按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
raft upon which he sails through life…not without risk； as I admit； if
he cannot find some word of God which will more surely and safely
carry him。 And now； as you bid me； I will venture to question you；
as I should not like to reproach myself hereafter with not having said
at the time what I think。 For when I consider the matter either
alone or with Cebes； the argument does certainly appear to me；
Socrates； to be not sufficient。
Socrates answered： I dare say； my friend； that you may be right； but
I should like to know in what respect the argument is not sufficient。
In this respect； replied Simmias： Might not a person use the same
argument about harmony and the lyre…might he not say that harmony is a
thing invisible； incorporeal； fair； divine； abiding in the lyre
which is harmonized； but that the lyre and the strings are matter
and material； composite； earthy； and akin to mortality？ And when
someone breaks the lyre； or cuts and rends the strings； then he who
takes this view would argue as you do； and on the same analogy； that
the harmony survives and has not perished； for you cannot imagine；
as we would say； that the lyre without the strings； and the broken
strings themselves； remain； and yet that the harmony； which is of
heavenly and immortal nature and kindred； has perished…and perished
too before the mortal。 The harmony； he would say； certainly exists
somewhere； and the wood and strings will decay before that decays。 For
I suspect； Socrates； that the notion of the soul which we are all of
us inclined to entertain； would also be yours； and that you too
would conceive the body to be strung up； and held together； by the
elements of hot and cold； wet and dry； and the like； and that the soul
is the harmony or due proportionate admixture of them。 And； if this is
true； the inference clearly is that when the strings of the body are
unduly loosened or overstrained through disorder or other injury； then
the soul； though most divine； like other harmonies of music or of
the works of art； of course perishes at once； although the material
remains of the body may last for a considerable time； until they are
either decayed or burnt。 Now if anyone maintained that the soul； being
the harmony of the elements of the body； first perishes in that
which is called death； how shall we answer him？
Socrates looked round at us as his manner was； and said； with a
smile： Simmias has reason on his side； and why does not some one of
you who is abler than myself answer him？ for there is force in his
attack upon me。 But perhaps； before we answer him； we had better
also hear what Cebes has to say against the argument…this will give us
time for reflection； and when both of them have spoken； we may
either assent to them if their words appear to be in consonance with
the truth； or if not； we may take up the other side； and argue with
them。 Please to tell me then； Cebes； he said； what was the
difficulty which troubled you？
Cebes said： I will tell you。 My feeling is that the argument is
still in the same position； and open to the same objections which were
urged before； for I am ready to admit that the existence of the soul
before entering into the bodily form has been very ingeniously； and；
as I may be allowed to say； quite sufficiently proven； but the
existence of the soul after death is still； in my judgment；
unproven。 Now my objection is not the same as that of Simmias； for I
am not disposed to deny that the soul is stronger and more lasting
than the body； being of opinion that in all such respects the soul
very far excels the body。 Well； then； says the argument to me； why
do you remain unconvinced？ When you see that the weaker is still in
existence after the man is dead； will you not admit that the more
lasting must also survive during the same period of time？ Now I；
like Simmias； must employ a figure； and I shall ask you to consider
whether the figure is to the point。 The parallel which I will
suppose is that of an old weaver； who dies； and after his death
somebody says： He is not dead； he must be alive； and he appeals to the
coat which he himself wove and wore； and which is still whole and
undecayed。 And then he proceeds to ask of someone who is
incredulous； whether a man lasts longer； or the coat which is in use
and wear； and when he is answered that a man lasts far longer；
thinks that he has thus certainly demonstrated the survival of the
man； who is the more lasting； because the less lasting remains。 But
that； Simmias； as I would beg you to observe； is not the truth；
everyone sees that he who talks thus is talking nonsense。 For the
truth is that this weaver； having worn and woven many such coats；
though he outlived several of them； was himself outlived by the
last； but this is surely very far from proving that a man is
slighter and weaker than a coat。 Now the relation of the body to the
soul may be expressed in a similar figure； for you may say with reason
that the soul is lasting； and the body weak and short…lived in
comparison。 And every soul may be said to wear out many bodies；
especially in the course of a long life。 For if while the man is alive
the body deliquesces and decays； and yet the soul always weaves her
garment anew and repairs the waste； then of course； when the soul
perishes； she must have on her last garment； and this only will
survive her； but then again when the soul is dead the body will at
last show its native weakness； and soon pass into decay。 And therefore
this is an argument on which I would rather not rely as proving that
the soul exists after death。 For suppose that we grant even more
than you affirm as within the range of possibility； and besides
acknowledging that the soul existed before birth admit also that after
death the souls of some are existing still； and will exist； and will
be born and die again and again； and that there is a natural
strength in the soul which will hold out and be born many times…for
all this； we may be still inclined to think that she will weary in the
labors of successive births； and may at last succumb in one of her
deaths and utterly perish； and this death and dissolution of the
body which brings destruction to the soul may be unknown to any of us；
for no one of us can have had any experience of it： and if this be
true； then I say that he who is confident in death has but a foolish
confidence； unless he is able to prove that the soul is altogether
immortal and imperishable。 But if he is not able to prove this； he who
is about to die will always have reason to fear that when the body
is disunited； the soul also may utterly perish。
All of us； as we afterwards remarked to one another； had an
unpleasant feeling at hearing them say this。 When we had been so
firmly convinced before； now to have our faith shaken seemed to
introduce a confusion and uncertainty； not only into the previous
argument； but into any future one； either we were not good judges；
or there were no real grounds of belief。
Ech。 There I feel with you…indeed I do； Phaedo； and when you were
speaking； I was beginning to ask myself the same question： What
argument can I ever trust again？ For what could be more convincing
than the argument of Socrates； which has now fallen into discredit？
That the soul is a harmony is a doctrine which has always had a
wonderful attraction for me； and； when mentioned； came back to me at
once； as my own original conviction。 And now I must begin again and
find another argument which will assure me that when the man is dead
the soul dies not with him。 Tell me； I beg； how did Socrates
proceed？ Did he appear to share the unpleasant feeling which you
mention？ or did he receive the interruption calmly and give a
sufficient answer？ Tell us； as exactly as you can； what passed。
Phaed。 Often； Echecrates； as I have admired Socrates； I never
admired him more than at that moment。 That he should be able to answer
was nothing； but what astonished me was； first； the gentle and
pleasant and approving manner in which he regarded the words of the
young men； and then his quick sense of the wound which had been
inflicted by the argument； and his ready application of the healing
art。 He might be compared to a general rallying his defeated and
broken army； urging them to follow him and return to the field of
argument。
Ech。 How was that？
Phaed。 You shall hear； for I was close to him on his right hand；
seated on a sort of stool； and he on a couch which was a good deal
higher。 Now he had a way of playing with my hair； and then he smoothed
my head； and pressed the hair upon my neck； and said： To…morrow；
Phaedo； I suppose that these fair locks of yours will be severed。
Ye