im e? Must h e not feel the extremity
of
disgust
when he looks at an old shr ivel led face and the remainder
to match, which even in a description is disagreeable, and
quite detes table when he
is
forced into daily contact with
his lover
;
moreover he
is
jealously watched and guarded
against everything and everybody, and has
to
he ar m isplaced
The lover wil l be the f irs t to see SocnATw.
You
may say that a courtesan is hurtful , and dis- pleasant,
although
withered
detestable
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 56/99
446
W h a t the
beloved
s w y e m from the lowr .
Phacdrur.
SOCRATES.
The
lover,
having ef-
fected the
ruin
of
his
beloved in
body and
mind, runs
away with-
out paying.
and exaggera ted pra ises of h imse l f , and censures equa l ly
inappropria te , w hich a re in to le rable wh en th e man i s sober ,
and, b esides being intolerable ,
are
publ i shed a l l ove r the w or ld
in a l l t he ir i nde li cacy and wea r i som eness wh en he is d r u n k .
And no t on ly whi l e h i s l ove con t inues i s he misch ievous
and unp leasan t, bu t when h i s love cea ses h e becomes a
pe rf id ious enemy of h im on whom h e show ered h i s oa ths 241
and praye r s and p romises, and ye t cou ld ha rd ly p r eva il u pon
him to to le ra te th e tedium of h is company even f rom mot ives
of in te r es t. T h e ho ur o f payment a rr ives , and now he i s t he
se rvan t
of
ano the r m as te r ; i ns tead o f love and in fa tua tion ,
wisdom a nd t emperan ce a r e h i s bosom’s lo rd s ; bu t t he
be loved has no t d iscovered the cha nge which ha s t aken
place in h im, when he asks for a re turn and reca l l s to h is
recol lect ion former sayings and doings
;
h e be l ieves h imse lf
to be speak ing
to
t he s a m e pe r son , a nd t he o t he r, no t ha v i ng
the courage to confess the t r u th , and no t knowing how to
fu lfil t he oa ths and p rom ises which h e ma de w hen und e r t he
dominion of fo l ly , and having now grown wise and tem-
pe ra te , doe s no t w a n t t o d o a s he d id o r t o be a s h e w a s
before. And so h e run s away and i s cons tr ained to be
a defaul te r ; th e oys te r- she ll ha s fa llen wi th the o th er s ide
uppermost-he ch an ges purs ui t into f light , while the ot he r is
compelled to fol low him with passion and imprecat ion, not
knowing tha t h e oug ht nev e r f rom t h e f ir st t o have accep ted
a demented lover ins tead of a sens ible non - lover
;
and tha t in
making such
a
choice he was g iving him self up to a fai thless ,
morose, envious, dis ag reea ble being, hur tful to his esta te ,
hur tful to his bodi ly heal th, and st i l l more hur tful to the
cult iva tion of h is mind, tha n which the re n e i th er i s no r ever
wi ll be any th ing more h onou red in t h e eye s bo th o f go ds
and men .
Cons ide r th i s , f a i r you th , and know tha t i n the
f ri endsh ip of the love r the r e i s n o r ea l k ind ness ; h e has
a n a ppe t i t e a nd w a n t s t o f e e d upon you :
‘ As
wolves love lambs so lovers love their loves.’
But I told you
so,
I am speak ing in ve rse , an d the r e fore
I
had be t te r make an end
;
enough.
I n
allusion
to
a game in which
two
parties
fled
or pursued according
as
an oyster-shell which wa s throw n into the air fell with the dark
or
light side
11ppennost.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 57/99
Sonztt .s
having @ishtd,
proposes t o return
home. 447
Phoedr.
I thought that you were only half-way and w ere Phardrus.
going to make a s imilar speech about al l the advantages of socRAras
accepting the non-lover. W h y d o you no t p roceed
?
PH B
D
S.
SOC.
oes not you r s implicity observe that I have got out Enough:-
of di thyrambics into heroics , when only ut ter ing a ce nsu re
>:Ais-
on the lo ve r? And if I am to add the praises of the non- praiseor
lover what will become of m e ?
Do
you not perceive that E
I am al read y over taken by the Nym phs to whom you have converted
mischievously exposed m e ? And the refore I will only ad d z:hT:c-
that the non-lover ha s all t he advantages in which the lover
loser.
is
accused
of
being deficient. A nd now
I
will say no
m or e; there ha s been enough of both of them. Leaving
242 the tale to its fate,
I
will
cross
the r iver and make the
best of my way hom e, lest a w orse thing be inflicted upon
me by you.
Phacdr.
Not yet , Socra tes ; no t until th e heat of the' da y
ha s passed ; do you not see tha t the hour is almost noon ?
there is th e midday sun s tan din g s ti ll, as people say, in th e
meridian. Let
u s
rather s tay an d talk over what ha s been
said, and then return in the cool.
SOC.
OULove
of
discourse, Phaedrus ,
is
superhuman,
simply marvellous, and
I
do not bel ieve that there is any on e
of yo ur contempo rar ies who ha s ei ther made or in one way
o r anoth er has compelled others to make an equal num ber of
speeches .
I
would except Simmias the Theb an , but all the
res t ar e far behind you. An d now
I
do verily believe that
you have been th e cause of another .
But what d o you m ean
?
haedr. T h a t is good news.
soc . 1 mean to say tha t as I was about to cross th e s tream Thedlvine
the usual sign wa s given to me,-that sign which always gE2l:F
forbids, but never bids, me to do anything which
1
am going depart; he
to
do;
and I thought that 1 heard a voice saying in my ear
is
sensible
tha t
I
had been guilty of impiety, and that I must not
go been@t,,
away until I had made an atonement.
Now
I
am a diviner,
of ~ m p m .
though not
a
very good one, but
I
have enough religion for
my ow n use, a s you might say of a bad writer-his writing
is
good enough for him
;
a n d
I
am beginning to see that I was
in error. 0 my friend, how prophetic is the human soul
At the t ime
I
had a
sort
of misgiving, and, like Ibycus,
' I
was troubled
; I
feared that
I
might be buying honour from
that he has
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 58/99
448
Phaedrus.
SOCUATES,
PHAEDRUS.
T h e tw o
speeches
were a
blasphemy
against the
God of
love.
Socrates
therefore
before any
evil hap -
pens to
him will
make a
re-
cantation.
But he
is
detained
by
a presentiment.
men a t t he p r i ce of s inning against the gods.’
cognize my error .
Now I re-
Phaedr .
W h a t e r ro r
?
SOC. ha t was a drea dfu l speech which you b roug ht wi th
Phaedr . H o w so ?
SOC.t was foolish, I say,-to a certain exten t , impio us
;
Phaedr . Nothing , if th e speech w as rea l ly such a s you
SOC.
W e l l , a n d
is
not
Eros
the son of Aphrodi te , and
Phaedr .
So
men say.
SOC. ut that was not a cknow ledged by Ly sias in his
speech , nor by you in tha t o ther speech which you by a
charm dre w from my l ips. F o r i f love be, a s he su rely is ,
a divinity, he cannot be evil. Y et this w as the e rr or of both
the speeches . T he re was a lso
a
s impl ici ty about them
which was ref resh ing; having no t ru th
or
hon es ty in them,
243
never theless they pre tended to be someth ing , hoping to
succeed in deceiving the manikins of ear th an d gain ce lebri ty
anio ilg them. W he refo re I must have a purgation . An d I
bethink me of an ancient purgat ion of mythological error
which was devised , not by H om er , for h e n ev er had th e wi t
to discover w hy he w as bl ind, but by Stesich orus , who w a s
a phi losopher an d kn ew the reaso n why; an d therefore ,
when he lost his eyes , for that was th e penal ty which wa s
inflicted upon him for revi l ing th e lovely He len , he at once
purged himself. A nd t he purgat ion was
a
recantat ion,
which began thus,-
you, and you mad e me u t t e r on e as bad .
can an yth ing be mo re dreadfu l ?
describe.
a g o d ?
< False is tha t word of mine-the trut h is tha t tho u
didst not
embark
in ships,
nor
ever
go
to the walls
of Troy ;’
an d when he had comple ted h i s poem, which i s ca lled ‘ th e
recantat ion,’ imm ediately his s ight retu rne d to him. No w
I
wil l be wiser than ei ther Stes ichorus
or
Homer , i n t ha t I
am going to make my reca nta t ion for rev il ing love before
I
suffer ; and this I wi l l a t tempt , not as before, vei led and
ashamed, but wi th forehead bold and bare.
Plzaedr.
Noth ing cou ld be m ore ag ree ab l e t o me than t o
hear you s ay so.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 59/99
The
impiety
of the t w o discoz~~ses .
449
SOC. nly th ink my good Phaed rus , what an ut te r wa nt Phaedrus.
of d e l icacy was show n in the two discourses
;
I mean, in my socRAres
own and in tha t which you rec i ted out of the book. W o u l d
PH*EDRus.
not any o n e wh o was himsel f of a noble an d gen t le na ture ,
~ ~ $ ' " ' ~ e y
and w ho loved o r eve r had loved
a
nature l ike h is own,
described
when we te ll of th e pet ty ca us es of lovers ' jealousies, a nd of
the i r exce edin g animosi ties , an d of the in juries which they do and
ignoble
to the i r beloved, have imagined tha t ou r ideas of love we re
sort.
t aken f rom some h aun t of sa i lor s to which good m ann ers
we re un kno wn -he would cer ta in ly nev er have admi t ted th e
jus t ice of ou r censu re
?
Phaedr. I da re sa y not, Socra tes .
SOC. herefore , because I blush a t t he thought of th i s
person, and a lso because I am afraid of Love himself , I
des i re to wash th e b r ine ou t o f my ea r s w ith wa te r f rom the
s p r i n g ; a n d I would counse l Lysias not to delay, but to
wr i te another d iscoutse , which sha l l prove tha t ' ceteris
pa r ibus ' t he lover oug ht to be accep ted r a the r than th e non -
lover.
You sha l l speak the
praises of th e lover, an d L ys ias shal l be com pelled by me to
wr i te an o the r d i scour se on the sam e theme .
SOC. ou will be t ru e to yo ur n a tu re in tha t, an d therefore
I believe you,
Phaedr. Speak, and fear not .
SOC. u t w he r e is the fa i r youth whom
I
w a s a dd r e s s i ng
before , an d w ho ou ght to l i sten now
;
est, if he hear me not,
he should accept a non- lover before he knows what he
is
d o i n g ?
Phaedr.
H e is c lose a t hand, an d a lways a t yo ur se rvice .
SOC. no w then, fai r youth , th a t the former d iscourse was
The second
244 the word of Pha edru s , the son of Va in Man, wh o dwel ls in ~~~~~:~
the c i ty
of
M yrrhin a (Myrrhinus ius) . An d th is which
I
am
thepurport
about to u t t e r i s t he r ecan ta t ion o f S te s i chorus the son o f
~~~~~&~
Godly M an (Euphemus) , who comes f rom the town of
l o v e l s a
D e s i r e ( H i m e r a ) , a nd
is
to the fol lowing effect : ' I told madnessof
a
l ie whe n I said ' ha t the beloved oug ht to accept the non- sort.
l ove r when he migh t have the love r , because the one is
sane , and the o the r mad .
It
might be so i f madness were
s imply an ev i l ; bu t t he r e is a lso a madness which
is
a
Phaedr. Be
assured tha t he sha l l ,
the noble
VOL.
I.
= g
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 60/99
450
phmarld.r.
SOCRATES.
?'his mad-
ness is
of four
kinds :-
I . Prophe-
cy is
mad-
ness, as is
proved by
considern-
tions of
philology.
a . Theh-
spiration
which
purges
away
an-
cient wrath.
divine gif t, and the source of the chiefest blessings gra nte d
to men. F o r prophecy
is
a madness , and the pro phe tess a t
Delphi an d the pr iestesses a t Dod ona when out of their
se ns es have con ferred great benef its on Hel las , both in
publ ic an d pr ivate li fe , but when in their se ns es few or
none , And I might a l so te l l you how the Sibyl and other
inspi red persons have given to many an one many an in-
timation of the future which has saved them from fall ing.
But i t would be tedious to speak of what every o ne knows.
T h e re wil l be mo re reason in appeal ing to the ancient
inven tors of names' , who would nev er have con nected pro -
phecy
(pRVTlK ) ,
which forete l ls the future and is the noblest
of arts, with madness
( p n v w j ) ,
o r called them both by th e
same name, i f they had deemed madness to be a disgrace or
dishonour;- they must have thought that th ere was an
inspired m adness which was a noble th in g ; for th e two
words,
pawritj
a nd pavrK+, are rea l ly the same, and the le t te r
T is only a mod ern an d taste less inser t ion. An d this
is
con-
firmed by the name which was given by them to the rational
investigation of futurity, whether made by the help of birds
o r of o th er signs-this, for as much as i t
is
an art which
supp lies from the reason ing faculty mind ( v o k ) and inform-
ation (iuTopia) to human thought (oiqurs), they originally
termed oiovorurimj, but th e word h as been la te ly a l tered and
made sonorous by the modern introduct ion of the le t te r
O m e ga O I U U O I U T L K ; I a nd O I W Y L U T L K ~ ~ ) , and in propor t ion as
prophecy
(pawim))
is
more perfect and august than augury,
both in name and fact, in the same propor t ion, as the
ancients testify, is madness sup er ior to a sane mind ( U O C ~ O -
uBq), for the one
is
only of hum an, but th e o th er of divine
origin. Again, w her e plagues and mightiest woes have bred
in certain families, owing to some ancient blood-guiltiness,
there madness has ente red wi th holy pray ers an d r ites , and
by inspired utterance s found a way of del iverance for those
who ar e in ne ed ; and he who ha s par t in th is g ift, and
is
t ruly possessed and duly out of his mind, is by th e us e of
pur if icat ions and myster ies made whole and exempt f rom
evil, future a s well a s present , and has
a
re lease f rom the
Cp.
Cratylus 358
foll.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 61/99
The diviize nzadttess. 45'
245
calamity which was afflicting him.
T h e th i rd k ind
is
t he Pirae,i+ur.
madness o f those who a r e possessed by the M uses ; which socRarFs.
taking hold of a del icate an d virgin soul, and th ere insp ir ing
3.
