图书在版编目（CIP）数据

会饮篇：英汉对照/（古希腊）柏拉图著；孙平华，储春艳译．—北京：中译出版社，2015.11

（企鹅口袋书系列·伟大的思想）

ISBN 978-7-5001-4346-8

Ⅰ．①会…　Ⅱ．①柏…　②孙…　③储…　Ⅲ．①柏拉图（前427～前347）—美学思想—英、汉　Ⅳ．①B502.232　②B83-095.45

中国版本图书馆CIP数据核字（2015）第267708号

（著作权合同登记：图字01-2015-7258号）

Penguin Books Ltd，Registered Offices：80 Strand，London WC2R 0RL，England

www.penguin.com

This revised translation of The Republic
first published in Penguin Classics 1987

This translation of The Symposium
first published in Penguin Classics 1999

These extracts published in Penguin Books 2005

The Republic
translation copyright © H．D．P．Lee，1987

The Symposium
translation copyright © Christopher Gill，1999

All rights reserved

出版发行
/中译出版社

地　　址
/北京市西城区车公庄大街甲4号物华大厦6层

电　　话
/（010）68359827；68359303（发行部）；68359725（编辑部）

邮　　编
/100044　　传真
/（010）68357870

电子邮箱
/book@ctph.com.cn　网址
/http://www.ctph.com.cn

出版策划
/张高里

责任编辑
/胡晓凯　刘黎黎

装帧设计
/索　迪

排　　版
/竹叶图文

印　　刷
/保定市中画美凯印刷有限公司

规　　格
/760毫米×940毫米　1/32　印张
/7

版　　次
/2016年1月第一版　印次
/2016年1月第一次

ISBN 978–7–5001–4346–8　定价：
21.00元

“企鹅”及相关标识是企鹅图书有限公司已经注册或尚未注册的商标。

未经允许，不得擅用。

中译出版社与企鹅图书有限公司联合出版

《伟大的思想》中文版序

企鹅《伟大的思想》丛书2004年开始出版。在英国，已付梓八十种，尚有二十种计划出版。美国出版的丛书规模略小，德国的同类丛书规模更小一些。丛书销量已远远超过二百万册，在全球众多读者间，尤其是学生当中，普及了哲学和政治学。中文版《伟大的思想》丛书的推出，迈出了新的一步，令人欢欣鼓舞。

推出这套丛书的目的是让读者再次与一些伟大的非小说类经典著作面对面地交流。太久以来，确定版本依据这样一个假设——读者在教室里学习这些著作，因此需要导读、详尽的注释、参考书目等。此类版本无疑十分有用，但我想，如果能够重建托马斯·潘恩《常识》或约翰·罗斯金《艺术与人生》初版时的环境，营造更具亲和力的氛围，也许是一件有趣的事。这样，读者除了原作者及其自身的理性思考外没有其他参照。

这样做有一定的缺陷：每位作者的话难免有难解或不可解之处，一些重要的背景知识会缺失。例如，读者对亨利·梭罗创作时的情形毫无头绪，也不了解该书的接受情况以及影响；不过，这样做的优点也显而易见。最突出的优点是：作者的初衷又一次变得重要起来——托马斯·潘恩的愤怒、查尔斯·达尔文的灵光、塞内加的隐逸。这些作家在许多国家影响着许多人的生活，其影响难以估量；长达几个世纪，读他们书的乐趣罕有匹敌。没有亚当·斯密或阿图尔·叔本华，或无法想象我们今天的世界。这些小书的创作年代久远，但其中的话语彻底改变了我们的政治学、经济学、智力生活、社会规划和宗教信仰。

《伟大的思想》丛书一直求新求变。地域不同，收录的作家亦不同。在中国或美国，一些作家更受欢迎。英国《伟大的思想》收录的一些作家在其他地方则默默无闻。称其为“伟大的思想”，我们亦慎之又慎。思想之伟大，在于其影响之深远，而不意味着这些思想是“好”的，实际上一些书或可列入“坏”思想之列。丛书中很多作家受到同一丛书其他作家的很大影响，例如，马塞尔·普鲁斯特承认受约翰·罗斯金影响很大，米歇尔·德·蒙田也承认深受塞内加影响，但其他作家彼此憎恶，如果发现他们被收入同一丛书，一定会气愤难平。不过，读者可自行判明这些思想是否合理。我们衷心希望，您可以从阅读这些杰作中获得乐趣。

《伟大的思想》出版者

西蒙·温德尔

Introduction to the Chinese Editions of Great Ideas

Penguin's Great Ideas series began publication in 2004. In the UK we now have 80 copies in print with plans to publish a further 20. A somewhat smaller list is published in the USA and a related，even smaller series in Germany．The books have sold now well over two million copies and have popularized philosophy and politics for many people around the world — particularly students．The launch of a Chinese Great Ideas series is an extremely exciting new development．

The intention behind the series was to allow readers to be once more face to face with some of the great non-fiction classics．For too long the editions of these books were created on the assumption that you were studying them in the classroom and that the student needed an introduction，extensive notes，a bibliography and so on．While this sort of edition is of course extremely useful，I thought it would be interesting to recreate a more intimate feeling — to recreate the atmosphere in which，for example，Thomas Paine's Common Sense or John Ruskin's On Art and Life was first published — where the reader has no other guide than the original author and his or her own common sense．

This method has its severe disadvantages — there will inevitably be statements made by each author which are either hard or impossible to understand，some important context might be missing．For example the reader has no clue as to the conditions under which Henry Thoreau was writing his book and the reader cannot be aware of the book's reception or influence．The advantages however are very clear — most importantly the original intentions of the author become once more important．The sense of anger in Thomas Paine，of intellectual excitement in Charles Darwin，of resignation in Seneca — few things can be more thrilling than to read writers who have had such immeasurable influence on so many lives，sometimes for centuries，in many different countries．Our world would not make sense without Adam Smith or Arthur Schopenhauer — our politics，economics，intellectual lives，social planning，religious beliefs have all been fundamentally changed by the words in these little books，fi rst written down long ago．

