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！
tormenting him and demanding an explanation of his argument； he gained the
ear of the audience far more than Prodicus。
Can you repeat the discourse to us？ Said Erasistratus。
SOCRATES： If I can only remember it； I will。 The youth began by asking
Prodicus； In what way did he think that riches were a good and in what an
evil？ Prodicus answered； as you did just now； that they were a good to
good men and to those who knew in what way they should be employed； while
to the bad and the ignorant they were an evil。 The same is true； he went
on to say； of all other things； men make them to be what they are
themselves。 The saying of Archilochus is true：
'Men's thoughts correspond to the things which they meet with。'
Well； then； replied the youth； if any one makes me wise in that wisdom
whereby good men become wise； he must also make everything else good to me。
Not that he concerns himself at all with these other things； but he has
converted my ignorance into wisdom。 If； for example； a person teach me
grammar or music； he will at the same time teach me all that relates to
grammar or music； and so when he makes me good； he makes things good to me。
Prodicus did not altogether agree： still he consented to what was said。
And do you think； said the youth； that doing good things is like building a
house；the work of human agency； or do things remain what they were at
first； good or bad； for all time？
Prodicus began to suspect； I fancy； the direction which the argument was
likely to take； and did not wish to be put down by a mere stripling before
all those present：（if they two had been alone； he would not have
minded）：so he answered； cleverly enough： I think that doing good things
is a work of human agency。
And is virtue in your opinion； Prodicus； innate or acquired by instruction？
The latter； said Prodicus。
Then you would consider him a simpleton who supposed that he could obtain
by praying to the Gods the knowledge of grammar or music or any other art；
which he must either learn from another or find out for himself？
Prodicus agreed to this also。
And when you pray to the Gods that you may do well and receive good； you
mean by your prayer nothing else than that you desire to become good and
wise：if； at least； things are good to the good and wise and evil to the
evil。 But in that case； if virtue is acquired by instruction； it would
appear that you only pray to be taught what you do not know。
Hereupon I said to Prodicus that it was no misfortune to him if he had been
proved to be in error in supposing that the Gods immediately granted to us
whatever we asked：if； I added； whenever you go up to the Acropolis you
earnestly entreat the Gods to grant you good things； although you know not
whether they can yield your request； it is as though you went to the doors
of the grammarian and begged him； although you had never made a study of
the art； to give you a knowledge of grammar which would enable you
forthwith to do the business of a grammarian。
While I was speaking； Prodicus was preparing to retaliate upon his youthful
assailant； intending to employ the argument of which you have just made
use； for he was annoyed to have it supposed that he offered a vain prayer
to the Gods。 But the master of the gymnasium came to him and begged him to
leave because he was teaching the youths doctrines which were unsuited to
them； and therefore bad for them。
I have told you this because I want you to understand how men are
circumstanced in regard to philosophy。 Had Prodicus been present and said
what you have said； the audience would have thought him raving； and he
would have been ejected from the gymnasium。 But you have argued so
excellently well that you have not only persuaded your hearers； but have
brought your opponent to an agreement。 For just as in the law courts； if
two witnesses testify to the same fact； one of whom seems to be an honest
fellow and the other a rogue； the testimony of the rogue often has the
contrary effect on the judges' minds to what he intended； while the same
evidence if given by the honest man at once strikes them as perfectly true。
And probably the audience have something of the same feeling about yourself
and Prodicus； they think him a Sophist and a braggart； and regard you as a
gentleman of courtesy and worth。 For they do not pay attention to the
argument so much as to the character of the speaker。
But truly； Socrates； said Erasistratus； though you may be joking； Critias
does seem to me to be saying something which is of weight。
SOCRATES： I am in profound earnest； I assure you。 But why； as you have
begun your argument so prettily； do you not go on with the rest？ There is
still something lacking； now you have agreed that （wealth） is a good to
some and an evil to others。 It remains to enquire what constitutes wealth；
for unless you know this； you cannot possibly come to an understanding as
to whether it is a good or an evil。 I am ready to assist you in the
enquiry to the utmost of my power： but first let him who affirms that
riches are a good； tell us what； in his opinion； is wealth。
ERASISTRATUS： Indeed； Socrates； I have no notion about wealth beyond that
which men commonly have。 I suppose that wealth is a quantity of money
（compare Arist。 Pol。）； and this； I imagine； would also be Critias'
definition。
SOCRATES： Then now we have to consider； What is money？ Or else later on
we shall be found to differ about the question。 For instance； the
Carthaginians use money of this sort。 Something which is about the size of
a stater is tied up in a small piece of leather： what it is； no one knows
but the makers。 A seal is next set upon the leather； which then passes
into circulation； and he who has the largest number of such pieces is
esteemed the richest and best off。 And yet if any one among us had a mass
of such coins he would be no wealthier than if he had so many pebbles from
the mountain。 At Lacedaemon； again； they use iron by weight which has been
rendered useless： and he who has the greatest mass of such iron is thought
to be the richest； although elsewhere it has no value。 In Ethiopia
engraved stones are employed； of which a Lacedaemonian could make no use。
Once more； among the Nomad Scythians a man who owned the house of Polytion
would not be thought richer than one who possessed Mount Lycabettus among
ourselves。 And clearly those things cannot all be regarded as possessions；
for in some cases the possessors would appear none the richer thereby：
but； as I was saying； some one of them is thought in one place to be money；
and the possessors of it are the wealthy； whereas in some other place it is
not money； and the ownership of it does not confer wealth； just as the
standard of morals varies； and what is honourable to some men is
dishonourable to others。 And if we wish to enquire why a house is valuable
to us but not to the Scythians； or why the Carthaginians value leather
which is worthless to us； or the Lacedaemonians find wealth in iron and we
do not； can we not get an answer in some such way as this： Would an
Athenian； who had a thousand talents weight of the stones which lie about
in the Agora and which we do not employ for any purpose； be thought to be
any the richer？
ERASISTRATUS： He certainly would not appear so to me。
SOCRATES： But if he possessed a thousand talents weight of some precious
stone； we should say that he was very rich？
ERASISTRATUS： Of course。
SOCRATES： The reason is that the one is useless and the other useful？
ERASISTRATUS： Yes。
SOCRATES： And in the same way among the Scythians a house has no value
because they have no use for a house； nor would a Scythian set so much
store on the finest house in the world as on a leather coat； because he
could use the one and not the other。 Or again； the Carthaginian coinage is
not wealth in our eyes； for we could not employ it； as we can silver； to
procure what we need； and therefore it is of no use to us。
ERASISTRATUS： True。
SOCRATES： What is useful to us； then； is wealth； and what is useless to us
is not wealth？
But how do you mean； Socrates？ said Eryxias； interrupting。 Do we not
employ in our intercourse with one another speech and violence （？） and
various other things？ These are useful and yet they are not wealth。
SOCRATES： Clearly we have not yet answered the question； What is wealth？
That wealth must be useful； to be wealth at all；thus much is acknowledged
by every one。 But what particular thing is wealth； if not all things？ Let
us pursue the argument in another way； and then we may perhaps find what we
are seeking。 What is the use of wealth； and for what purpose has the
possession of riches been invented；in the sense； I mean； in which drugs
have been discovered for the cure of disease？ Perhaps in this way we may
throw some light on the