Poetryis
f renzy, awakens lyr ica l and a l l o ther numbers
;
with these
madness.
adorning the myr iad ac t ions of anc ient heroes for the in .
s t ruct ion of poster i ty. But h e who, ha vin g
n o
touch of the
Muses ' madness in h is soul, comes to the door and th inks
that he wil l get into the temple by the help of ar t -he, I
say , and h i s poe t ry a r e no t adm i t t ed ; t he sane man d i s -
a p p e a r s a n d is now here when he en te r s in to r iva lry w ith the
madman.
I
might te ll of m any oth er noble de ed s which hav e sp run g
from inspired madness. A nd therefore , le t no one f r ighten
or f lut ter u s by say ing tha t t he t empera te f r i end i s t o be
chosen ra th er than the inspi red, but le t h im fu r the r sho w
that love
is
not s en t by the g ods for an y good to love r o r
beloved ; i f he can do so we will allow him to carry off t h e
palm. And we, on ou r par t, will prove in ans w er to h im tha t 4.
Loveis
the madn ess of love is the grea tes t of heav en 's b less ings , an d
the proo f s hal l be o n e which th e wise wil l receive, an d t he
witling disb eliev e. Bu t first of all, let us view the affections
and ac tions of th e
sou l
divine an d human, an d t ry to ascer-
tain the t ru th about them. T h e beginning of ou r proof is
as
follows :-
'The sou l th rough a l l he r be ing
is
imm ortal , for that which
S O U ~ s self-
is
ever in motion is immortal
;
but tha t which moves another
a nd
is
moved by another , in ceasing to move ceases a lso to
foreimmor-
l ive . On ly th e self -moving, ne ve r leaving self , ne ver ceases
tal
and 1111-
to move, and
is
th e fountain a nd beginning of motion to a l l
that moves besides. Now, th e beginning
is
unbegotten, for
tha t which i s begot ten ha s a beginning ; but the beginning
is
begotten
of
noth ing, for if i t w ere b ego tten of some thing,
then the begot ten would no t come from a beginning. B ut i
unbegotten, i t must a lso be indestruct ible ; for i f beginning
were destroyed, there could be no beginning out of any-
th ing, nor any thing out of a begin ning ; an d a ll th ings m ust
have a beginning. An d therefore the se lf -moving is the
beginning of motion ; an d th is can ne i ther be destroyed nor
begotten.
Translated by
Cic.
?'us. Qiaest, s. zj.
G 8 2
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 62/99
4 5 2
l h e
mortal am’ immot-tal
creature.
p h . t , i ~ s .
begotten, else th e whole hea ven s an d all creat ion would
k U T K S .
collapse and s tand s t i l l , and never again have motion or
birth. Bu t if th e self-mo ving
is
proved to be immortal, h e
who aff irms that seK motion is th e very idea a nd essence of
the soul will not be put to confusion. F o r th e body which
is moved from without is soulless ; but that which is moved
from within has
a
soul , for such is the nature of the soul .
But if this be true, must not the
soul
be the self-moving, and
246
Th e soul
described
under the
image of
two winged
horses and
a
chariot-
eer. ’
therefore of necessity unbegotten and immortal ? E n o u g h
of the soul’s immortality.
Of the nature of the soul , though her t rue form be ever
a theme of large and more than mortal discourse, let me
spe ak briefly, and in a figure. A nd let th e figure be com-
posi te-a pair of winged ho rses an d a charioteer . Now th e
winged h orses an d the charioteers of the g od s are all of them
noble and of noble descent , but those of other races are
mixed ; he human charioteer dr ives h is in a pair
;
a n d o n e
of them
is
noble and of noble breed, an d the ot her is ignoble
and of ignoble breed
;
nd the dr iving of them of necessi ty
gives a great deal of trouble to him. I will endeavour to
explain to you in w hat way th e m ortal differs f rom th e
immorta l c rea ture . T h e soul in her to ta li ty ha s the c are
of inanimate being everywhere, and traverses the whole
heaven in divers forms appearing ;-when perfect an d fully
winged s he soars upward , and orde rs the whole w or ld ;
whereas th e imperfect soul, los ing her wings and drooping
in her flight at last settles
o n
the sol id ground-there,
f inding a home, s he receives an ear thly frame which app ear s
to be self-moved, but is really moved by her power; and
this composition of soul and body is called a living and
mor ta l c rea ture. F o r immorta l no such union can be
reasonably believed
to
be ; although fancy, not having seen
nor sure ly known the nature of God, may imagine an
immortal creature having both a body and also a soul which
ar e united through out all t ime. L et that, however, be a s
God
wills,
and be spoke n of acceptably to him. A nd now
let us ask the reason w hy th e soul loses he r wings
T h e w ing is th e corporeal element which is most akin to
th e divine, an d which by nat ure ten ds to soar alof t an d
Th e wing is
ofearth
the element
which
soars carry that
upward.
which
gravitates downwards into the
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 63/99
The
pvocessioiL of the
Gocis.
453
T h e d i v i n e i s
P k d m s .
egion, which is the habitat ion of the gods,
beauty, wisdom, goodness , and the l ike ; a n d b y t h e s e t h e
~ o c ~ ~
wing of the soul i s nour ished , and grow s ap ace ; but wh en
fed upon evil an d foulness a nd the opposi te of good, wastes
an d fal ls away. Zeu s , th e mighty lord, hold ing the re ins of
a winged char io t , leads the wa y in heaven, orde r ing a l l and
taking care of al l
;
an d the re fo llows h im the ar ra y of go ds
247 and demi-gods , marshalled in e leven ban ds ; Hes t ia a lone
ab ides a t hom e in th e ho use o f heaven ; of the r es t they who
are reckoned among the pr incely twelve march in the i r
appoin ted o rder . T he y see man y b lessed s ig h t s in the
inne r heaven, and the re a r e m any ways to and fro , a long
which the b lessed gods are pass ing , every one do ing h i s
own work ; h e m ay fo llow w ho w i ll a nd can , for jea lou sy
has no place in the celes t ial choir .
banquet and fes tival, the n they move up th e s tee p to th e top
of the vault of heaven. T h e char io ts of the god s in even whichis
poise, obeying the rein, gl ide ra pidly; but the othe rs labour , celebrated
for the v ic ious s teed goe s heavi ly , weighing down the
heavens:
chario tee r to the ea r th wh en h i s s t eed ha s no t been mortals
thoroughly tra ined:-and th is i s th e ho ur of ago ny an d
low.
extrem es t conflic t for th e soul . F o r th e immorta ls , when
t h ey a r e a t t h e e n d
of
their course,
go
for th a nd s tand upon
the outs ide of heaven, and the revolu t ion of the spheres
car r ies them round , an d they behold the th ings beyond.
But of th e heaven which is above th e heavens, what ear th ly
poe t ever d id
or
ever w ill s ing wo r th i ly? I t i s such
as
I
will
desc r ibe ; or I mus t da re to speak the t ru th , when t ru th
is
my theme, T h e re ab ides the ve ry be ing w i th which t ru e
knowledge is concerned ; he colourless, formless, intangible
essence, vis ible only
to
mind, th e p ilo t of the soul . T h e
div ine in te l ligence, be ing nu r tur ed upon mind an d pure know-
ledge, an d th e intel l igence of ev ery soul which is capable of
receiving the food pro per to i t, rejoices at beholding_real ity ,
and once more gaz ing upon t ru th ,
is
rep lenished and made
glad , unti l the revolu tion of the wor lds b r ings h er roun d
again to the same p lace .
tion of the
jus tice, a nd temperance, a nd knowledge absolute, no t in th e
worldsin
form of genera t ion or of relation, which men call exist- which the
ence, but knowledge absolute in exis tence absolute ;
all
truth.
B u t w h e n t h e y
go
to
Thegreat
in the outer
feebly
fol-
In the r evo lu t ion she beho lds
The*evolu-
a n d
soul
beholds
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 64/99
'The
trouble
of other
souls
in the
upper
world.
'IIiey
drop
IO artli
;rlld
pass
r r i t ~ nany
natures
of
men.
behold ing the o the r t rue ex istences in l ike man ner , and
feast ing upon them, she passes down into the inter ior of the
heavens and r e tu rns home
;
and there the charioteer putt ing
up his hors es at the s tal l , gives them ambrosia to eat and
nectar to dr ink.
follows God best and is l ikest to him lif ts the head of the
charioteer into the outer world, and is carr ied round in the
revolution, troubled indeed by the steeds, and with difficulty
beholding true b ein g; while ano the r only r ises an d falls,
and sees , an d again fails to se e by reason of the un rulin ess
of the s teeds . T h e res t of the souls are also longing af ter
the upper world and they al l fol low, but not being s trong
enough they ar e carr ied rou nd below the surface, plunging,
trea din g on on e another , each s tr iving to be f irst
;
and the re
is confusion and perspiration and the extremity of effort ;
and many of them are lamed o r have their wings broken
through the i l l-dr iving of th e chariote ers
;
and all of them
after a fruitless toil, not h aving a ttained to t h e m ysteries of
true being, go away, and feed upon opinion. T h e reason
why the souls exhibi t this exceeding eagerness to behold
the plain of t ruth is tha t pas tu rage is found there, which is
su ited to the h ighes t par t of the so u l ; and the wing on
which the soul soars
is
nourish ed with this. And there
is
a
law of Dest iny, that th e soul which at tains an y vision of
truth
i n
comp any with a god is preserve d from ha rm until
the next per iod, and
if
at ta in ing a lways
is
always unharmed
But when she is unable to follow, and fails to behold the
t ru th , and through some i l l -hap s inks beneath the double
load of forgetfulness an d vice, and he r wings fall f rom he r
and sh e drops to the groun d, then the law ordains tha t th is
soul shall a t he r first birth pass, not into an y ot he r animal,,
bu t on ly in to man ; and the soul which has seen most of
truth shal l come to th e bir th as a philosopher , o r ar t is t, or
some musical a nd loving n atu re ; tha t which has seen t ru th
in
the second degre e shal l be som e r ighteous k ing or
warr ior chief ; the soul which is of th e th ird class shall be
a politician, or economist, or t rader ; the four th shal l be a
lover of gyninastic toils , or a physician
;
the fifth shall lead
the life of a prophet or h ie rop ha nt ; to the s ix th the
Su ch is th e l ife of the go ds ; but of other souls, that which 248
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 65/99
The
fourth
k i d of
nzadmss.
45
5
charac t e r of a poet or some other imi tat ive ar t is t wi l l be I - ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ( ~
assigned
;
o the se venth th e l ife of an ar t i san o r husb and- SoLsAre.
man
;
to the e igh th th a t o f a sophis t o r demagogue
;
t o t he
ninth that of a tyra nt ;-all the se a re state s of probation, in
which he wh o d oe s r igh teously improves, and he wh o d oe s
unrighteously, deteriorates his lot .
Ten thousand years mus t e lapse before the soul of each T I I C C O U I -
one can re turn to the p lace f rom whence she came, for she
l,n,D, oS,~
249 cann ot gro w h er w ings in l es s ; on ly the soul of a ph i loso-
g r o w w i n a s
pher , gui leless and t rue, or the soul of a lover , who is not in
ten
thou-
devoid of phi losophy, ma y acq uire wings in th e thi rd of the
thephi loso-
r ecu r r ing pe r iods o f a t housand yea r s ; he is dis t inguished
p h e r o r p h i -
losopher-
from the ord inary good m an who gains wings in th ree
thousand ye ar s : --and they who choose this l ife thre e t imes quires then1
in succession have wings given them, and
go
away a t t he ' ; ~ ~ ~ : ~ ~ d ,
end of th re e thousa nd years. But the o thers ' rece ive j u d g T he j odg-
ment when they have completed thei r f i rs t l i fe , and af ter the merit.
judgm ent they go , some of them to th e houses of cor rec t ion
w hich a r e u n d e r t h e e a rt h , a n d a r e p u n i s h e d ; o t h e r s
to
some place in heaven whi ther they are l igh t ly borne by
just ice, and there they l ive in
a
m an ne r w orth y of the li fe
which they led he re wh en in the form of men. And a t th e
end of the fir st thousa nd ye ars the good souls and a l so th e
evil souls both come to draw lo t s and choose the i r second
life, an d they may take an y which they p lease . T h e soul
of a man ma y pass in to the life of a beast , o r f rom the beas t
re turn again in to the man.
But the soul which has never
' fhesoul s
seen th e t ru th will no t pass in to the human form. F o r a
ma n m ust hav e intell igence of universals , an d be able to
never seen
proceed f rom the ma ny par t i cu lars of sen se to one concep- ~ ~
tion of reason ;-this is th e recol lect ion of those things which never pass
o u r soul on ce saw whi le following God-when regard less
into men.
of tha t which we now ca ll being s h e ra is ed h e r head UP
towards the t rue being .
And therefore the mind of the
ph i losopher a lone has wings ; and t h i s is
jus t , for he
is
always, according to the measure of his abi l i t ies , c l inging
in recol lect ion to tho se thing s in which Go d abides , an d in
beholding wh ich H e is w hat H e is. And he who employs
never
lost
the vision of
truth.
sand
years ;
w h o have
' The
phi losopher a lone is
not
subject
t o judgment '~p iarr ' .
for he has
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 66/99
456 The
visior8
of
havenZy beauty.
~ h a ~ d r ~ s .
r ight th ese mem ories is ev er being ini t iated into perfect
sOCRATm.yster ies an d alone becomes truly perfect . But , a s h e
forgets ear th ly in teres ts and is rap t in the d iv ine , the vulga r
deem h im mad , and r ebuke h i m ; they do no t see t h a t h e
is inspired.
T h u s f a r
I
have been spea king of th e fourth and last k ind
of
madness, which
is
impu ted to him who, w hen h e sees fh e
beauty of earth, is t ransported with the recollect ion of the
t rue beau ty ; he would l ike to fly away, but he can no t ; he i s
l ike a bird f lut ter ing and looking upward and careless
of
t h e
world below
;
an d he i s therefore thoug ht to be mad. An d
I have shown this of al l inspirat ions to be the noblest and
highest an d th e offspr ing of th e highest to him who ha s o r
shares in i t , and that he who loves the beautiful is cal led
a lover because he par take s of it. For , as has been a l ready
said, every soul of man ha s in the way of na ture beheld t rue
be ing ; th is was the condi t ion of he r pass in g in to th e form
of man.
o the r wor ld ; they may have seen them fo r a shor t t ime
only , o r they may have b een unfo r tunate in the i r ear th ly
lo t, and , having had the i r hea r ts turn ed to unr igh teousn ess
through some cor rupt ing inf luence , they may have los t the
memory of the holy th ings which once they saw. Fe w only
re ta in an adequa te r emembrance o f th em ; and they , when
they behold here any image of tha t o t her wor ld , a re rap t in
amazement ; bu t they a r e ignoran t o f wha t th i s r ap tu re
Th e t rue
means, because they do not clear ly perceive.