The Great Ideas series continues to change and evolve．In different parts of the world different writers would be included．In China or in the United States there are some writers who are liked much more than others．In the UK there are writers in the Great Ideas series who are ignored elsewhere．We have also been very careful to call the series Great Ideas — these ideas are great because they have been so enormously influential，but this does not mean that they are Good Ideas — indeed some of the books would probably qualify as Bad Ideas．Many of the writers in the series have been massively influenced by others in the series — for example Marcel Proust owned so much to John Ruskin，Michel de Montaigne to Seneca．But others hated each other and would be distressed to find themselves together in the same series！ But readers can decide the validity of these ideas for themselves．We very much hope that you enjoy these remarkable books．

Simon Winder

Publisher

Great Ideas

目录

《伟大的思想》中文版序

Introduction to the Chinese Editions of Great Ideas

译者导读

会饮篇

洞穴寓言（选自《理想国》）

Contents

The Symposium

The Allegory of the Cave

译者导读

柏拉图（Plato，前427年—前347年），古希腊伟大的哲学家，也是全部西方哲学乃至整个西方文化最伟大的哲学家和思想家之一。柏拉图和他的老师苏格拉底以及他的学生亚里士多德被并称为古希腊三大哲学家。柏拉图是西方客观唯心主义的创始人，他的哲学体系博大精深，一生作品很多，写下了许多哲学对话录，并且后来在雅典创办了著名的书院。

《会饮篇》（或译作《飨宴篇》《宴话篇》）是柏拉图早期的一篇对话式作品，它描述了在一次宴会上，一群雅典男性对爱的本质的讨论。该作品以演讲和对话的形式写成，既有讽刺式的，也有认真的谈话。他们对话的大前提是（而且有些讲者更清楚说明），最高贵的爱是男人之间的爱。爱是对美的企盼，美貌、智慧和美德都被讨论。他们反对古希腊风俗中男人对少年的爱，说男人不应该在这些尚未了解基本美德，也未定型的少年身上下功夫，而更应该去爱一个男子并长相厮守，并强调两人间若只有美德与知识的交流最为崇高。柏拉图提出肉体的爱不如精神上对智慧和美德的爱，这就是著名的“柏拉图式的爱情”，这样的爱就是至善。在《会饮篇》里，柏拉图还描述了认识“美”的过程：从认识美的形体到美的道理、美的制度等等，逐级上升，经过飞跃最后认识到美本身，即“美的相”。柏拉图又进一步描述了这种“相”的基本特征：它是永恒的，不生不灭的，绝对的，单一的等等。

此书还收录了柏拉图著名的“洞穴寓言”，选自《理想国》。在《理想国》中，苏格拉底一开始提到了哲学家必须具备的各种素质，然后着重强调这些素质必须建立在学问的基础之上，最终则是建立在为善的学问基础之上。对苏格拉底来说它是善的本质。一些人认为善即快乐，或者认为善即学问。柏拉图简明扼要地驳斥了此类观点，却拒绝直接给出自己的看法，而是借用“洞穴寓言”来阐述他的观点，这是他首次详细解释唯心主义。

柏拉图还提到了太阳的比喻和分割线的比喻，柏拉图解释说，分割线比喻是太阳比喻的续篇，旨在进一步说明太阳比喻所涉及的现实中两种层次之间的关系。但它是从一个特定的角度来讲述的，即我们用来理解这两种层次或领域的心智状态。因此，这个线的目的主要也不是用来给事物分类。与可知领域相关的两种心智状态，都是与同种类型的东西（本质）打交道，尽管每种心智状态的处理方式各不相同；虽然在物质世界里，物质的东西与其自身的影子有区别，但这种差异主要用于阐明需要了解的东西当中存在的“真实”或真实性的程度——如果我们的学问仅局限于它的影子或影像，那么，我们对自身学问的东西了解就太有限了。就这个问题而言，就是仅仅局限于肤浅的外表了。

会饮篇

阿波罗多洛斯：实际上，我已经准备好回答你的问题了。前几天我碰巧要从我位于法勒鲁姆的家去城里，一个我认识的人从后面看见了我，大老远地叫我。他喊道（扯着嗓门用开玩笑的口吻）：

“嘿，从法勒鲁姆来的人！你！ 阿波罗多洛斯，能等我一下吗？”

我停了下来，等着他。

他说：“阿波罗多洛斯，我刚才一直在找你，想让你告诉我在阿伽松家举行的聚会上发生的故事。苏格拉底、亚西比德等人都参加了那次晚宴。他们在关于爱的发言中都说了什么？有个人从菲利普的儿子菲尼克斯那里了解了一些，我听他说了；但他说你也知道那次晚宴。他讲述的内容不够确切。请告诉我你知道的东西吧。苏格拉底是你的朋友，要复述他说的话，没有人比你更有权利了。不过，开始讲之前，”他补充说，“先告诉我：你当时在场吗？”

“你得到的肯定不是精准的复述，”我回答道，“你以为这次聚会是最近发生的，连我也参加了。”

“是的，我确实这样认为，”他说。

“你怎会这样认为呢，格老孔？阿伽松已经有很多年不在雅典住了，而我开始和苏格拉底交往，把追随他的一言一行当作我的职业，还不到三年时间，你难道不知道这些吗？那之前我经常漫无目的地闲逛。我自认为在做一些重要的事，但其实我当时处于最可悲的境地——就像你现在这样！——认为哲学是我最不应该做的事。”

“别取笑我，”他说，“告诉我这次聚会是什么时候举办的吧。”

“那时你和我都还是小孩子，”我说，“阿伽松的第一部悲剧得了奖。他和他的伙伴们举行了祭祀盛宴，庆祝他们的成功，聚会就发生在次日。”

“所以确实是很久以前的事了，”他说，“是谁告诉你这件事的，是苏格拉底自己吗？”

“当然不是了！”我说，“和告诉菲尼克斯的是同一个人，是居达塞奈乌姆一个叫阿里斯托得摩斯的矮个子，他总是光着脚走来走去。他当时参加了那次聚会，我想他是苏格拉底当时最狂热的崇拜者之一，不过，我后来就他告诉我的一些要点问了苏格拉底，他证实了阿里斯托得摩斯的说法。”

“来吧，”他说，“你把这些再给我讲一遍吧。在去城邦的路上，我们正好可以边走边说。”