F o r t h e r e i s
light is the
no l igh t o f ju st ice o r t emperance o r an y
of
the h ighe r ideas
of the pa s t . which are precious to souls in the ear th ly copies of them :
they a re s een th rough a g las s d imly ; and the re a re f ew who,
going to the images, behold in them the real i t ies , and these
only with difficulty. T h e r e wa s
a
t ime when wi th th e res t of
th e happy band they saw beauty sh in ing in br ightness , -we
philosophers following in th e train of Zeus, ot he rs in
corn-
pany wi th o the r g od s ; and then we behe ld the bea ti fi c
vis ion an d were init iated into a mystery which may be truly
called most blessed, celebrated by u s in our s ta te of inno-
cence, before we had an y ex per ien ce
of
evils to come, when
we were admitted to the s ight
of
appar i t ions innocent and
simple an d calm and happy, which we beheld shin ing in
But al l souls do no t eas i ly recal l t he things
of
t h e
2 5 0
recollection
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 67/99
The
pangs
of sew
bi~th
45 7
pu re ligh t, pu re ourse lves an d not ye t enshr ine d in tha t Phadnrr.
l iv in g to m b w h ic h w e c a r r y a b ou t, n o w t h a t w e a r e i m
pr i soned in the body, l ike an oy s ter in h i s shel l. L et
me l i nger over t he memory o f s cenes wh ich have pas sed
away.
Bu t of beauty,
I
r epea t aga in t hat we saw her t he re sh in in g
W e find
in com pany with t h e celes t ial forms
;
and coming to ea r th we
trz:tt ere
f ind he r he re too , sh in ing in c learness th ro ugh the c leares t but o f wir
a p e r t u r e of sense . F o r s igh t is th e mos t p ierc ing of ou r
2::?-e
bod i ly s enses ;
t hough no t by tha t i s w i sdom se e n ; he r
bleimage.
lovel iness would have been t ranspor t ing i f there had been
a visible im age of her , an d t h e o th er ideas , if they had vis ible
counterparts , would be eq ua l ly lovely. Bu t th is i s the pr i -
vi lege of beauty, that b ein g the loveliest sh e is also th e most
palpable to s ight .
Now
he who i s no t newly in i t i a ted or
who h as become corrupted , do es not eas i ly r i se o u t of th is
wor ld to the s igh t of t rue beauty in the o the r
;
he looks on ly
a t h e r ea r th ly namesake , and i n st ead
of
being awed
at
t h e
s ight of her , he is given ove r to pleasure, an d l ike a brut ish The recol-
251
beas t he rushes on t o en joy and bege t
;
he conso r t s w i th
wantonness , and i s no t a f ra id o r ash am ed of pursu ing p lea . beauty
su re in violat ion of nature. Bu t he who se init iat ion
is ::?buts
r ecen t , and who has been t he spec t a to r o f many g lo r i es i n renewed
t h e o th e r w o r ld , is a m a z e d w h e n h e s e e s a n y o n e h a v in g ~ ~
a godl ike face or form, which is the expression of divine the sight
of
beauty ; an d a t fi rs t a sh ud de r ru ns th roug h h im, and again
ct ;f
the o ld awe s tea l s over h im
;
hen look ing upon th e f ace o f earth.
his be loved as of a god h e revere nce s h im, and i f he we re
not af ra id of be ing thou ght
a
downright m adman, h e would
sacrifice to his beloved
as
to the image of
a
god
;
hen whi le
he gazes on h im the re i s a
sort
of reac tion , an d the
shu dde r pas ses i n to an un usua l hea t and pe r sp ira t ian
;
or,
as he receives the ef f luence of beauty through the eyes , the
wing moi st ens and h e warms. And
a s
he warms , t he p a r t s
out of which the wing grew, and which had been h i ther to
c losed an d rig id , an d had prevented the wing f rom shoo t ing
fo rth , a r e m elt ed , an d a s nour i shm en t s t r ea m s upon h im,
the l ow er end o f the w ing begins t o swe l l and g row f rom the
r o o t u p w a r d s ; a n d t h e g ro w th e x t e n d s u n d e r t h e w h o le
soul- for onc e the whole wa s winged . ' Du r ing th is proc ess
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 68/99
458
The
s o d s
who wait uport th.e Gods
Phacdms. the whole soul is all in
a
s ta te of ebul l i tion an d effervescence,
SocRAre5, --which ma y be comp ared to the ir r i tat ion an d une asin ess
in the gum s at the t ime of cut t ing teeth,-bubbles up, an d
has a fee l ing of uneas iness and t i ck l ing ; bu t when in l ike
m an ner the soul i s begin ning to grow wings , the beauty
of the beloved meets h er eye and sh e receives the sens ib le
warm motion of part icles which f low towards her , therefore
called emotion
(&pos),
and i s r e f reshed and warmed by
them, and then she ceases f rom her pa in wi th joy. But
when s h e i s par ted f rom he r be loved an d h e r mo is ture fails ,
then the or i f ices of the passa ge ou t of which the w ing shoots
dr y up a nd c lose , an d in tercept the g erm of the wing
;
which,
being shu t up with the emot ion , th rob bing a s with the pu lsa-
t ions of an ar tery , p r icks th e ap er tu re which is nearest , unti l
a t leng th t he en t i r e sou l i s p ie rced and m addened and pa ined ,
and at the recol lect ion of beauty is again del ighted. A nd
from both of them together the soul i s oppressed a t the
s t rangeness of her condi t ion , and is in a g rea t s t r a i t and
excitement, an d in h e r m adn ess can nei ther s leep by n ight
no r ab ide in he r p l ace by day. And wh erever she t h inks
that she will behold the beaut ifu l one , th i th er in he r des i re
sh e runs . And when sh e ha s s een h im, and ba thed he r se l f
in the waters of beauty, he r con straint i s loosened, an d sh e
is
r ef re sh e d, a n d h a s n o m o r e p a n g s a n d p a i n s ; a n d
this
is
the sweetes t of a l l p leasures a t the t ime, and is 252
the reason wh y the soul of the lover will n ev er forsake
his beaut i fu l one , whom he es teem s above a l l
;
he has for -
go tt en mother an d b re th ren and companions, a nd he t h inks
no th ing o f the neg lec t and loss of h i s proper ty ; the ru les
and propriet ies of l i fe , on which he formerly pr ided himself ,
he now despises , and is ready to s leep l ike
a
servant ,
wherever he is a llowed, a s ne a r a s he can t o h i s des i r ed
one, who
is
the object of his worship, and the physician who
can a lone assua ge th e gre a tne ss of h i s pa in . An d th i s s ta te ,
my dear imaginary youth to whom
I
am talking, i s by men
called love , an d am ong the god s has
a
nam e at which you, in
your s implici ty , may be inc l ined to m o c k ; the re a re two
l ines in the apocryp hal wr i t ings of H o m er in which the
nanie occurs. One of them is r a the r ou t rageous , and no t
altogether metrical .
' ~ r u l t r o
del.'
T h e y a r e
as
follows :-
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 69/99
inke the
wntuw
o
the
God
whoni
the) C ~ O O S C .
45.4
‘Mor ta ls call hiin flnttering love,
Phacdnts.
But the
immor ta l s
call him winged one,
Because
thc
growing
of
wings’ is
a
necessily to him.’
S O C R I T E a .
You
ma y believe this, but not unle ss you like. At an y rate
the loves of lovers and the i r causes ar e such a s
I
have
described.
Now th e lover who is taken to be the a t tendant of Ze us i s
T h e SOUIS
better ab le to b ear the winged god, an d can en dur e a heavier
~ ~
burden ; but the a t tend ants and companions of Ares, when aDei tywho
un de r the influence of love, if the y fancy that they ha ve been
~ ” , ” ~
at all wronged, are ready to kill and put an end to themselves
nature.
a n d their beloved. And he who follows in the train o f an y
oth er god, while h e is unspoiled and the impression lasts ,
honours and imitates him,
as
far as he i s ab le ; and af ter the
m anne r of h is Go d he behaves in h is in tercourse wi th h is
beloved and w ith the res t of the world d urin g the f irst per iod
of his earthl y existence. Ev ery on e chooses his love from
the ran ks of beauty acco rding to his character, and this
h e
makes his god, and fashions and adorns as a sor t of image
which he is to fall dow n and w orship. T h e fol lowers of
Ze us desire that their beloved should have a soul l ike him ;
and therefore they seek out some one of a philosophical and
imperial n ature, an d when th ey have found him and loved
him, the y d o all they can to confirm such a nature in him,
and if they have no expe rience of such a disposition
hitherto, the y learn of an y on e who can teach then-,, an d
themselves follow in the sam e way. And the y have the less
253 difficulty in f inding the nature of their own god in them-
selves , beca use they have been compelled to gaze intensely
on h im ; the ir recollect ion cl ings to him, and th ey become
possesse d of him, and rcceive from him their charac ter and
disposition,
so
far
as
man can participate in
God.
T h e
qualit ies of their god the y at tr ibute to the beloved, wh erefore
they love him all the m ore, and
i f
l ike the Bacchic Nymphs,
they draw inspi ra tion f rom Zeus , they po ur out the i r own
fountain upo n him, wantiiig to make him a s like a s possible to
thei r own god. But those who
are
the fol lowers of H e re seek
T he y
walk
a royal love, an d when the y have found him the y d o ju s t the 2:k;:ys
same with him ; and in like manner the followers of Apollo, god.
’
Or,
rcxding
m f p d $ o m w ,
’
the
niovcrnent of wings.‘
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 70/99
460 The two
steeds
and the
chariokev.
P~acJnrs.
an d of every oth er god walking in the ways of the i r god,
SOLRATES
seek a love who i s t o be made l ike h im whom they se rve ,
an d when they hav e found him, the y themselves imi tate the i r
god, and persuade the i r love to do the same , and educa te
h im i nt o t he m a n ne r a nd na t u r e o f t he god a s fa r a s t he y
each can
;
for no feel ings of env y o r jea lou sy a r e ente r -
ta ined by them tow ards the i r be loved, but they do the i r
utmost to create in him the greatest l ikeness of themselves
and of the god whom the y honour . T h u s f ai r and b li ss fu l
to the be loved i s the des i re o f th e inspi red lover , an d t he
initiation of which
I
speak into the myster ies of t rue love,
if he be ca pture d by the lover a nd t he i r pu rpo se i s e f fec ted.
Now th e be loved i s taken capt ive in th e fo llowing man ner : -
As
I sa id a t the b egin ning of th i s tale,
I
div ided each so u l
in to thr ee -two hor ses and a cha r io t ee r ; a nd on e o f the
hor ses was good and the o the r bad : the d iv i s ion may
re-
main, but
I
ha ve no t ye t e xp l a i ne d i n w ha t t he g oodne s s
o r badness of e i ther cons is ts , a nd to tha t I will n ow proceed .
T h e r i gh t- ha nd ho r s e i s up r igh t a nd c le an ly m a de
;
h e h a s
a lof ty neck an d a n aqui line no se
;
his colour i s whi te , an d
h i s e ye s da r k ; he i s a l ove r
of
honour a nd m ode s t y a nd
temperance , and the fo l lower o f t r ue g lo ry ; he needs no
touch of the whip, but is guided by word and admonit ion
only . T h e o th e r is
a
crooked lum ber in g animal , pu t toge th er
anyhow; he h as a sho r t th ick n ec k; h e i s fla t-faced an d of
a
dark colour , wi th grey eyes and blood- red complexion
I ;
th e mate of insolence an d pr ide , sh ag-ea red an d deaf , ha rdly
yie lding to whip and spur . No w wh en th e char io teer be-
holds the v is ion of love , and ha s h is whole soul warmed
through sense , and is fu l l of the pr ickings and t ickl ings
of
des ir e, t he obed ien t s teed , t hen a s a lways unde r the gove rn- 254
ment o f shame , re f r ains f rom leap ing o n the be loved ; bu t
the o the r , heed le ss of t he p r i cks and o f the b lows of the
whip, p lunges a nd ru ns away, g ivin g a ll ma nn er of t rouble
to h is companion an d the char io teer , wh om h e forces to
approach the be loved and to r emem ber the
joys
of love.
T h ey a t f ir st indignant ly op pos e him an d will not be urge d
on to do te rr ib le an d unlawful de ed s ; but a t l as t, wh en he
pers is t s in p laguing them, the y yield a nd agree to do as he
' Or with grey and blood-shot
eyes.
*
.
T h e c h a -
racters of
steeds.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 71/99
Th
victory
over
the u n m 4
steed.
46
bids them. And now they ar e a t the spot an d behold the
P h d r u r .
flashing beauty of the beloved
;
which when the charioteer
saaATr9.
sees , his memory
is
carr ied to the t rue beauty, whom he
A t t h e
beho lds in com pany with M odesty l ike an image placed upon
vision
of
a holy pedestal . H e sees her, bu t he is afraid and fal ls
~~~d~~
backw ards in adora tion, and by his fall is compelled to pull
tionedsteed
back t he re ins with such violence as to br in g both the s teeds
~~~o~~
on their haunches, the on e wi l ling and unresis ting, the unruly but
is re-
on e very unwil l ing; and w hen they have go ne back a l it tle, EEbY
the on e is overcome with shame an d wonder, and his whole
panionand
soul
is
bathed in perspirat ion
;
he other , when th e pain is
tL::ter.
over which the bridle and the fal l had given him, having
with difficulty taken br ea th, is full of w rath a n d reproa ches,
which he heaps upon the charioteer and his fel low-steed, for
want of courage and manhood, declar ing that they have been
false to their agree me nt an d guil ty of dese rt ion. Again they
refuse, an d again he urges them on, and will scarce yield to
their pr ay er that he would wait unti l an oth er t ime.
the appointed hour comes, they make as if they had for- t:isF, , d
got ten, and he reminds them, f ight ing an d neighing a nd
worse.
dragging them on, unt i l a t length he on the same thoughts
intent, forces them to draw ne ar again. And when they ar e
ne ar he s toops his head and puts up his tail , and takes the
bit in his teeth and pulls shamelessly . T h e n the charioteer
is worse
off
than ever; he fal ls back l ike a racer at the
barrier, and with a st i l l more violent wrench drags the bit
out of the teeth of the wild steed and covers his abusive
tongue an d jaw s with blood, an d forces his legs an d haunches
to
the ground and punishes him sorely. And when this ha s
happened seve ral t imes an d the villain ha s ceased fr6m his
wanton w ay, he is tamed an d hum bled, and follows the
will of th e charioteer, an d when he see s the beautiful on e
h e is ready to die of fear. And from that t ime forward
the soul of the lover follows the beloved in modesty and
holy fear.