于是我们一起走的时候就谈了这些，所以正如我一开始说的，我已经准备好了。如果需要给你讲一遍，我也会那样做。实际上，每当我讨论哲学或听他人讨论哲学时，我都会得到极大的愉悦，更不用说从中受益了。但至于其他类的讨论，尤其是像你们这样的富商的谈话，我感到索然无味，为你和你的朋友感到可惜，因为你们自认为在做一些重要的事，其实不然。可能你觉得我是个失败者，不中用 ，我却认为你是自以为是。我不仅认为你是个失败者，而且我知道你就是。

朋友：你总是这样，阿波罗多洛斯。你总是贬低自己，贬低其他人。你似乎相信除了苏格拉底，其余所有的人都处于悲惨境地，首当其冲的就是你自己。我不知道你是怎么得到“软蛋”这个绰号的。你在说话时，总是现在这个样子，残酷地攻击你自己和所有人——只有苏格拉底除外。

阿波罗多洛斯：我亲爱的朋友，很明显，如果我对自己和你持有这种看法，我是不是在胡说八道？

朋友：阿波罗多洛斯，我们现在实在不值得为此争论。请按照我的请求，告诉我谈话的进展如何。

阿波罗多洛斯：好吧，差不多是这样的——但如果我从头开始讲的话会更好点儿，就像阿里斯托得摩斯做的那样。

他说他在路上遇到了苏格拉底，苏格拉底刚洗过澡 ，还穿上了鞋——他几乎从不这样做。他问苏格拉底穿戴这么整齐是要去哪里。

苏格拉底答道：“去和阿伽松一起参加晚宴。昨天我没去他的得奖庆典，避开了人群；但我答应今天参加他的晚宴。因此我才打扮一番，这样我去美貌的人的家时也能看起来精神点儿。你呢？”他问道，“虽然你没受邀请，但是愿意和我参加晚宴吗？”

“你怎么说我就怎么做。”阿里斯托得摩斯答道。

“那么你就和我一起走吧，”苏格拉底说，“这样我们就可以证实谚语是错的，将它倒过来说，‘每逢好人开宴，好人不请自来。’其实，荷马也借用过这条谚语，但他把它曲解了，并且几乎是用蔑视的态度对待它的。他笔下的阿伽门农是位异常优秀的战将，而墨涅拉俄斯是个‘软弱无能的枪兵’。但当阿伽门农祭祀并举办盛宴时，墨涅拉俄斯这个卑微的人不请自来地参加了优等人的盛宴，这样看来，就是让不太好的人赴好人的宴会了。”

阿里斯托得摩斯回答道：“但是恐怕我也符合荷马描述的情况，而不像你说的那个意思，苏格拉底，我是个卑微的人，不请自来地参加聪明者的盛宴。如果你要带我一起去，想想你该用什么借口；我不会承认我是不请自来的，我只能说是你邀请了我。”

“‘我们两个路上搭伴儿来的’，”他说，“这样说就行了。那么快走吧。”

阿里斯托得摩斯说，这段交谈之后，他们就出发了。但苏格拉底陷入了自己的沉思，他们一起走的时候总是落在后面。阿里斯托得摩斯也停下来时，苏格拉底就让他继续走。到达阿伽松家时，阿里斯托得摩斯发现门是开着的，并且遇到了一件很荒谬可笑的事情。家中的一位仆人看到了他，把他带进屋里，其他人都已落座，正准备用餐。阿伽松一看到他，就说，“阿里斯托得摩斯！你来得正好，和我们一起用餐吧。你要是为了别的事情而来，就先放一边。我昨天找你，要邀请你，但没找到你。苏格拉底呢——你为什么没带他一块儿来？”

他转身的时候（阿里斯托得摩斯说的），发现苏格拉底根本没跟在后面。他解释说是苏格拉底带他来的，他是受苏格拉底的邀请来参加晚宴的。

“很高兴你来了，”阿伽松说，“但是苏格拉底去哪儿了呢？”

“刚才他还在我后面。我不知道现在他在哪儿。”

“仆人，去看看，”阿伽松说，“把苏格拉底带到这儿来。阿里斯托得摩斯，请你挨着厄律克西马库坐。”

一个仆人帮阿里斯托得摩斯洗了手和脚，这样他就可以坐下了。另一个仆人过来说：“苏格拉底已经到这儿了；他退回到了邻居家的走廊里，一直站在那里，不肯进来，我请他进来也不行。”

“真奇怪，”阿伽松说，“你再去请他进来，别让他独自一人待着。”

“别，”阿里斯托得摩斯说，“随他去吧。这是他的习惯。有时他离开人群，走到哪儿，就站在那里不动了。我敢肯定他一会儿就过来。别打扰他，让他一个人待着吧。”

“好吧，如果你这样认为，那我们就这样做，”阿伽松说，“现在，仆人，给我们上菜吧。你们想上什么食物就上什么食物，没人监督你们——我从未这样做过。这一次，你们就把我及其他人当作你们晚宴的客人，要好好伺候，争取赢得我们的赞扬。”

接着他们就开始用餐了，但苏格拉底还没进来。阿伽松不停地说应该派人去叫苏格拉底，但阿里斯托得摩斯不让他这么做。实际上，苏格拉底不一会儿就来了（他没有像往常那样迟到很长时间），其他人用餐才刚用到了一半。阿伽松正好独自一人坐在末席，就说：“苏格拉底，过来坐在我旁边吧，这样靠近你，我就可以分享你在走廊中获得的智慧了。显然你已经找到了你要寻找的东西并且拥有它了；不然你不会来的。”

苏格拉底坐了下来，说：“阿伽松，如果智慧这种东西能像水一样，在双方彼此接触的时候从丰盈者流到匮乏者那里，通过一根毛线从满杯子流到空杯子中，该有多好啊。如果智慧真像这样，我把与你共坐当作莫大的荣耀。我希望用你丰富的美好智慧把自己填满。我的智慧无疑是肤浅的——更确切地说，是真是假说不清，就像梦一样——但你的智慧光辉灿烂，有巨大的发展潜力。在你还年轻的时候，你的智慧就大放异彩；前几天三万多在场的希腊同胞都见证了你的智慧。”

“你在嘲笑我，”阿伽松说，“稍后我们再争论智慧问题，让狄奥尼索斯做我们的评判员。不过现在你先把注意力放在用餐上吧。”

之后，阿里斯托得摩斯说，苏格拉底坐了下来，与其他人一起用餐。然后他们向神祭酒、唱颂神歌，进行了其他例行的礼仪，然后开始饮酒。鲍桑尼亚带了头，说了类似下面的话：“先生们，最愉快的饮酒方式是什么？我可以告诉你们，我由于昨天饮酒，今天的身体状况非常糟糕，需要多休息 。我觉得你们中许多人也是这样，因为你们昨天也在场——所以想想我们应该怎样饮酒才最合适吧。”

阿里斯托芬说：“鲍桑尼亚，你说得对，我们得想办法喝得从容一些。我昨天也属于酩酊大醉之列。”

此后，阿库门努的儿子厄律克西马库说：“我赞同你的说法。但还有个人的意见我需要问问，看看他还能喝吗，那个人就是阿伽松。”

“我也绝对没有耐力再喝了，”他说。

“那我们就交了好运了——我是说，对于阿里斯托得摩斯、费德鲁斯及其他人来说——你们这些酒量最大的已经放弃了。我们永远抵不过你们。当然，我没有算苏格拉底：他可以喝也可以不喝，所以我们不管怎么做对他来说都行。既然大家没人热衷于大量饮酒，所以如果我说说醉酒是怎么回事，大概没人会觉得厌烦吧。从我的医疗经验来看，醉酒显然对人体有害。所以如果我可以随心所欲的话，我不愿意喝过头，我也不建议任何人喝过头，尤其是你还没从昨晚的宿醉中醒过来，头还昏昏沉沉时。”

这时费德鲁斯说话了：“我通常都听从你的建议，尤其是涉及医药方面的。如果其余的人都还理智的话，也该相信。”

听到这话，他们都同意不要把当前的场合弄成豪饮的局面，而是愿意喝多少就喝多少。

“好，”厄律克西马库说，“既然大家都同意愿意喝多少就喝多少，没有任何强迫与勉强，那我下一个提议是把刚进来的吹笛女打发走，让她们自吹自乐吧，或者如果她们愿意的话，吹给屋子里的女人听，我们今晚就以交谈来度过。要是你们同意的话，我想提议一个讨论的话题。”

大家都同意，让他提议。厄律克西马库说：“我以引用欧里庇得斯的《墨拉尼佩》开头：我将要讲的‘不是我自己的故事’，而是费德鲁斯的。他总是这样抱怨：‘厄律克西马库，诗人为其他的神谱写赞美诗和颂歌，但没人谱写过一首爱神的颂词，尽管他是位非常古老又非常重要的神，这岂不是很糟糕？你看看最优秀的智者（例如，杰出的普罗迪库斯），他们为赫拉克勒斯还有其他的神写颂词。可能这也不足为奇；但有一次我发现一位聪明的作者写的书，由于盐的效用，他在其中对其大力赞美——你也能发现诸多类似的颂词。人们如此重视这类东西，但至今却无人有勇气歌颂爱神应得的赞歌，这岂不是很荒唐。他是位如此伟大的神，却被忽略到如此地步！’我认为费德鲁斯在这一点上说得很对。我想让他高兴，为这件事做出自己的贡献；同时现在似乎是在座各位赞美爱神的好时机。如果你们同意，我们不需要做其他事了，就进行讨论。我提议每人尽其所能做最出色的发言，赞美爱神，然后坐在他右边的人继续。费德鲁斯应该起头，因为他不仅坐在首席，而且是这个话题的发起人。”

“没人会反对你，厄律克西马库，”苏格拉底说，“我当然也不能拒绝，因为爱这个主题是我唯一可以声称懂得的。阿伽松和鲍桑尼亚不会；阿里斯托芬也不会，他的整个事业都集中在狄奥尼索斯和阿佛洛狄特上；在座的其他任何人也不会。当然，这种安排对于我们坐在末席的人不公平。但如果先说的人说了所要求说的，并且说得很好，那我们也就满足了。费德鲁斯起头，做他对爱神的颂词，祝你好运！”

其余人都同意，让费德鲁斯按苏格拉底说的做。当然，阿里斯托得摩斯没有记住所有发言者说的话，我也没记住他说的所有的话。不过我会告诉你那些他记得最清楚、我认为最重要的人的发言。

如我所说的，阿里斯托得摩斯告诉我是费德鲁斯先说，他是这样说的：爱神被人类及诸神认为是一位伟大且了不起的神，这表现在很多方面，尤其是他的出身方面。

“爱神受人们尊敬，”费德鲁斯说，“是因为他是最古老的一位神，古老就是一种荣誉，可以由这个事实来论证：爱神没有父母，散文或诗歌里也从未提到过他的父母。但与此相反，赫西奥德说首先存在的是一片混沌，‘然后是宽阔的大地，为一切事物提供了永久、安全的根基，然后就是爱。’阿里斯托得摩斯同意赫西奥德的说法，说混沌之后两样东西出现了，即大地和爱。关于他的出身，巴门尼德说‘她创造的第一位神即是爱神’。所以爱神的古老历史已广为人们接受。

“由于其古老历史，他是我们最大福祉的源泉。我会宣称，对于青年来说，没有什么比拥有一位钟爱自己的爱人更幸福了；对爱人来说，没有什么比一位好情郎更幸福了。不管是亲情、社会地位、财富，还是其他任何东西，在向那些想要过上好生活的人灌输毕生指导方面的东西时，没有一个比爱更有效。这原则是什么呢？这是一种厌恶丑陋、爱慕美好的意识在起作用。没有这些，没有任何人或任何城邦能获得伟大或高尚的事物。