A n d
so
the beloved who, like
a
god, ha s received every
true and loyal service
from
his lover, not in pre tenc e but in
reali ty, being also himself of a nature friendly
to
his ad.
mirer ', if in former d ay s he has blushed to own his passion
Omitting
tlr
+&bv
dcyw T ~ Y
1hhw.
W h e n The
con-
255
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 72/99
462 The jerfeci’ ‘~v’siait
f
the beloved.
Phizednu.
and tu rned away h is lover , b c b u s e h i s you th fu l companions
socRATes.r
others s landerous ly to ld h im that he would be d i sgraced ,
now as ye ars advance , a t the appoin ted age an d t ime,
is
led
T h e perfect to receive him into communion. For f a te wh ich has o rda ined
communion th a t there shal l be n o f r i endship am ong th e evil ha s a l so
of the
good. ordained tha t the re shal l ever be f r i endship am ong the good.
An d the beloved w hen h e ha s rece ived h im in to comm union
an d in timacy , i s qu i te amazed a t th e good-wi ll o f th e lover
;
he recognises tha t the insp i red f r iend i s wor th a l l o the r
f r iends o r k insmen ; hey hav e noth in g of f r i endship in them
worthy to be com pared with his. A nd w he n this feel ing
con t inues and he
is
ne are r to h im an d em brac es him, in
gymnas t ic exerc i ses an d a t o th er t imes of meet ing , the n th e
fountain
of
t ha t st ream, wh ich Z e u s when he w as i n l ove
wi th Ga nym ede named Des i re , overflows upo n th e lover ,
and some en t e r s i n to h i s sou l, and some wh en h e
is
filled
flows out again ; and as a b reeze o r an echo reboun ds from
the smooth rocks an d r e tu rns whence i t came, so d o e s t h e
s t ream of beauty , pass ing thro ugh the e yes which ar e the
windows of the soul, come hack to th e beauti fu l o n e ; the re
a r r iv ing and qu i cken ing t he pas sages of the wings , water ing
them an d incl ining them to grow, an d f il ling th e soul of t h e
beloved also wi th love. A nd t hu s he loves , but he knows
no t w ha t ; he doe s no t under s t and and cannot exp la in h i s
own s tate
;
he appears to have caught the infect ion of bl ind-
Thereflec- ness f rom ano the r ; t he l over i s h i s mi r ro r i n whom he is
tion of the
be,ovedin
beholding himself , but he
is
not aware of this.
W h e n h e
thelover. i s wi th the lover , both cease from their pain, but when he is
away then he l ongs as he
is
longed for, and has love’s image,
love for love {An teros) lod gin g in his breast , which h e cal ls
an d bel ieves to b e not love but fr iendship only, an d his
des i re
is
as the des i re of th e o ther , bu t weak er
;
h e w a n t s
to
see him, touch him, kiss, embrace him, a n d probably no t long
afterwards his desi re is accompl ished. W h e n they mee t, t he
wanton s teed of the lover ha s a word to say to the cha-
Somesatis-
r io te er ; he would l ike to hav e a l it tl e p lea sure in re tu rn for
2 5 6
many pains ,
but
the wanton s teed of the beloved sa ys not
pleasure a word , for h e i s burs t in g wi th pass ion which h e u nde rs tand s
also
no t
;-he th rows h i s arm s roun d the lover an d embra ces h im
as h i s deares t f r i end ; and , when they a re s i de
by
s ide , he is
faction
of
granted.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 73/99
463
not in a state in which he can refuse the lover anything, if he
Phacdrws.
ask hi f i ; a l though his fel low-steed a nd the char ioteer oppose SOCRATES
him wi th the a rgum ents of sham e an d reason. Af te r th i s Thehar-
their happiness depends upon their se lf -control
;
if the better
KrY
Of
e lements of the n i ind which lead to order and phi losophy
prevail , then the y pa ss their l ife he re in happiness an d har-
mo ny-m asters of themselves an d orderly-enslaving th e
vicious an d eman cipat ing th e vir tuous e lements of the soul ;
and when the end
comes, they are l ight and winged for
f l ight , having conquered in one of the three heavenly or
t ruly Olympian victor ies
;
nor can human discipl ine or divine
inspirat ion confer any greater blessing on man than this .
I f
The life
of
on the o ther hand, they leave phi losophy and lead the lower
~ ~ q s h o e p h y
l ife of ambit ion, the n probably, af ter w ine o r in som e othe r
lower
lire
of
care less h m r , the two wanton animals take the two souls when
ambit ion .
off the i r gua rd an d br ing them toge ther, and they accompl ish
that d esire of their hear ts which to the m any is bliss; and
this having o nc e enjoyed they cont inue to enjoy, yet rarely
because they have not the approval of th e whole soul . T h ey
too ar e dear , but not
so
dea r to o ne ano the r
as
the others ,
e i ther a t the t ime of the i r love o r a fterwards . T h ey consider
tha t fh ey have given and taken f rom each o ther th e most
sacred pledges, an d they ma y not break them an d fal l into
enmity. At last they pas s out of the body, unwinged, but
eag er to soar , an d thu s obta in no mean reward of love and
madness. F o r those who hav e once begun the heavenward
pi lgrimage ma y not go down aga in to da rknes s and th e
jou rne y beneath th e e ar th, but they l ive in l ight a lw ay s;
happy companions in the i r p i lgr image , and when the t ime T h e e n d o f
comes at which they receive their wings they have th e s am e
22
plumage because of their love.
T h u s grea t a r e the heavenly bless ings which the f r iendship
of a lover will confer upon you, my youth. W h e re a s th e
a t t a c hm e n t
of
th e non- lover, which is alloyed with a w orldly
pruden ce and ha s wor ld ly and n igga rd ly ways o f do l ing ou t
benefits, will breed in your soul those vulgar qualit ies which
the populace applaud, will send you bowl ing round the ear th
257 during a per iod of nine thousand years , and leave you a fool
in the world below.
And thus , dear Eros , I have made an d paid my recantat idn,
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 74/99
464 Lysias and Phuedrus.
Piraedwr.
as well and as fairly a s I cou ld ; m ore especia l ly in th e
*MTE5
ma tter of th e poetical f igures which I was compelled to use,
PHrEDRus.
because Phaedrus would have them
'.
And now forg ive the
Thepoet i -
past and accept the present , and be gracious and merciful to
cal
form is
on l y i n -
me, and do not in th ine a ng er dep r ive me of sight, o r take
tended to from me the ar t of love which thou hast given me, but gr an t
please
phsedrus, that I may be yet more es teemed in the eyes of the fair .
And i f Phaedrus or
I
myself said anything rude in our f i rs t
speeches , blame Lysias , who is the father of the brat , and
let
u s
have no m ore of h is proge ny; b id h im s tudy philo-
sophy, l ike h is bro ther Polemarchus ; and then h is lover
Ph aed rus will n o lon ger hal t between two opinions , but
will dedicate himself wholly to love and to philosophical
discourses.
The speech Phaedr. I join in t he p rayer , Socrates , an d say with you, i f
thanthatof
this be for my good, may yo ur w ord s come to pass. But
Lysias, who why did you make your second ora t ion so much finer than
will be out
of conceit
is far finer
with
him-
self.
The
poli-
ticians are
fond of
writing.
the- f i rs t?
I
wonder why. And
I
begin to be afraid that
I
shall lose conceit of Lysias , an d th at h e will a pp ea r tame
in comparison, even if he be willing to put an ot he r a s fine
and as long as yours in to the f ie ld , which I doub t . For
quite lately on e of your poli t icians was ab usin g him on this
very account
;
and cal led him a I speech-writer
'
again and
again.
So
that a feeling of pr ide may probably ind uce him
to give up wri t ing speeche s .
SOC.
W h a t a very amusing notion But
I
th ink , my young
man, that you ar e m uch m istaken in yo ur f r iend if you
imagine that he is f r ightened at a l i t t le noise ; and, possibly,
you th ink tha t h is assai lan t wa s in ea rn es t?
Phaedr. I
thought, Socra tes , tha t he was. An d you are
aware tha t the grea tes t and mos t inf luent ia l s ta tesmen are
a s h a me d of writ ing speeches and leaving them in a writ ten
form, lest they should be called Sophists by posterity.
SOCYou
seem to be unconscious , Phaedrus , tha t the
'sweet elbow
* '
of
the p roverb is r eal ly the long a rm
of
t h e
Ni le . And you app ear to be equal ly una wa re of the fact tha t
1 See a34 C.
' A proverb, like
'
he grapes are sour,' applied t o pleasures which cannot be
had, m eaning sweet things which, like the elbow, are out of the reach of
the
mon th. Th e promised ~ I S U I
tarns
out to be
a
long and tedious &air.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 75/99
Thr zinmorfalily
of
a?il/zoi-shzp.
46
5
th is sweet elbow of thei rs is al so a long arm ,
nothing of which our great pol i t icians are
so
fond as of
socrurps,
wri t ing spee che s and beque ath ing them to pos ter ity. And
PH*KDRUS.
they ad d the i r admirers' nam es a t the top of the wr it ing ,
out
They
are
always re-
their own
praises in
of laws.
F o r t h e r e
is Phacdms.
of
gra t i tude
to
them. hearsing
258
Phaedr . W h a t d o y ou m e a n ? I d o not unders tand .
soc.
W hy, do you no t know tha t when
a
politician writes,
the form
Phaedr .
How so?
SOC.
hy , he beg ins in t h is m ann er : ' B e i t enac ted by
the senate, the people, or both, on the mot ion of a cer tain
person, ' who
is
o u r a u t h o r
;
a n d
so
put t ing on a serious face,
he proceeds to d i sp lay h i s own wisdom to h i s admirers in
what is often
a
long an d tedious composi tion. Now what is
that
sort of
th ing but a regu lar p iece of au tho rsh ip?
he begins with the nam es of h i s approv ers ?
Phaedr . T r u e .
SOC.And i f the law is f inal ly approved, then the author
leaves th e theat re in high delight
;
but
if
th e law is rejected
and he i s do ne ou t of h i s speech-making , and not thought
good enough to wr ite , then h e a nd h i s par ty a re in mourning .
Phaedr . Ve ry t rue .
SOC. o far a re they f rom despising , o r ra th er so highly do
Phaedr . N o doub t.
SOC.And when the k ing o r o ra to r has t he power , a s L y Theybe
c u r g u s o r S o l o n o r D a r i u s h a d, of at taining an immortal i ty gy;'lke
of au tho rsh ip in a s tate , is he not thought by poster i ty , when
they see his composi t ions , and does he not think himself ,
while h e is yet alive, to be a god ?
they value th e pract ice of wri ting.
Phaedr . Ve ry t rue .
SOC.
hen do you . t h ink t ha t any one o f t h i s c l a s s , how
ever i l l -disposed, would reproach Lysias wi th beiAg an
au tho r
?
Phaedr. Not upon y ou r v iew; for accord ing
to Y O U
h e
would be cast ing a s lu r upon his own favourite pursui t.
SOC.
n y o n e m a y s e e th a t t h e r e
is
no d i sgrace in the
mere fact of writ ing.
Phaedr. Certainly not .
s o c . T h e d i sg race beg ins when a m an wr i te s no t well, but
VOL. 1. ~h
badly.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 76/99
466
The
tale
of the p-asshopper.~.
What
mo-
tive is
higher than
the love of
discourse?
The grass-
hoppers
will laugh
at us if we
sleep.
The grass-
hoppers
were
ori-
ginally m en
who died
from the
love of
song.
Phaedv.
Clearly.
SOC.
nd what is well an d w ha t is badly-need we ask
Lys ias , o r any o ther poet or ora tor , wh o ever wrote o r will
wri te ei ther a poli tical o r a ny othe r work, in metre o r ou t of
metre, poet or prose writer, to teach
u s
this
?
F o r what should a m an l ive if not for
the pleasures of discourse
?
Su re ly not for th e sa ke of bodily
pleasures, which almost alwa ys have previou s pain as a con-
dition of them, a nd therefore a re r ightly cal led s lavish.
A n d
I
believe that the g rass-
hoppers ch i r ruping af ter the i r man ner in the heat of the sun
q g
over. our heads are ta lk ing to one anoth er an d looking down
at us. What would they say i f they saw that we, l ike the
many, are not conversing, but slumbering at mid-day, lulled
by their voices, too indolent to th in k ? W ou ld they not have
a right to laugh at
u s ?
They migh t imag ine tha t we were
slaves, who, coming to rest at a place of resort of theirs, like
she ep l ie as leep at noon aroun d the well. But if the y se e
u s
discoursing, and like O dy sse us sailing past them, dea f to
their siren voices, they may perhap s, out of respect,
g’
w e
u s
of the gif ts which they receive from th e go ds tha t the y ma y
impart them to men.
Plzaedr. Need we ?
SOC. he re i s time enough.
Phaedr.
W h a t g ifts d o yo u m e a n ?
I
never hea rd
of
any.
SOC
lover of music like yourself ought surely to have
heard the s tory of the grasshoppers , w ho ar e said to have
been human beings in a n age before the Muses . An d when
the M uses came and song appeared they were ravished wi th
de lig ht ; a nd s inging always, never thought of eating an d
drinking, until a t last in the ir forgetfulness the y died.
And
now they live again in th e gra ssh op pe rs ; and th is is th e
return which the Mu ses mak e to them-they nei ther hunger ,
nor thi rs t, bu t f rom the hour of the i r b ir th a re a lways s i n g
ing , and never ea t ing or dr inking
;
and when they d ie they
go
and inform the Muses in heaven who honours them on
earth . Th ey win the love of Terps ich ore for the danc ers by
their report of them; of Erato for the lovers , and of the
other Muses for those who do them honour, according to
the several ways of ho no ur ing them ;-of Calliope th e eldest
Muse and o f U rania w ho is next to her, for the philoso-
phers, of whose music t he g rass ho pp ers make report to
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 77/99
T h e mlcs wi+itiuqand .pecrA.