“以一个处于热恋中的人为例，他被发现做了不光彩的事，或经历了某些可耻的事情，因为他受人凌辱而懦弱不敢反抗。我认为这种情况下，被他的情郎看见会比被他的父亲、朋友或其他任何人看见给他带来更多的痛苦。若是情郎的话，我们也会看到同样的情景：若他被发现处于某种可耻的情形中，他会在他的爱人面前感觉最无地自容。如果有机制能创建由爱人和情郎组成的城邦或军队，那就没有比这更好的社会组织形式了：他们会阻止一切不光彩的事，为彼此眼中的荣誉而竞争。即使一小部分这样的人并肩作战，也几乎可以打败整个人类。爱人在从战线退缩或丢弃自己的武器时，最不能容忍被他的情郎看到；相反，他宁愿死千百回。至于抛弃自己的情郎或没能在危险中帮助他——没人会如此懦弱，不能从爱中激发出勇气，与天生就很勇敢的人相匹敌。当荷马说一位神‘把力量吹进’一些英雄体内时，这是爱情对爱人才会产生的效果。

“而且，只有爱人才会愿意为对方而死；这对女人和男人都适用。希腊人能从珀利阿斯的女儿阿尔刻提斯身上找到这一事实的充分证据，她是唯一一个愿意替她丈夫去死的人，尽管他的父亲和母亲都还活着。她将爱付诸行动，展示出了超出父母的深切关爱，使他们看起来像自己儿子的陌生人一样，只是名义上的亲属罢了。诸神以及人类都把这看作是高尚的行为。尽管许多人表现出许多高尚的行为，尽管神只授予少数人将生命从冥界再还阳一次的特权，但他们将她从冥界放了出来，因为钦佩她的行为。这显示了即使神也多么珍视爱情激发出的承诺和勇气。

“但是他们把奥阿格罗斯之子奥尔甫斯两手空空地从冥界打发了出来；他们只给他看了他想要拥有的妻子的幻影，而没有给他这个女人本身。他们认为他很软弱（他只是个音乐家），因为他没有勇气像阿尔刻提斯那样为自己的爱人去死，而是在还活着的时候找到了进入冥界的方法。他们为此惩罚他，让他死在女人的手中。

“相反，他们钦佩忒提斯的儿子阿喀琉斯，把他送到极乐岛。他从母亲那里知道，如果他杀死赫克托耳，他自己也会死，但是如果他不杀死他，他就可以回家并长命百岁。他有勇气代表他的爱人做出选择并行动，替他报仇：他不仅为他而死，并且要和他一起死去，因为帕特洛克罗斯已经死了。这种行为赢得了诸神的特别敬佩和特殊赞誉，因为这显示了他多么珍视自己的爱人。当埃斯库罗斯在说阿喀琉斯是帕特洛克罗斯的爱人时，是在胡说八道：如荷马告诉我们的，他比帕特洛克罗斯更英俊（实际上，他是所有英雄中最英俊的），他还没有胡须，而且比帕特洛克罗斯年轻得多。尽管神给予爱情激发出的勇气特殊赞誉，但当一位情郎向自己的爱人展示出深切关爱时，与爱人对情郎这样做时相比，他们展示出更大的惊异和赞赏，也给予更慷慨的回应。爱人比情郎更像神，因为他受到了神灵的激发。这就是为什么他们给阿喀琉斯比阿尔刻提斯更高的荣誉，并把他送到极乐岛。

“这就是我为什么说爱神是最古老的神，最受人尊敬，在激发人们获得勇气和幸福方面最有效，不管是对生还是死来说都一样。”

按照阿里斯托得摩斯说的，费德鲁斯的发言大致是这样。费德鲁斯之后，有一些其他人的发言，阿里斯托得摩斯记不清了；所以他就略过了他们，接着说鲍桑尼亚的发言。鲍桑尼亚说：“费德鲁斯，我们仅仅被告知去赞美爱神，我认为我们没有做出明确规定。如果爱是单一的，那就没问题，但实际上它不是；由于它不是，那最好提前规定我们应该赞美哪种爱。我尽力把情况摆正，先说说我们应该赞美哪种爱，然后再给予诸神他应得的赞美。

“我们都知道阿佛洛狄特与爱神不可分开。如果只有一个阿佛洛狄特，那就只有一种爱；但由于有两类阿佛洛狄特，也就必须有两种爱。肯定有两类阿佛洛狄特吗？其中一个较年长，是乌拉诺斯的女儿，尽管她没有母亲：我们称她为乌拉诺斯或神圣的阿佛洛狄特。较年轻的一个是宙斯和狄俄涅的女儿：我们称她为凡间的阿佛洛狄特。因此结果就是，每一种爱，根据他是谁的伴侣，应该有与女神一样的名字，也称之为神圣的爱或凡间的爱。当然，所有的神都应该受到赞美，但我们必须尽力区分开这两个神的职能。

“每一种活动本身没有对错之分。就拿我们现在的活动为例：我们可以饮酒、唱歌或讨论。这些就其本身而言没有一种是对的；活动的性质取决于完成它的方式。如果做得适当，它就是对的；如果做得不当，它就是错的。所以并不是每一种爱和爱神都是对的，都值得赞美，只有那种激励我们以正确的方式去爱的才如此。

“凡间的爱是名副其实的‘凡俗’，效果方面没什么区别；这是下等人感受到的那种爱。这类人既受女人的吸引，也受少男的吸引，吸引他们的是肉体而不是灵魂。他们受到智力最低下的伴侣的吸引，因为他们的唯一目的是得到他们所想要的，而不关心这样做是否恰当。所以爱对他们的影响就是他们不加区别地行动：不管他们的行为是好是坏，对他们来说都一样。其原因就是，他们的爱源自更年轻的女神，由于她的出身，她本性上一部分是女的，一部分是男的。

“另一种爱源自神圣的女神，她体内没有一点儿女性的特质，完全是男性的；所以这种爱的对象是少男。这位女神也较年长，所以会避免滥用暴力。这就是为什么受这种爱激发的人倾向于男性，对本性更精力充沛和智慧的事物心怀喜爱。在受少男吸引的那一类人中，你们也可以区别那些纯粹受神圣的爱激励的人。他们只有在开始完成智力发育的时候才会受少男吸引，这通常会发生在他们开始长胡须的时候。我认为那些在这个时候开始恋爱的人做好了共度一生、终生相守的准备。他们不会利用少男的年幼无知哄骗他，引诱他，然后碰到另外合适的对象便喜新厌旧。