467
t he m ; f or t he s e a r e t he M us es
who
a r e ch ief ly conc e rned P/latdt.ttr.
with heaven an d though t , d iv ine as wel l as human, an d th ey Socnr+Es,
have the sweetes t u t te rance .
ought a lways
to
t a lk an d n ot to s leep a t mid-day.
For many r easons , t hen , we PH*EDR"s.
Plzaedr. L e t
u s
talk.
SOC. ha l l we discuss t he ru les of wr i ting an d speech as
Phaedr. Very good .
SOC. n good spea k ing shou ld no t th e mind of t h e s p e a k e r
know the t r u th o f the ma t t e r abou t which he is go i ng to s pe a k ?
Phaedr. And yet , Socrates ,
I
have hea rd tha t he who
sthe he
would be a n or a to r has no thing to do wi th t rue just ice , but
z:Ttr-
only with that which is l ike ly to be approved by the many haveknow-
who s it i n judgm ent ; nor w i th th e t r u ly good o r honourable , ledge?
but o nly wi th opinion about them, an d tha t f rom opinion
comes persuasion, an d not f rom the t ru th .
SOC. h e w or ds o f the w is e a r e no t t o be s e t a s i de ; f o r
t he r e is probab ly s om e t h i ng in t h e m ; a nd t he re f o re t he
mean ing o f th i s say ing
is
not hast i ly to be dismissed.
we were p ropos ing
?
2 6 0
Phaedr. V e r y t rue .
SOC.
e t u s put the ma t t e r t hus : -Supp ose tha t
I
per-
Ofcourse.
suaded you to buy a hor se and go to the wars . Ne i the r o f
the
u s knew wha t a horse was l ike , but I knew that you bel ieved good for
a hor se to be o f t ame an ima l s the on e which has the longes t Ei2 zl:
ears.
put
a
horse
in
the place
of an
ass.
Plzaedr.
T h a t would be r idiculous.
SOC.
h e re i s som ethin g m ore r id iculous com ing :-Sup-
pose , fur ther , tha t in sober earnes t
I,
having pe r suaded you
of this, we nt a nd composed a spee ch in ho nou r
of
an ass ,
whom I en ti tl ed a hor se , beg inn ing : ' A nob le an ima l and a
most useful possession, espec ia l ly in war , an d you may ge t
on his back an d f ight, an d he wi ll ca r ry baggage o r any-
thing.'
Phaedr.
H o w r id i cu lous
SOC.
i d i c u lous Y e s ; bu t is not even
a
r idiculous fr iend
be t t er t ha t a c unn i ng e ne m y
?
Plzaedr. Certainly.
SOC. nd w he n t he o r a t o r i n s t e a d of put t ing an
ass
in
the place of a horse, puts good for evi l , being himself as
ignoran t
of
t he i r t r ue na tu r e as the c i ty on which he imposes
~ h 2
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 78/99
468
Rhetonc an art
of
enchantment.
Th e mere
knowledge
of
the truth
not enough
t o give the
art of per-
suasion.
But neither
is the art
of persua-
sion sepa-
rable from
the truth.
T h e r h e t e
rician can
produce
any impres-
sion which
he pleases,
in any place
orupon any
occasion.
is ignorant ; nd having studied the not ions of the m ult itude,
fa lsely persuades them not about ‘ t h e shadow o f an ass ,’
which he confounds with
a
horse, but about good which he
confo und s with evil,-what will be th e har ves t which rheto ric
will be l ikely to gat he r after th e sow ing of that se ed
?
Phacdr. T h e reverse of good.
SOC ut perhaps rhetor ic has been get t ing too roughly
handled by
us,
and she might answer
:
What amaz ing non-
sense you ar e talking A s if
I
forced any man to learn to
speak in ignorance of the t ruth W ha tev er my advice may
be worth,
I
should have told him to arr ive at the truth f irst ,
an d then come to me. At the same t ime I boldly assert that
mere know ledge of the t ruth wil l not give you th e ar t
of
persuasion.
Phaedr. T h e r e is reason in the lady’s defence of herself .
SOC.
uite t ru e; if only the o the r argu m ent s which remain
to be brought up bear her wi tness tha t s he is a n a r t a t
all. But
I
seem to hear them arraying themselves on the
opposite side, declaring tha t sh e s pe ak s falsely, an d that
rhetoric is a mere rout ine and t r ick, not an ar t . L o a
Spar tan appears , and says tha t there never
is
nor ever will
be a real art of speak ing which is divorced from th e truth.
Phaedr. And what a r e these a rguments , Socra tes ? Bring 261
them out that we may examine them.
SOC.
ome out, fa ir chi ldren, an d convince Ph aed rus , who
is the fath er of similar beauties, that he will nev er be ab le to
speak about anything as he ought to speak un less he have a
know ledge of philosophy.
And let Pha edru s answer you.
Phaedr. Pu t the quest ion.
SOCs not rhetoric, taken generally, a universal art of
enchant ing the mind by arguments ; which is practised not
only in cour ts and publ ic assemblies, but in pr ivate houses
also, hav ing to d o with all ma tters, gre at a s well a s small,
good an d bad alike, and is in all equally r ight, and equally
to be esteemed-that is wh at you have hea rd
?
Phaedr.
Nay, not exactly th at ; I should say ra ther that
I
hav e heard the art confined to speak ing an d writ ing in law-
suits, and to speak ing in public assemblies-not extend ed
farther.
SOC h e n I suppose that you have only heard of the
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 79/99
Th Rhetorician nt i rs t know dzfiwnces
469
rhe tor ic of Ne s tor a nd Odysseus , which they composed in
Phncdrus.
t he ir l e i su re hou rs when a t T roy , and never o f t he rhe to r i c sKaAms,
Phnedr.
N o more t han o f Ne s to r and Odysseus , un les s
Gorgias
G o r g i a s is your Nes to r , and ‘Fhrasymachus o r Th eod oru s
~~~~~~-
of Pa l am edes
?
PHAEDXUS.
y o u r O d y s s e u s . or The-
But let us leave them.
doruslnthe
disguise of
And do you te ll me, ins tead , wh at a re p lain ti ff an d d efen dan t Nestor and
Odysseus.
doing in a l awcour t-are the y not con tend ing?
SOC. erh ap s t ha t i s my mean ing .
Phaedr. Exact ly so.
SOC.
bout the ju s t an d unjus t -tha t
is
the
mat ter in
Phaedr.
Yes .
SOC. nd a professor of the ar t will make the same th ing
appear t o t he s am e per sons t o be a t one t ime ju st , a t ano the r
time, if he is so inclined, to be unjust
?
dispute
?
Phaedr.
Exact ly .
SOC
nd w hen he spea ks in the assembly, he will m ake
the sam e th ings seem good to th e c i ty a t o ne t ime, and a t
ano ther t ime the reve rse of good
?
Phaedr.
T h a t
is
t rue.
SOC.
H av e we no t hea rd o f t he E lea ti c Pa l am edes (Zeno) ,
Zen0 the
who has an a r t o f speak ing by wh ich he makes t he same
th ings ap pe ar to h i s h ea rer s like an d unlike , one and many,
at res t and in mot ion ?
Phaedr.
V e r y t ru e .
SOC.
h e a r t of disputat ion, then,
is
not confined to the
cour t s and the assembly , bu t
is
one and the same in every
use of l anguage
;
th is
is
the ar t , i f there be such an ar t , The de-
which
is
able to f ind a l ikene ss of eve ryth ing to which
a ~ ~ t
l ikeness can be found, an d draw s in to the l igh t o f day the
truth, be-
cause he
has to find
ikenesses and d i sguises which are used by o t he rs?
a
likeness
haedr. H o w do you mean ?
SOC.
e t m e p u t t h e m a t t e r t h u s i W h e n w ill th e r e b e
izkyth*
mo re cha nce of deception-when th e d i fference i s l a rge o r learnto
deceive by
degrees.
mall
?
262
Phaedr.
W h e n the d i ff erence i s smal l.
SOC.
nd you will be less l ikely to be discovered in
p a s s i n g b y d e g r e e s in t o t h e o t h e r e x t r e m e t h a n w h e n
YOU go
al l at once
?
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 80/99
4 o
Phaediws.
SOCRATES,
PHAEDRUS.
Criticistit of the two
speeches.
Phaedr.
Of course .
Soc.
H e, then , w ho would deceive o thers , an d not be de .
ceived, must exact ly know the real l ikenesses a nd d ifferences
o f t h ings?
Phacdr.
H e m ust.
SOC. nd if he is i gnoran t
of
t h e t r u e n a t u r e o f a n y
subjec t, how can he detec t the gre a te r or l ess de gre e of
l ikeness in other things to that of which by the hypothesis
h e is i gnoran t ?
Phacdr. H e c an no t.
SOC.
nd when men a re dece ived and the ir no tions a re a t
variance with realities, it is clear tha t the er ror s l ips in
through resemblances ?
Phaedr. Yes, that i s the way.
SOC. he n he who wou ld be a m as t e r of t he a r t mus t
unders t and the r ea l na tu re o f eve ry th ing
;
or he wi l l never
know e i the r how to m ake the g rad ua l dep ar tu re from t ru th
into the opposi te of t ruth which is effected by the help
of
resemblances , o r how to avoid i t ?
Phncdu.
H e wi ll no t .
SOC.
e then , who being igno rant of the t ru th a ims a t
appearances , wi l l only at tain an ar t of rhetoric which is
r i d i cu lous and i s no t an a r t a t a l l ?
Phaedr. T ha t may be expec ted .
SOC. h a l l I prop ose tha t we look for exa mp les of ar t an d
want of ar t , accord ing to our not ion of them, in the spee ch
of Lys ias which you have in your hand , and in my own
speech ?
Phaedu. Noth ing cou ld be bet ter
;
a n d i n d e e d I th ink tha t
ou r p revious a rgumen t has been t oo abs t rac t and wan t ing
in
i l lustrat ions.
SOC. e s
;
and the two sp eec hes happen to a f fo rd a very
good example of the way in which the s pe ak er who knows
the t ru th may, wi thout a n y ser ious purpose , s tea l awa y the
he ar t s o f h i s hearers . Th is p iece of good-fortune
I
at t r ibute
to the local de i t i es ; and , perh aps , the pro ph ets of t h e M u s e s
who a r e s i ng ing over ou r heads may have impart ed t he i r
inspiration to me. F o r I
do
not imagine tha t I h a v e a n y
rhetorical ar t of my own,
Pltnedr. G r a n t e d
;
if you will only p leas e
to
get
on.
Illustra-
tions of
skill and
want
of
skill from
the speech
of Lysias.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 81/99
There
shouldbe order anddivisiorz o f classes
i na
speech. 47
I
SOC up po se that you read me the f irst words of Lysias’ t’hmd,.trs.
Phaedr.
‘YOUnow how matters s tand with me, and how,
PHAEDRrs.
speech. Si lCRAT@s,
a s I conceive, they might be arranged for our common
interest ; a n d I maintain that
I
ought not to fail in my suit ,
because
I
am not your lover .
SOC no ug h :-Now, sh all I point out the rhetor ical er ror
of those words ?
Phaedr . Yes.
SOC. v e r y o n e is aware tha t about some th ings we a re Therheton-
clan should
distinguish
Phaedr . think that I unde r s t a nd y o u ; but will
you
thingssuch
as iron and
soc. W h e n an y one spea ks of iron an d s i lver , i s not the
which
we
F o r lovers repent--’
263
agreed, w he rea s about oth er things we differ .
expla in yourse l f?
silver, about
are agreed,
from things
Phaedr . Certainly.
such
as
SOC
u t w he n a ny one s pe a ks of jus tice an d g ood ness we
Justiceand
par t company and a re a t odds wi th one another and wi th
aboutwhich
same thing present in the minds of a l l ?
goodness,
ourselves ? we are dis-
Greed.
Phaedr . Precisely.
SOC. h e n in some th ings we agree , but not in o thers ?
Phaedr. T h a t is true.
SOC n which ar e we more l ikely to be deceived, an d in
Phaedr . Clearly, in the uncertain class.
SOC. hen the rhe tor ic ian ought to make a regular
division, and acquire a distinct notion
of
both c lasses, as
well of tha t in which the ma ny err , as of that in which they
do n ot e r r ?
Phaedr . H e wh o made such a d is tinc tion would have an
excellent principle.
SOC.
es ; and in the nex t p l ace he mus t have a keen
eye for the observat ion of par t iculars in speaking, and not
make a mistake about the c lass to which they are to be
referred.
which has rhetor ic the greater power ?
Phaedr. Certainly.
SOC No w to which class do es love belong-to the Lovebe-
Phaedr .
To the d ebatab le, cl ea rl y; for if not,
d o YOU class.
longs
to
the
debatable
eba table o r to the undisputed c lass ?
th ink tha t love would have al lowed you to say as you did,
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 82/99
4 7 2
Phmu‘rus.
Lysias
should
have be-
gun, as I
did,
by
de-
fining love.
H e begins
at the end.
No order
or
arrange-
ment of
parts
in his
discourse.
Furthy
c ~ i t i c i s ~ ~ ~ s
f
Lysias.
tha t he i s an evi l both to th e lover and the be loved, an d a lso
the greatest possible good ?
B ut wil l you tel l me wh eth er I def ined love
a t the beginning of my speech? for , having been in an
ecstasy, I cannot wel l remember .
Soc.
Capital .
Phaedr. Yes , indeed
;
hat you did , an d no mis take .
SOC. h e n I pe rce ive tha t t he Nymphs o f Ache lous and
P an the son of H erm es , wh o inspi red me, we re fa r be t te r
rhe toric ians tha n Ly sias the so n of Cephalus . Ala s how
infer ior to them he i s
B u t pe r ha ps I a m m i s ta ke n ; a nd
Ly sias a t the comm encement of h is lover’s spee ch did ins i s t
on our suppos ing love to be some th ing o r o the r which he
fanc ied him to be, and a tco rdi ng to th is model h e fashioned
and f ramed the remainder of h is d iscourse .
S uppos e w e
read his beginning over aga in :
Phaedr. I f you p lease ;
but you will not f ind what you
want.
SOC. ead, tha t I may hav e h i s ex ac t words .
Phaedr.