“甚至应该有针对与宠爱少男相关的法律，阻止他们将巨大的精力花费在结果不明的事情上。就少男而言，他们无论在心灵或身体上最终是好还是坏谁也无法预知。善良的人们为自己制定这条规则，并愿意这样做。应该强迫凡俗的爱的追随者采用同样的规则，就像我们尽自己最大努力强行阻止他们爱恋自由民妇女一样。这种凡俗的爱情使人们对爱情有了不好的印象，也给爱带来了不良声誉，以至于一些人竟然说满足爱人的要求是错的。人们这样说，是因为他们考虑的是这类人的卑鄙放荡的行为；当然，如果行为是以有条理的方式进行且符合通常的规范，就不会招致批评指责。

“其他城邦管理恋爱的规范都用了明确的语言进行规定，很容易被人领会。但在斯巴达这里却很复杂。在厄利斯和比奥夏，以及人们不擅长演讲的地方，有明确的规定，认为满足爱人的需求是对的，不管老少，没人会说那是错的。毫无疑问，这是因为他们不愿费尽心思通过劝说赢得少男，别忘了他们本来都是不够格的演说家。但在爱奥尼亚的许多地方以及波斯帝国的其他地方，规定恋爱是错的。在波斯，由于其残暴的政府，人们谴责他们，还谴责智力和体育活动。毫无疑问，在他们的政府中，人们不适合有伟大的思想或建立深厚的友谊和私人关系，这些都是通过这些活动、尤其是爱情促成的。在雅典，暴君通过自己的经验发现了这一点：亚里斯托杰顿的爱及哈尔摩狄奥斯互相爱慕的力量使他们的统治走向了终点。所以在有这样的基本规则（即满足爱人的需求是错误的）的地方，就可以将其归结为制定这条规则的人自身的缺陷：政府对权力的贪求和人民的懦弱。而在一些地方，认为这是完全正确的，那是因为规则的制定者头脑迟钝。

“在雅典，我们的规范比那些地方强得多；但正如我刚才说的，这些规范不太容易理解。据说公开地去爱比秘密地爱更好，尤其是你爱的是具有社会地位和良好品行的少男时，即使他们不是特别英俊。而且爱人从众人那里得到巨大的鼓舞，暗示他做的不是可耻的事；获取你想要的少男的心被认为是高尚的行为，而未能获取则被认为是可耻的。当爱人尽力抓获少男的心时，规范允许他因做非凡的事而赢得赞美。如果他胆敢在做这些事时有任何其他目的和意图，他将会受到强烈的谴责。

“比如说，一个人想从别人那里得到钱，或政治职务或其他某种势力，他就去做像爱人对待自己喜爱的少男那样的事情。想象一下，他会像个哀求者一样双膝跪地，乞求他想要的东西，发誓，整夜都待在人家的门阶上，准备好遭受任何仆人都不会做的奴性行为。他的朋友和仇敌都会阻止他这样做；他的敌人会批评他为了得到想要的东西而使自己蒙受耻辱，而他的朋友会责备他，并为他感到羞耻。但当爱人这样做时，规范就会纵容他并允许他逃避批评，意味着他的意图反而会得到赞扬。最值得注意的是，人们普遍认为神会宽恕的未能遵从誓言的唯一的人即是爱人。他们说，爱人的誓言根本不是誓言。所以，根据我们的规范，神以及人给予了爱人各种纵容。从这个观点来看，你会认为在这个城邦，成为爱人并热切地回应爱人是非常值得赞扬的事。

“另一方面，当少男吸引爱人时，他们的父亲会让仆人管束他们，明确规定不让少男与爱人交谈。少男的朋友和同龄人如果看到这样的事发生时就会谩骂他们，长辈也不去阻止这种谩骂，或责备他们这样说话。你们看到这种情况时，就会想，相比之下，在我们这个城邦里，恋爱会被认为是很丢人的事。

“我认为情况是这样的。这种事并不十分单纯；如我之前说的，恋爱本身没有对错之分，行为恰当时它即是对，行为不当时它即是错。以不当的方式满足坏人的需求即是错的，以恰当的方式满足好人的需求即是对的。在这一点上，卑鄙的对象即是上面提到的凡俗的爱人，他们爱肉体而不是灵魂。他所爱的东西不是恒定不变的，所以他的爱也不会始终如一：一旦肉体的花蕊（这正是吸引他的东西）凋谢，‘他就远走高飞，消失不见了’，毁掉他以前所有的誓言。但那些热爱良好品行的人终其一生都是恒定不变的，因为他们所爱的东西也是始终如一的。

“我们考验的目的是要充分地、以恰当的方式检验爱人，确保少男满足一种，而远离另一种。这就是为什么我们同时鼓励爱人去追逐少男，又鼓励少男躲避爱人。这是一种比赛，来检验爱人属于哪一类，少男属于哪一类。这就解释了为什么快速俘获内心被认为是错误的：就是为了确保时间起到干预作用，这被认为是检验多数事物的好方法。这也解释了为什么被爱人的金钱或政治权力俘获被认为是错误的。这种情况下，少男要么由于受虐待而害怕地屈从，要么可耻地享受金钱或政治成就的利益。这些东西没有一样被认为是稳定或永恒的，除了这样一个事实，即没有真正的感情能建立在这样的基础之上。

“根据我们的规则，只剩下一种方法，少男以这种方法满足他的爱人是正确的。我之前说过，爱人愿意忍受各种奴役且不算献媚也不受谴责。同样，根据我们的规则，只有一种自愿的奴役不受谴责：那种目的是要产生美德的奴役。我们的观点是，如果某个人愿意屈身为他人效劳，相信那个人会帮助他提升智慧或其他方面的美德，那么这种自愿的奴役并无不对，也不丢脸。

“这两条规则必须合二为一（一条规定对少男的爱，一条规定对智慧及其他美德的爱），才能创造出少男满足他的爱人无过错的条件。当爱人和情郎集合起来，每一方都遵守相应的规则时，这些条件就实现了：爱人完全可以为满足了自己需求的情郎做任何事，情郎也完全可以为使自己变得智慧和高尚的人做任何事。而且一般来说爱人必须能够增进情郎的理解力和品德，情郎必须想要获得教育和智慧。当所有这些条件都满足时，然后，而且只有这时，情郎满足爱人的需求才是对的，而不是相反的情况。

“这种情况下，被欺骗也没什么错；但是，除此之外，爱就是错的，不管你是否被欺骗。假设一个少男认为他的爱人很富有，由于贪恋钱财就满足了他；如若结果证明这位爱人很贫穷，少男没得到任何钱，那他做的仍是错的。这类少男显示了他品性中的一些东西：他愿意为了挣钱为任何人效劳，而那是不对的。在同样的基础上，假设一位少男认为他的爱人是个好人，就满足了他，希望通过和他的爱人的交往使自己变得更好。如果结果证明这位爱人是个坏人，缺乏美德，这样被欺骗也没有耻辱。这类少男也显示了他品性中的一些东西：他为了获得美德、使自己变得更好，愿意为他人做任何事，没有什么动机比这更值得赞扬了。所以为了获得美德而满足爱人是完全正确的。这是属于神圣女神的神圣之爱，对城邦和个人来说都是巨大价值的来源，因为它迫使爱人和情郎重视自己的品德。其他形式的爱都来源于另一位一般的爱神。

“费德鲁斯，这就是我对爱的理解，”他说，“这是我在没准备的情况下能说的最好的了。”

当鲍桑尼亚停下来时（我是从专家那里学的这种拐弯抹角的说话技巧），阿里斯托得摩斯说，轮到阿里斯托芬发言了。但是，巧合的是，他由于吃得过多或其他原因正在打嗝，无法说话。他对厄律克西马库（这位医生正坐在他下一位）说：“正巧，你要么帮助我止住嗝，要么替我说，直到我不打嗝为止。”厄律克西马库回答道：“两件事我都做。我来取代你的位置，等轮到我的时候你再讲。我发言时，你屏住呼吸，可能就可以止住嗝；如果没止住，你就用水漱漱口。如果还是打嗝，你就用个东西戳一下鼻孔，让自己打个喷嚏。这样一两次，不管多么顽固的嗝儿，都可以止得住了。”

“尽快开始你的发言吧，”阿里斯托芬说，“我照你说的办。”

厄律克西马库说：“我是这样认为的：鲍桑尼亚的发言，开头很好，但没有贯彻下去，结尾处不是很相称，所以我尽力完成他的论证。我认为他对爱情有两重性，做了很妥当的区分。但是爱不仅可以通过人们对英俊的人的情绪反应来表达，而且还有许多种其他类型的反应：既可以追溯到动物的生殖，也可以追溯到植物的生长。我可以说，存在于神圣的或世俗的各种活动中的爱的威力适用于一切类型的存在物。我确信，我是从医学、从我自己的专业领域认识到爱神的威力有多么伟大、多么美妙，他的力量延伸到人类和神圣生命的各个方面。

“我将从医学开始，使这种专长占据第一位。身体的性质中天生就显示出了这两种爱。人们通常认为身体的健康和疾病是不同的状态，彼此互不相同。当事物不同时，它们渴望和爱的对象也不同。因此，在身体健康和患有疾病的情况下爱是不同的。鲍桑尼亚刚才说，满足好人是对的，而满足放纵的人是错的。身体也一样。对于每个身体，满足好的部分是对的，且你应该这样做（行医就是这个意思）；但满足不好的、有病的部分就是错的，若你打算成为医术高明的人，就应该剥夺那部分的满足。

“实质上，医学就是关于填满和排空身体之爱的各种形式的知识。医生最重要的是能区分出这些过程中正确的和错误的爱。好的医生能引起改变，这样身体就能获得一种爱而不是另一种；当一种爱不在那里而应该在那里时，他知道如何来灌输这种爱，并排除在那里的另一种爱。他应该能够取出身体中最对抗的元素，在它们之间建立友谊和爱。最对抗的元素是对立的，如冷与热，苦与甜，干与湿，等等。找到在这些元素之间灌输爱与和谐的方法的人是我们的祖先阿斯克勒庇俄斯（这是一些诗人告诉我们的，有些就在这里，我相信他们），他就是这样创建医学的。

“如我所说的，医学完全由这位神掌管，他也掌管体育和农业；任何人思考片刻都会清楚，这一点也适用于音乐。这可能是赫拉克利特心里所想的，虽然他没有很好地表达出来。关于团结，他说，‘通过背离，它与自身达成一致。……就像弓或琴的和谐’。若说和谐与自身背离，或它的构成要素仍然分离的时候它就存在，是很荒谬的。但可能他心里想的是，音乐的技艺是通过用一致性替换高音和低音之间的分歧，从而创造和谐。高音和低音仍分离的时候，它们之间当然不会存在和谐。和谐就是协调，协调是一种一致性；但是当分离的东西仍分离时就不能从中创建一致性，只有当分离的东西一致时才能创造和谐。同样，韵律是通过用一致性替换快拍和慢拍之间的分离创造出来的。正如医学在一个区域内创造一致性，音乐通过向涉及的元素中灌输爱和协调，在另一个区域内创造它；转过来，音乐就是与和谐和韵律有关的爱的各种形式的知识。

“在和谐和韵律的结构中，考虑其自身，不难发现爱的作用；所以爱的双重性在这里没有呈现出来。但是当用韵律与和谐对人产生影响时，不管是创作音乐（他们称之为‘作曲’），还是恰当运用曲调和诗歌（称为‘教育’），困难就出现了，需要好的音乐大师了。这里同样的原则仍然有效：你应该满足并促进秩序井然的人们的爱，或者那些尚未秩序井然但能用这种方式获得改善的人的爱。这种爱是美好的、神圣的，是神圣的缪斯之爱。但一般的爱是缪斯圣歌女神之爱；当是这种爱时，我们必须慎重，确保爱的接受者享受它提供的欢愉，而不会变得放纵。同样，在我的专业领域，工作的一个关键部分是正确处理通过烹饪艺术满足的欲望，确保人们享受这种欢愉，而不生病。所以在音乐、医学及其他所有领域中，既有人类的也有神的，我们必须尽其所能地留意这两种爱，因为这两种爱都存在。