‘Y ou know how m at te r s s tan d wi th me, and how,
as I conce ive , they might be a r ran ge d for
our common 264
i n t e r e s t ;
a n d I maintain
I
ought not to fa i l in my sui t
because I am no t yo ur lover, for lovers re pe nt of the k ind-
ne sse s which they have show n, w he n th eir love is over .’
SOC. e r e he a ppe a r s t o h a ve done j u s t t he r e ve r s e o f
w ha t he o ug h t ; f or he h a s begun a t t he e nd , a nd
is
swim.
ming on his back throug h the flood to th e p lace of s ta r ting.
His
add ress to th e fa ir you th beg ins wh ere the love r would
ha ve e nde d . A m
I
no t right, s w e e t P h a e d r u s ?
Phaedr. Yes , indeed, So c ra t e s
;
he do es begin a t t he end .
SOC. h en a s to the o the r top ic s- ar e they no t th rown
d o w n a n y h o w ? Is t h e re a n y prin cip le in t h e m ? W h y
should the nex t top ic fo l low nex t in o rde r , o r any o the r
topic? I cannot he lp f ancy ing in my ignorance tha t he
wrote
off
boldly jus t wha t cam e in to h is head, but
I
d a r e s a y
t ha t
YOU
would recognize
a
rhe tor ica l necess i ty in the
success ion of the severa l par t s of the composi t ion ?
Phaedr . You have too good an op inion
of
m e if
you
think
t ha t I hav e a n y such ins ight in to h is pr inc iples of compo-
sition.
SOC.
t
any ra te , you will a l low that every discourse
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 83/99
Reca&hZatio?z.
4 7 3
ought to be a l iving creature , hav ing a body of i ts own an d a pht im.
head and fee t ; the re shou ld be a middle , beginning , and
socnArbs,
e n d , a d a p te d t o o n e a n o t h e r a n d t o th e w h o l e ?
PHAEDRUS.
Phaedr.
Certainly.
Every dis-
course
soc.
Can th is be sa id of the d iscourse
of
Lys ias
?
S e e
should be
wh ether you can find an y m ore connexion in h is wo rds than a living
in th e epita ph which is said by some to have been inscr ibed
g
on the grav e of Midas the Phrygian . body, h a d ,
and feet.
Phaedr.
W h a t is t h e r e r e ma r k a b l e in t h e e p it ap h ?
SOC.t i s
as
follows :-
‘I am a maiden of bronze and lie
on
the tomb of Mid as ;
So long as water flows and tall trees grow,
So long here on this spot by his sad tomb abiding,
I shall declare to passrs-by that Midas sleeps below.’
Th e dis-
course of
Lysias had
no more ar-
rangement
Now in th i s rhyme whe ther
a
l ine comes first
or
comes last,
iksl‘:f
as you will perceive, makes no difference.
epitaphs.
Plzaedr.
Y o u
are
m ak ing fun of that orat ion
of
ours.
SOC.
W e l l ,
I
will sa y no more abou t you r f riend’s speech
lest I shou ld g ive of fence to yo u ; a l though I think that i t
migh t fu rn i sh many o the r examples
of
w h a t a ma n o u g h t
B u t I will proceed to the other speech,
which, as
I
think, is also suggest ive to s tud en ts of rhetor ic .
265
ra ther to avoid .
Phaedr. I n w h at w a y ?
SOC
he two speeches , as you may remember , were un-
l ike ; the on e a rgued tha t the lover and the o the r tha t the
non-lover ought to be accepted.
Phaedr.
And right manfully.
SOC.
ou
s h o u l d r a t h e r s a y ‘ ma d l y ; ’ a n d ma d ne ss w a s
Phaedr.
Yes.
SOC.
nd o f ma dness the re were two k inds
;
on e produced
by hum an inf irmi ty , the o th er w as a d iv ine release
of
the
soul from th e yok e of custom a nd convention.
the argu m en t of them, for , as I said, ‘ ove is
a
madness.’
Phaedr. True .
Soc.
T h e d iv ine m adne ss w as subdiv ided in to four k inds ,
FoursuMi-
visions
of
prophetic, initiatory, poetic, erotic, having four gods pre-
, , ,dries+
s id ing over them
;
he first w as th e inspiration of Apol10, th e
prophetic,
second that of Dionysus, the third that of th e Muses , th e ~ ~
four th tha t of A phrod i te and Eros.
last kind of ma dness, w hich wa s also said to be t he best, we
In the descr ip t ion of the
,erotic.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 84/99
474
Th e serious nreanitdg of
t h
ntyth.
I’haedrrcs spoke of the atiection of love in a f igure, into which we
socaArEs,ntroduced a tolerably credible and possibly t ru e thoug h
PHAsDaLs
partly err ing myth, which was also a hymn in honour o f
Love, who is your lo rd and a l so mine , Phaedrus , and the
guardian of fa i r chi ldren, and to h im we sung the hymn in
measured a nd solemn s t ra in .
Phaedr. I know that I had g rea t pleasure in l is tening to
you.
SOC.
et us take this instance and note how the t ransi t ion
was m ade f rom blame to praise .
Phaedr.
W h a t d o you m e a n ?
s o c .
1
mean to say that the comp osition wa s mo stly play-
Y et in these ch an ce fancies of the ho ur w ere involved
two principles of which we should be too glad to have a
The myth
was a crea- ful.
tion of
fancy, yet
true pfinci-
clearer description if art could give us one.
ples were
involved
i n
Phaedr.
W h a t a r e th ey ?
i t : ( 1 )unity SOC. irst , the comprehension of scattered particulars in
of particu-
lars
in
a one ide a; as in our def ini t ion of love, which whether t rue o r
single note
;
fa lse cer ta inly gave clearness and consistency to the dis-
2 )natural
division
course, th e spe ak er should define his several not ions an d so
intospcies. make his meaning clear .
Phaedr. W h at i s the o ther principle , S ocra te s
?
SOC. he second pr inciple is that of division into species
according to the natural formation, w he re th e joint is, not
breaking any par t as a bad carver might. Jus t as our two 266
discourses, alike assumed, f irst of all , a single form of un.
reason
;
an d then, as the bod y which f rom being on e becomes
double and may be divided into
a
lef t s ide and r ight s ide,
each having par ts r ight and lef t of th e sa m e name-af ter this
manner the speaker proceeded to d ivide the par t s of the left
s ide and did not desist unt i l he found in them an evil or left-
han ded love which h e just ly reviled
;
and the o th er d iscourse
leading us to the madn ess which lay on th e r ight s ide, found
another love, a lso having the same name, but divine, which
the speaker held up before
us
and applauded and aff i rmed to
be t he au tho r of the g reatest benef its ,
Th e dialec- Phaedr. Most true.
concerned
with the
Oneand
many.
tician is
sot.
I am myself a great lover of these processes
of
division and generalization
;
they help me to speak and to
think. An d if I f ind any man who is able to see
‘a
O n e a n d
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 85/99
h e
rhetoriciarcs of the agL-.
475
Many ’ in nature, him I follow, an d ‘walk in his footsteps as p h w i r u s .
if he were a god.’ And those who have this ar t, I have socRATes,
hitherto been in the habit of call ing dialecticians
;
but God
PHAEDRcs .
knows wh ether the name is r ight o r not . And I should like
to know what name you would give to your or to Lysias’
disciples, and whether this may not be that famous art of
rhetor ic which Thrasymachus and others teach and pract ise ?
Skilful speakers they are , and impar t their ski l l to any who
is will ing to mak e kings of them an d to bring gif ts to them.
Phacdr. Yes, they are royal men ; but their art is not the H e is not to
same with the art of those whom you call , and r ightly, in
my opinion, dialecticians :-Sti ll we ar e in the da rk about
rhetorician.
rhetoric.
T he r e m a i ns of‘ it,
if
there be still rhe-
anything remaining which can be brought under rules
of
ar t ,
:’ <:‘
must be a f ine thin g; and, a t an y ra te , is n ot to be despised from dia-
by you and me.
Phacdr. T h e r e
is
a g reat deal surely to be fb un d in books ableart.
of rhetoric ?
SOC. es ; thank you for reminding me: -There is the
cxordiuni, showing how the speech should begin, i f I remem-
ber rightly ; hat is what you mean- the niceties of the art ?
SOC.
W ha t do you m e an
?
lectic must
be a valn-
ut how much
is
left
?
P/rncdr. Yes.
SOC. h e n follows the stateme nt of facts, and upon that
witnesses
;
thirdly, proofs
;
fourthly, probabili t ies are to
come ; the great Byzantian word-maker also speaks, if I am
not mistaken, of confirmation and further confirmation.
Phacdr.
You
mean the exce l lent Theodorus .
Soc. Y e s ; and he tells how refutation or further refutation
is to be managed, whether in accusation or defence.
I
ought
also
to mention the i l lustr ious Parian, Evenus, who first Evenus.
invented insinuat ions and indirect praises
;
and also in-
direct censures, which according to som e he put into verse
to help the memory.
But shal l I ‘ to dumb forgetfulness
consign’ T is ias and Gorgias , who are not ignorant tha t
Tisiasand
probabili ty is superior to truth, and who by force of argu-
Gorgias*
ment make the l i t t le appear great and the great l i t t le ,
disguise the new in old fashions an d the old in new fashions,
and have discovered forms for everything, e i ther shor t or
going on to infinity. I remember Prodicus laughing when
‘I‘lieodorus.
267
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 86/99
476
Phacdrus.
&CRATES,
P H A E D R U S .
Prodicus.
Hippias.
Polus.
Lic
ymnius.
Protagoras.
Thrasyma-
chus again.
Rhetoric
a
superficial
art.
The
insuficiency of rhetoric.
I told him
of
th is ; he said that he had himself discovered
the t rue rule of art , which was to
be
nei ther long nor shor t ,
but of a convenient length.
Phaedr.
W ell done, P rodicus
Sac.
Then the re is Hippias the E lean s t ranger , who
Phaedr.
Yes.
Sac.
And there is also Polus, who has treasuries of dipla.
siology, and gnomology, and eikonology, and who teaches
in them the names of which L icymnius m ade him a presen t
;
they were to give a polish.
Phaedr.
H ad not Protagoras something of the same s o r t ?
Sac.
Yes, rules of correct diction and many other f ine pre-
ce pt s; for the ‘sorrows of a poor old man,’ o r an y oth er
pathetic case, no one is bet ter than the Chalcedonian giant ;
he can put a whole company of people into a passion a nd o ut
of on e again by his mighty magic, and is f irst-rate at invent-
ing or disposing of any sor t of ca lumny on any grounds o r
none. All
of
them agree in asser t ing that a speech should
end in a recapitula t ion, though they do not a l l ag ree to use
the same word.
Phaedr.
Yo u mean that there shou ld be a summing up of
the arguments in ord er to remind the h eare rs of them.
SOC have now said all that I have to say of the a r t
of
rhetoric
:
have
you
anything to a dd ?
Phaedr.
Not much
;
no thin g v ery impo’rtant.
SOC.
eave the unimportant and le t us br ing the real ly 268
probably agr ees with him.
important question into the l ight of day, which is : W h a t
power has th is a r t of rhetoric, and w h en ?
Phaedr. A v ery great power in public meet ings.
SOC t has. But
I
should l ike to know wh ether you have
the same feel ing as
I
have about the rhe tor ic ians?
To
me
there seem to be a great many holes in their web,
Phaedr.
Give an example.
SOC.
will.
Suppose a person to come to your f r iend
Eryximachus, o r to his fa ther Acumenus, an d to say to him :
‘ I
know how to apply drugs which shal l have ei ther a
heating or a cooling effect, and I can give a vomit and also
a purge, and all that sor t of thi ng ; an d knowing all this , as
I do, I claim
to
be a physician
and
to make physicians
by
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 87/99
47 7
he mere c r i t i c and the true artist.
imparting this know ledge to others,’-what do you suppo se ph, jws .
Phaedr.
They would be sure to ask him whether he knew
P ~ * m m
that they would s a y ? SocahTES,
‘ to whom’ he would give his medicines, and ‘when,’ and
‘h ow much.’
SM. And suppose tha t he were to reply: ‘ N o ; I know
nothing of all that
;
I expect the patient who consults me to
be able to do th ese things for himself’?
Phaedr. T he y would s ay in reply that h e is a madman o r a
ped ant who fancies tha t h e is a physician because he ha s read
som ething in a
book,
o r has stumb led on a prescription o r two,
al though he h as no real understanding of the ar t
of
medicine.
SOC. nd suppo se a person were to come to Sophocles or What
Euripides and say that he knows how to make a very long would
speech about a small matter , and a short speech about
a o r ~ u n -
great matter , and also a sorrowful speech, or a terr ible, or p i d s s a y
threatening speech, or any other kind of speech, and in Esf”,B”iF
teaching this fancies that he is teaching the ar t
of
tragedy- ?
rhetoric?
Phaedr.
T he y too would surely laugh at him
if’
he fancies
that t ragedy is anything but the arranging of these elements
in a mann er which will be suitable to one another and to the
whole.
SOC.
ut
I
do not suppose that they would be rude or
abusive to him : W ou ld they not t reat him a s a musician
would a m an who thinks th at he is a harmo nist because
he knows how to pitch the highest an d lowest note
;
happen-
ing to meet such an one h e would not say to him savagely,
‘Fool,
you are mad
’
and harmon ious tone of voice, he would answer
:
‘My good say t o
him
in the most
friend, he who would be a harm onist must certainly know courteous
this , and yet he may understand nothing of harmony if he . anner and
in the sweet-
has not got beyond your stage of knowledge, for YOU only est tone of
know the preliminaries of harmon y a nd not harmony itself .’ \Olce, ‘ Y o u
only know
Phaedr.
Ve ry t rue .
the alpha-
SOC nd will not Soph ocles say to the display of the bet
ofyour
Sophocla
Bu t like a musician, in a ge ntle
Theywould
269
would-be tragedian, that this is not tragedy but the prelimi-
art”
nar ies of t rag ed y? an d wil l not Acumenus say the same
of
medicine to the would-be physician
?
Phaedr.
Qu i te t rue .
SOCAnd if Ad rastu s the mellifluous o r Pericles heard of
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 88/99
4is
I-’wic/r.s
and Jirtn.~~zgovrt.s.
Phaednts. these wonderful ar ts , brachylogies and ei l ionologies and al l
~ o c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,
he hard nam es which we have been ende avo ur ing to draw
PHARDRUP.
nto the l ight of day , what would they sa y ? Ins tead of
losing temper an d app lying uncomplimen tary epithets , as you
an d I have been doing , to the au tho rs of such an imaginary
art , their superior wisdom would rather censure
us,
as well
w e s h o u l d
a s th em . ‘ H a v e a l it tle pa t ience , Pha ed rus and Socra tes ,
not be oo they would sa y;
you
should not be in such a passion with
hard on the
rhetorician
those who from some want of dialectical skill are unable to
f or t ac h in g
define the natur e of rhetor ic , and consequently suppose that
only part
of
is
art,
they have found the ar t in the prel iminary condit ions
of
it,
and when these have been taught by them to others , fancy that
the whole ar t of rhetor ic has been taught by them ; but a s to
using the several instrum ents of the a rt effectively,
or
making
the composition
a
whole,-an application of it su ch a s this
is they regard as an easy thing which their disciples may
make for themselves.’
Phaedr.
I quite admit , Socrates , that the ar t of rhetor ic
which these m en teach a nd of which they wr i te is such as
you
describe-there
I
ag ree with you. Bu t I s t i ll want to
know w here and how the t rue ar t of rhe tor ic an d persuas ion
is to be acquired.
The perf- SOC.
h e perfection which
is
required of the f inished orator
tion
of
ora-
tory
is part- is, or rath er m ust be, l ike the perfection of an yt hin g else,
ly
a
gift of
partly given by nature, but may also be assisted by art . If
it
may
be
you have the natural power and add to i t knowledge and
improved practice, you will be a dis tinguished speak er ; f you fall sho rt
b yar t .T h i s
in ei ther of these, you will be to that extent defective. But
art, how-
ever,
is
not
the ar t , as far as there is an ar t , of rhetor ic do es not l ie in the
the
art
Of
direction
of
Lys ias o r Thrasym achus .
Thrasyma-
thus,
but
Phaedr. In what direct ion then ?
partakasof
SOC.
conceive Pericles to have been the most accom-
of philoso-
plished of rhetoricians.
PhY. Phnedr. W h at of tha t ?
SOC.
l l th e great a r ts require discussion an d high specula-
t ion about the truths of nature
;
hence come lof t iness of 270
thought an d completeness of execution. An d this, as
I
con-
ceive, was the quality which, in addition to his natural gifts ,
Per icles acquired from his intercourse with Anaxagoras
whom he happened to know. H e was thus imbued with the
nature. But
the nature
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 89/99
The viytide of tsita&.vk.
4 9
higher phi losophy, and at tained the knowledge of Mind ~hacdrrcs.
and the negat ive of Mind, which w ere favouri te themes of
socRATe+,
Anaxagoras , an d appl ied w hat su i ted h i s purpose to the ar t PHasDRcs~
of speak ing.
Phaedr. Explain.
SOC. heto ric is l ike medicine.
Phaedr.
H o w
so
?
Sod.
Why, because medic ine has to def ine the nature of
the body and rhetor ic of the soul - i f we would proceed, not
empir ical ly but scienti fically, in the o n e cas e to im pa rt heal th
an d s t rength by g iv ing medic ine an d food , in the o the r to
implant th e convict ion o r vi r tue which you desi re, by the r ight
appl icat ion of wo rds an d t raining.
Phaedr. There , Socra tes , I suspe ct tha t you a re r igh t.
Svc. An d do you th ink tha t you can know the nature of t h e
soul intel ligent ly wi thout k nowing the na ture of the whole ?
Phaedr. Hippocra t es t he Asc l ep i ad says t ha t t he na tu re
even of the body ca n only be und ers tood a s a whole'.
SOC.
es, friend, an d he w as right :-still, we ou gh t no t to
be conten t wi th the nam e of Hip pocra tes , bu t to examine and
see wh ether h i s argum ent ag rees with h i s concept ion of
nature.
Phacdr. I agree.
SOC he n cons ide r wha t t ru th a s we ll a s H ippocra t es s ays
First there
abou t t h is o r abou t any o the r na tu re. Ou gh t we not t o con- Fi;:, :
s ider f i r s t whether tha t which we wish to l earn and to t each thesoul.
is a s imple or mul t i form thing, and i f s imple, then to enquire
what po wer i t ha s of act ing o r being acted upon in relat ion to
o ther th ings , and i f mul t i form, then to number the forms;
and see f ir s t in the case of one of them, and then in the c ase
of all of them, what is tha t power of act ing or be ing ac ted
upon which ma kes each an d a l l o f them to be what they a re ?
Phaedr. You ma y ve ry l ikely be r ight, Socra tes .
SOC. h e method which p rocee ds wi thout analysi s i s like
t h e g r o p i n g
of
a bl ind man. Yet , surely, h e who is an ar t is t
ought no t to admi t of a compa rison with the blind, o r deaf .
T h e rhetorician, w ho tea che s his pupi l to speak scienti fically,
will par t i cu lar ly se t for th the n atu re of tha t be ing to which h e
add res ses h is speeches ; and this,
I
conceive, to be th e soul.
1 Cp. Chnmides, 156 C.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 90/99
480
Phaedt-rrs.
Phaedr.
Certainly.
PHAEDaus*
The tn4e natu9.e of o r a t o v .
SOC. i s whole effort i s d i rec ted to the so ul ; for in t ha t 271
Phaedr. Yes.
SOC. he n c l e a r l y , T h r a s ym a c hus o r a ny one e l s e w ho
teaches rhetor ic in earnest wil l give an exact descr ipt ion of
the na tu re o f the sou l ; which will enab le u s to see whe the r
sh e be s ingle and same, or , l ike the body, mul ti form. T h a t
is
what we sho uld ca ll showing the na ture of the soul .
he seek s to p rodu ce convict ion.
Phaedr. Exactly.
Soc.
H e will expla in , secondly , the m ode in which sh e ac ts
hen the
show
or is acted upon.
by what
Phaedr. T r u e .
means the
soul
affects
SOC.
hirdly, having classif ied men and speeches, and
or
is af- the i r k inds and a ffections , an d ada pted them to o n e another ,
f ec ted n
and he will t el l t he r easons o f h i s a r r angem ent , and show w hy
why one
SOU^
in one on e soul i s persu ade d by a par t icula r form of a rgu me nt , an d
way and another not .
anoth er in
another.
rhetorician
Phaedr. YOU
ave hi t upon a very good way.
SOC. es , t ha t is t he t r ue and on ly way in which any sub-
jec t can be se t for th o r tr ea ted by rules of a r t , wh ether in
spea king or wr i ting. But th e wr i te r s of t he p r e sen t day , a t
whose feet you have sat , craft ily conceal th e n atu re of th e
soul which th ey know qui te wel l. Nor, unt il t hey adopt ou r
method of read ing an d wri ting, c an we admi t tha t they wr i te
by rules of ar t ?
Phnedr.
W h a t i s o u r m e th o d
?
SOC. cannot g ive you th e exac t de ta i l s ; but I should l ike
to te l l you general ly, as far as
is
in my power , how a man
oug ht to proceed acco rding to ru les of a r t .
Phnedr. Le t me hea r.
O r a to r y i s
SOC.
r a to ry i s t he a r t o f enchan t ing the sou l , add the r e .
the art Of fore he who would be an ora tor h as to learn th e d if ferences of
thesou l ,
hum an sou ls - they a r e so many and of such a na tu r e , and
an d th e r e -
f rom them come the di f fe rences be tween man and man.
fore
t h e
Orator
H av ing proceeded thu s fa r in h is ana lys is , h e will next
learn the divide sp eec he s into their dif ferent c lasses : -- ‘Such an d such
ofhuman
persons,’ he will say, ‘ a r e af fected by this o r that kind of
so u l sb y r e -
speech in th is
or
that way,’ and he wil l te l l you why. The
experience. pupil must have a good theoretical notion of them first , and
enchanting
differences
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 91/99
The so-cadled a r t of
Rhetoric.
then he mus t have exper ience of them in ac tual l i fe , and be P~UC&~W
able to follow them w ith al l his se ns es abo ut him, o r h e will
s ~ ~
never get beyond the precepts of h is mas ters .
But
when
PnAEuR"~.
he under s tands wha t pe r sons
are
per suaded by wha t
argu- Knowledgp
2 7 2 ments , and
sees
the pe r son abou t whom he w as speak ing in ofjndlvi-
the abstract actual ly before him, and knows that i t is he, and
dual char-
can say to himse lf , 'Th i s i s the m an o r th i s i s th e charac te r :Esary
who o ugh t to have a cer ta in argum ent applied to h im in ord er to the
to convince him of a certain opinion ; -he w ho knows al l rhetorician.
th is , and knows a l so when he shou ld speak and when he
should refra in , and wh en h e shou ld use p i thy sayings,
pathet ic appeals , sensat ional effects , and al l the other modes
of speech which h e ha s lea rne d ;-when,
I
say , he knows
the t imes an d sea son s of al l the se things , then, an d not t il l
then , he
is
a per fec t mas ter of h is ar t ; but i f he fai l in any
of these poin ts , whether in speaking or teaching or wr i t ing
them, and yet d eclares tha t he sp eak s by ru les of ar t , he who
says
'
don' t bel ieve you ' has the bet ter of h im. W el l , the
tea che r will say, is th is , Phaedrus and Socra tes , your account
of the so-cal led ar t
of
rhetoric, or Pm
I
to look for another ?
Phaedr. H e m ust take th is , Socra tes , for the re
is
no pos-
sibility
of
another, an d yet th e crea tion of such an ar t
is
not
easy.
SOC
e r y t r u e
;
and therefore le t
us
cons ide r th i s m at te r
in every light, and see wh ether we cannot find a sho r ter a nd
eas ier road
;
h e r e
is
no use in tak ing a long rough round-
about way if the re be a shor te r an d eas ier one . And
I
wish
that you wou ld t ry and r emem ber whe ther you have heard
from Lys ia s o r an y on e e lse anyth ing which might be of
service to
us,
Phaedr.
If t rying would avail , then I mig h t ; but a t the
moment
I
can th ink
of
nothing.
SOC.
u p p o s e
I
tel l you something which somebod y who
knows told me,
Phaedv.
Certainly.
SOC.M ay not ' th e wolf ,' a s th e proverb says , ' c la im a
Phaedr.
Do
you say what can be said for him.
Soc. H e w ill a r g u e t h a t t h e r e i s no use in put t ing a so lemn But ' t h e
face on these mat ters , o r in going round and round, unt il
YOU ~ ~ ~
VOL. . i i
hear ing 3
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 92/99
48:' Roditst sophisfry.
Phaednis. arrive at first principles
;
or, as I said a t f irst , when th e ques-
.ksA rEsion is of justice and good, o r is a question in which men a r e
concerned who are just an d good, e i ther by nature o r habi t,
Of he who would be a skilful rhetorician has no need of truth-
caresabol,t
for that in courts of law men literally care nothing about
[ r ~ t t l . truth, but only about conviction : an d this is based o n proba-
bility, to which he wh o would be a skilful o rator sho uld there -
fore give his whole attention. A nd they say also that there
are cases in which the actual facts, if they are improbable,
ought to be withheld, and only the probabili t ies should be
told either in accusation o r defence, an d that alw ays
in
speaking, the orator sh ould keep probabili ty in view, an d say
good-bye to the t ruth.
throughou t a speech furnishes the whole a r t .
Phaedr. T h a t is what the professors of rhetoric do actually
say, Socrates. I have not forgotten that we have quite
briefly touched upon this matter ' already; with them the
point is all-important.
Does
he no t define probability to be that which the many think ?
PHAEDWS.
law no one
And the observance of this principle
273
SOC. dare say that you are familiar with Tisias.
Phaedr. Certainly, he does.
SOC. believe that he has a clever and ingenious case of
this so r t : -H e supposes a feeble and valiant man to have
assaul ted a s t rong and cowardly one, and to have robbed
him of his coat or 'of something
or
other ; he is brought into
-9ccording
court , and then Tisias says that both parties should tell l ies
:
either
party
the coward should say that h e was assaul ted by m ore me n than
should
tell
one ; the other should prove that they were a lone, and should
sort which a rgue thus : ' H o w could a weak man l ike me have assaul ted
theother
a st ron g man l ike hi m ?' T h e complainant will not l ike to
unwil l ing confess his ow n cowardice, an d will therefo re invent some
or unable oth er l ie which h is adversary will
thus
gain a n oppor tuni ty of
O
refuting.
And there are othe r devices of the same kind which
have a place in the system. Am
I
not r ight , Phaedrus?
to Tisias,
D
lie
of
a
would be
Phaedr.
Certainly.
SOC.
less me, what a w onderfully mysterious a rt is this
which Tisias or some other gent leman, in whatever name or
cou ntry he rejoices, h as discovered. Sh all we say a word to
him or n o t ?
' Cp. z j g E.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 93/99
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 94/99
484
Thamus and Theuth.
Phaedrus.
%CRATES.
PHAEDRUS.
The inge-
nuity of
the
god
Theuth.
who was
theinventor
of letters,
rebuked
by
King
Thamus,
also
called
Ammon.
ourselves, do you think that we should care much about the
opinions of men
?
Phaedr.
Yo ur ques tion needs no answer
;
but
I
wish that
you would tel l me what you say tha t you have heard.
SOC.
t the Egyptian city of Naucratis, there was a famous
old god, whose name was Theuth
;
he bird which is called
the Ib is
is
sacred to h im, and he was the inventor of many
arts, such
as
ar i thmetic and calculat ion and geometry and
astronomy and draughts and dice , but his great discovery
was the use of le tte rs . Now in those days the god Th am us
was th e king of the whole cou ntry of Egypt
;
and he dwel t
in that great c i ty of U pp er Egyp t which the H el le ne s call
Egyptian Thebes, and the god himself is called by them
Ammon. T o him came Th eu th an d showed his inventions,
desir ing that the o the r Egyp tians might be a l lowed to have
the benef i t of them; he enumerated them, and Thamus
enquired about their several uses, and praised some of them
and censured others , as he approved o r d isapproved
of
them.
I t would take a long t ime to repeat a l l that Th am us said to
Theuth in praise or blame of the var ious ar ts .
But when
the y came to let ters , Th is , sa id Th euth, will mak e the Egyp-
t ians wiser and give them bet ter memories; i t i s a specif ic
both for the m em ory an d for the wit. T ha m us replied :
0
most
ingenious Theu th , the parent o r inventor of an a r t isnot a lways
the best judge of the uti l i ty or inutil i ty of his own inventions
to the users of them.
fath er of letters, from a patern al love of yo ur o wn childre n
have been led to attr ibute to them a quality which they cannot
have
;
or this discovery of yours will create forgetfulness in
the learners’ souls, because they will not use their memories
;
they wil l t rust to the external wri t ten characters and not
remem ber of themselves. T h e specif ic which you have dis-
covered
is
an aid not to memory, but to reminiscence, an d you
give your disciples not t ruth, but only the semblance of truth ;
they will be he arer s of many things and wil l have learned
nothing
;
hey will appe ar to be om niscient an d will generally
know nothing
;
they will be t iresom e compan y, having the
show of wisdom w ithout th e reali ty.
Phaedr.
Yes, So crate s, you ca n easily inven t tales of Egypt,
o r of any other country .
And in this instance, you who are the
275
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 95/99
The written word
an im&ge on
of
the s j o b z .
48
SOC.
h e r e w a s
a
t rad i t ion in the temple of Dod ona tha t
I%ae[irns
oaks f i rs t gav e prop het ic u t terances . T h e men of o ld , unl ike
sWnArEs
in the i r s impl ic i ty to you ng phi losophy, deemed tha t if the y
PH*EDRU5.
heard the t ru th even f rom 'oak
or
rock, ' i t w as eno ug h for
T h e s c e p
them ; whe reas you seem to cons ide r no t whe ther a th ing
is
phaed,,,s
or i s not t rue , but who the speaker i s and f rom what country
reprovedby
the tale comes.
Phaedr .
I acknowledge the jus ti ce of you r r eb uk e ; and
I
th ink tha t th e T he ba n i s righ t in h i s v iew abou t l e t t e rs .
SOC. e would be a very s imple person , and qui te a b'riting
far
s t r a n g e r t o t h e or a cl e s of T h a m u s o r A mmo n, w h o s h o u l d
:zi'-to'
leave in wr i t ing or receive in wr i t ing any ar t under the idea
tion.
that t he wri tten w ord would be intel ligible o r cer tain
;
o r w h o
deemed tha t wr i t ing was a t all bet ter than knowledge and
recollect ion of the same matters ?
ticism of
Soeratee
Plzaedr.
T h at i s most t rue .
SOC.
cannot hel p feeling, Ph aed rus , tha t w ri t ing
is
unfor-
Writing IS
tunately l ike paint ing ; for th e creat ions of the p ainter have
:':
the at t i tude of l ife, an d ye t if you ask them
a
ques tion they
silent ever,
preserv e a so lemn s i lence . An d the sam e may be sa id of
not,
speeches . Yo u would imagine th at they had intel ligence, but
speech,
be
if you w ant to know any th ing an d pu t
a
quest ion to on e of
adaptedto
them, the speak er a lways g ives one unvary ing answer . And
when they have been once wr i t ten down they are tumbled
a b ou t a n y w h e r e a mo n g t h o se w h o ma y o r ma y n o t u n d e r s t a n d
them, and know no t to whom they shou ld r eply , to whom no t :
and, if the y ar e mal t rea ted o r abused , they have no pa ren t to
protect them ; an d they cann ot pro tec t o r defend themselves .
indinduals
Phaedr .
T ha t aga in i s most t rue .
soc.
Is
the re n ot an other k ind of word o r speech far Butthere
bet ter tha n th is, and havin g far gre a te r power-a son of the ~1~~~~
276 same family, but lawfully begotten ?
writing
graven
on
the tablets
haedr .
W h o m d o
you
mean, and what is his origin
?
soc. 1mean an in te l l igent word graven in the soul of the
ofthemilid
learner , which can defend i tself , and kno w s when to spe ak
and w hen to be s i len t .
Phaedr. Yo u m ean the l iving word of knowledge which
has a soul , and of which the wri t ten word
is
proper ly no
more than a n image ?
And
now may
*
SOC.
es , of course tha t i s what
I
mean.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 96/99
486
Recajitzdatioiz
in n
j p r e .
P A ~ ~ ~ ~ Y U J ,
be allowed to ask you a ques tion: W ou ld a husbandman,
socRArEa,ho is a man of sense, take the seeds, which he values and
P H A E D ~ L b .
which h e wishes
to
bea r fruit , and in sob er seriousness plant
IVhat man
of
sense
would plant
sccds
in an
artificial
garden, to
tiring forth
fruit or
flowers i n
eight days,
and
not in
deeper
and
iuore
fitting
soil
?
them during the heat of summer, in some garden of Adonis,
that he may rejoice when h e se es them in eight da ys appcar-
ing in bea ut y? at least h e would do so, if at all, only for the
sak e of amusem ent and pastime. But when he is in earnest
he sows in fitting soil, and practises husbandry, and
is
satisfied i f in eight months the seeds which he has sown
arrive a t perfection
?
Phncdr.
Y es , Socrates, that will be his way when he is
in
earnest ; he will do the other, a s you say, only in play.
SOC. nd can we suppose that he who knows the just and
good
and honourable has
less
understanding, than thc
husbandman, about his own seeds ?
/ ’ / inch,. Certainly not.
SOC. I’hen he will not seriouslx incline to ‘write’ his
thoughts ‘in w ate r’ with
pen
and ink, sowing words which
can neither speak for themselves nor teach thc truth ade.
quately to others?
Pllncdv.
No, that
is
not likely.
, I s
i i
wq-
Soc. Xo, that is not likely--in the gard en of le tte rs h c
will
sow and plant, but only for the sak e of recreation and amu se-
IlMy pl.111t
t i i \ f,lir
mcnt
;
he will write them down as memorials to be treasured
tlioogliih i i i against the forgetfulness of old age,
by
himself, or by any
t l l C pardcll
other old nian who is t reading the sanie path.
He
will
rejoice in beholding their tender growth
;
and while others
are refreshing their souls with banqueting and the like, this
will be the pastime in which his days are spent.
I’/zncd~ -4
pastime, Socrates,
as
noble as the othcr
i s
ignoble, the pastime of a man
who
can be amused by serious
talk, and can discourse merrily about justice and the like.
Illit / IF
SOC. rue, Phaedrus . But nobler far i s the ser ious
,,.ill tie
t o pursuit of the dialectician, who, finding a congenial soul, by
implant the help of science sows and plants therein words which
o w n a n d are able to help themselves and him who planted them, 2 7 7
otherlloth
and a re not unfruitful, but have in them a seed which
others brought up in different
soils
render immortal , making
the possessors of it happy
to
th c utmost extent of human
happiness.
tlllll:
11e
serious
aiin
them
in
hi>
n; i t i i res .
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 97/99
The pidgeimvat t~,boii
Lysias.
48
Phaedr.
Far nobler, certainly. l 'hnedrus.
SOC.
nd now, Pha edru s , hav ing agreed upon the prcniises
socRnrKs
Phaedr.
About what conclusion
?
SOC.
bout Lysias, whom we censured, and his art of
writ ing, and his discourses, and the rhetorical skil l or want
of skil l
which was show n in them-these ar e the qu estio ns
which we sought
to
determine, and they brought
us
to this
point . And
I
think that we are now pretty well informed
about the nature of ar t a nd i ts opposite .
Ptinedr.
Yes,
I
think with you
;
but
I
wish tha t you would
repeat what was said.
SOC. nt i l a man knows th e t ruth of the seve ral particulars The con-
of
which he
is
writ ing or speaking, and is able to define them
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ , &
as
they are, and having defined them again to divide them
IIC able to
unti l they can be no longer divided, and unti l in l ike manner
& 'e~:l
he is able to discern th e natu re of the soul, and discover the denote t i lt:
different mod es o f discourse which a re ad apt ed to different
~ ~ c
natures , a nd to ar ran ge and d ispose them in such a way that speaking.
the simple form
of
speech may be addres sed
to
the s impler
a n d t o d i s -
nature, an d the complex and com posi te to the more complex
of
nature-until h e ha s accom plished all this, he will be unab le
those\vholn
to handle argu men ts according to rules of ar t , as
far as
thei r dressing,
nature al lows them to be subjected to art , ei ther for the
purpose of teachin g o r pe rsu ad ing ;-such is the view which
is
implied , in the whole p reced ing arg um ent .
Phacdv.
Y es, th at w as ou r view, certainly.
SOC.
econdly, as to the censure which was passcd on the
speaking or wri t ing
of
discourses, and how they might be
rightly o r wrongly censured-did not
our
previous argument
show-?
we may decide ab out th e conclusion.
P H A f DRCS.
cern the
he is
ad-
Phaedv.
S h o w w h at ?
SOC. h at whether Lys ias or any o ther wr i ter tha t ever
' Ihe l t tg ia -
was or will be, whether pr ivate m an o r s tatesma n, proposes
laws and
so
becomes the au thor of
a
political treatise, fancy- must
know
ing that the re is any grea t cer tainty and clearness in his
~~~~~~~
performance, the fact of his so writ ing
is only a
disgrace to or injustice.
him, whatever men may say.
justice and injustice, and good and evil, and not to
be
able
-ro L+,\
to dist inguish the dre am from the reality, cannot in truth be
or t o
an).
For not to know the nature of f Td
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 98/99
488
The
message Lo
Lysias a d
socraks.
him.
Poets,
orators,
legislators,
if their
composi-
tions are
based on
truth, ark
worthy to
be called
philoso-
phers.
P ~ ~ Y w .therwise than disgraceful to him, even though he ha ve the
~ o c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~pp lause of the whole w or ld .
P n ~ D a u s -
Phaedr.
Certainly.
man
ig- SOG.
u t h e who th inks t h a t in t he wr i t t en word t he re i s
norance of
allthese
necessari ly much which is not ser ious , and that nei ther
things is a poe t ry nor prose , spo ken o r wr i t ten , i s
of
any great value, if ,
disgrace.
l ike the composit ions
of
t he rhapsodes , t hey a re on ly r ec it ed
But if there
is
any
one
in ord er to be bel ieved, an d not wi th a ny v iew
to
cr i t i c i sm or
2 7 8
who ha s ins t ruc t ion ; and who th inks tha t even the bes t o f wr i t ings
faith in oral
instruction
ar e but a reminiscence of wh at we know, an d th a t on ly in
a n d i n t h e
principles of j u s t i ce and goodness and nob i l i t y t augh t and
cence of comm unicated ora l ly for the sa ke of ins truc t ion an d grav en
ideas,- in t h e s o d , w h ic h i s t h e t r u e w a y
of
wri t ing, i s there clear-
sympathize,
ness and perfect ion an d ser iousness , a nd tha t such pr inc ip les
and pray a r e a m an’s own an d his legi t imate offspring ; --being, in th e
rs t p lace , th e word which he f inds in h i s own bo som ;
hatwemay
f i
become like
second ly , t he b re th ren and descend an t s a nd re l at ions o f h is
reminis-
with him we
idea which hav e been duly implanted by him in the souls of
o th ers ;-and who cares for them an d n o o thers - th i s i s the
r igh t so r t of man
;
a n d y o u a n d
I,
Phaedru s , w ou ld p ra y t ha t
we may become l ike him.
Phaedr.
T h at i s mos t a s su red ly my d es i re and p rayer.
SOC.
nd now the p lay i s p l ayed o u t ; and of rhe to ri c
enough. Go and te l l Lys ias tha t to the founta in and school
of
the Ny m phs we went down, an d were b idden by them to
convey a message t o h im a nd to o the r composer s of s p e e c h e s
-to H om er and o the r wr i t e rs o f poems , wh e the r s e t t o
music or no t
;
a n d t o S o l o n a n d o t h e r s w h o h a v e co m p o se d
wri t ings in the form
of
pol i t ical discourses which they would
ter m laws-to al l of them we ar e to s ay tha t if the i r compo.
s i ti ons a r e based on knowledge o f t he t ru th , and t hey can
defend o r p rove t hem, whe n they a r e pu t t o t he te st, by
spoken arguments , which leave the i r wr i t ings poor in corn-
parison of them, t hen t hey a re to be cal led, not only poets ,
orators, legislators, but
are
worthy of a higher name, befi t t ing
th e ser ious pursu i t of their life.
Phaedr.
W h a t n a m e w o uld
you
a s s ig n t o t h e m 3
SOC.
i s e , I may not ca l l them ; for tha t
is
a g r e a t n a m e
which belon gs to G od alone,-lovers of wisdom o r philoso.
p h e r s
is
their modest and befi t t ing t i t le.
8/11/2019 Plato, Phaedrus (Jowett Trans.)
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-phaedrus-jowett-trans 99/99
The prayer at dejadwe.
489
I’haedr.
V er y su it ab l e.
Phatdirrs.
SOC.
nd he w ho c ann ot r i se above h i s own compi la tions
socurps,
and compos i t ions , which he has been long patch ing and
P H A E D R u a
piec ing , ad din g so me an d tak ing away some, m ay be jus t ly
called poet o r speech-maker o r law-maker.
Phaedr.
Certainly.
Phaedr.
But there is also a fr iend of yo urs who ought not
iGeyy
SOC.W h o is he ?
Phaedr.
Isocra tes the fai r : -W hat message wi ll you sen d
Soc.
Isocra tes i s s t i l l young, Phaedrus
;
but 1 am will ing Another
Phaedr.
W h a t w ou ld y o u p r o p h e s y ?
SOC. o w go and tel l th is to your companion.
Give this as
to
be forgo t ten.
Lysias.
279
t o him , a nd how sha l l we desc r ibe h i m ?
to haza rd a prophecy con cern ing h im.
.
message to
Isocrate5,
which is ex-
SOC.
t hink t ha t h e ha s a gen ius wh ich soa r s above t he
orat ion s of Lysias , an d that his ch aracte r . i s cast in a f iner the highest
mould.
improve as he grows o lder , and tha t a l l fo rmer rhe tor ic ians
will be a s ch i ldren in compar i son
of
him. And
I
believe that
he wil l not be sat isfied with rhetoric, but tha t there is in him
a divine inspirat ion which will lead him to things higher st i l l .
F or h e ha s an e lement of ph i losophy in h i s na ture . T his is
the message of th e go ds dwel l ing in th i s p lace , an d which I
will myself de l iver to Isocrates , who is m y del ight
;
a n d d o
you g ive the o th er to Lys ias , who is yours .
Phaedr.
I wi l l ; and now as t he hea t i s aba t ed l e t u s
depar t .
SOC.
hould we not of fer up a prayer f i rs t of al l to the
local de i t i es ?
Phaedr. By all means.
My
impression of him is that h e wi ll m arvellously
Praise.
top related