“季节的特性也是由这两种爱决定的。当我之前提到的那些元素（热与冷、干与湿）受到秩序井然的爱的影响时，它们就会彼此协调一致，风调雨顺。它们的到来就会为人类及其他动植物带来丰收和健康，不会造成危害。但是当无节制的、暴力的爱主导季节时，它们就会造成巨大的破坏。这些情况常常会造成牲畜和植物得瘟疫及其他反常疾病。霜、冰雹和疫病是互相激烈竞争和混乱的结果，是这种爱的影响。所以我们所说的天文学是关于爱的作用的知识，因为这些影响星辰和一年中四季的运行。

“而且，各种祭祀和占卜的所有活动（这些是神与人类互相交流的方式）都在于维持一种爱，而消除另一种。当人们未满足、尊重或把活动中的首要位置让给秩序井然的爱时，而且对另一种爱做了这些，那么就常常会出现对自己父母（活着或去世的）或神的不尊敬。预言有一个职责，就是留意那些错误的爱，并将其消除。它还有一个职责，就是通过理解人类生命中爱的运作如何影响正确的行为和虔诚之心，在神和人类之间产生友谊。

“所以当把这一切集合在一起时，爱作为整体拥有巨大（更确切地说是所有的）力量。但是拥有最大力量的爱是那种本性表现在良好的行为中、以自制和正义为标志、在人类和神的层级上的爱，它是我们所有幸福的源泉。它使我们能够与彼此及神交往并成为朋友。

“可能我对爱神的颂词遗漏了许多东西，如果是这样，我并不是故意的。如果我遗漏了任何东西，阿里斯托芬，该你来填补缺口了。或者，如果你想到了其他对神的颂词，就继续说吧，你已经不打嗝了。”

现在轮到阿里斯托芬了（阿里斯托得摩斯说的），他说：“是的，已经不打嗝了，但是直到我用打喷嚏的方法后才停下来。这让我怀疑是否是我身体中‘秩序井然’的部分想要那种噪音和引起打喷嚏的挠痒。无论如何，我一打喷嚏嗝就立即被止住了。”

“亲爱的阿里斯托芬，”厄律克西马库说，“当心你正在做的事。你一开口就开玩笑，这让我不得不提防着你的玩笑，不然你的发言就可以不被打扰了。”

“你说得对，厄律克西马库，”阿里斯托芬说，“我收回刚才说的话。但如果你留意我的发言的话，别以为我不敢说一些有趣的事（那是我的缪斯女神的特权和典型特征），我是害怕说了荒唐的话。”

厄律克西马库说：“你认为你可以射我一箭然后就逃跑啊！好吧，当心了；你必须对你说的话负责。不过即使如此，如果我下了决心，我也会放你一马的。”

“事实上，厄律克西马库，”阿里斯托芬说，“我确实打算采用一种与你和鲍桑尼亚发言中不同的方式。我认为人们完全没有认识到爱神的力量；如果他们领会了这一点，他们会为他建造最大的寺庙和祭坛，做最大规模的祭祀。事实上，人们没有为他做其中任何一项，虽然他是最值得这样做的。他比其他任何神都更爱人类；他是他们的助手，是疾病的医治者，那些疾病的治愈构成了人类最大的幸福。我会试着把他的力量解释给你们听，你们再把这些传授给其他人。

“首先，你们必须要了解人类的本性以及它发生了什么变化。很久以前，我们的本性与现在的不同，而且有很大的差异。首先，人类有三种性别，而不是现在的男性和女性两种。还有第三种，它结合了这两种；现在它的名字保存了下来，不过这种性别已经消失了。‘阴阳人’是一种独特的性别，也是一个名字，它结合了男性和女性的特征；现在除了名字什么也没留下，现在它的名字是对人的侮辱。

“其次，最初的人外形是个圆形的整体，背部和两侧形成了一个圆。每个人有四只手、四条腿，圆形的脖子上有两张一样的脸。一个头上有两张脸，朝向相反的方向，有四只耳朵，两个生殖器，其余的你们可以从我刚才说的话中想象出来。他们可以笔直地来回走动，像我们现在一样，可以随心所欲地朝任何一个方向走。当他们要动身快跑时，就用八肢支撑着自己的身体，快速地旋转着移动，就像翻筋斗一样，他们在旋转时，腿伸直着翻筋斗。

“之所以有这三种性别以及他们如描述的那样，是因为男性最初是由太阳生的，女性是由大地生的，而阴阳人是由月亮生的，因为月亮是太阳和大地的结合体。他们是圆的，所以他们也以圆形的方式移动，因为他们与自己的父母相像。他们在力量和活力方面很糟糕；他们有雄心壮志，向神发起进攻。荷马讲的关于厄菲阿尔忒斯和俄图斯的故事，说他们如何尝试着爬上天国攻击诸神，实际上指的就是他们。宙斯和其他神讨论如何对付他们，但没有得出结论。诸神不知道如何能杀死他们，不能像以前对待巨人那样用雷电把人类全部消灭；如果他们那样做的话，诸神从他们那里得到的荣誉和祭品将会消失。但也不能让他们再这样蛮横无理下去。在经过深思之后，宙斯有了个主意：‘我有个计划，通过这个计划人类还可以继续存在，但非常虚弱，不能再有这样的野蛮行径了。我现在把他们每个人一分为二；他们将变得虚弱，也对我们更有用，因为他们人数增多了。他们将用两条腿直立着走路。如果我们觉得他们仍然蛮横，不肯安静下来，我就再把他们分成两半，这样他们就只能用一条腿跳着走路了。’

“说完之后，宙斯把人劈成了两半，就像人们把苹果切成两半或把煮熟的蛋切开一样。他在切每个人的时候，告诉阿波罗把他们的脸和与之相连的半面脖颈扭向伤口那面，这样人类就能看到自己的伤口，变得懂规矩点儿；宙斯也让他治愈其他伤口。阿波罗扭转了脸；他把周身的皮肤拉向现在称为腹部的方向（就像用拉链把手提袋拉紧一样），然后在腹部的中央留了一个口，我们称之为肚脐。他也磨平了许多其他褶皱，把胸部弄成鞋匠磨平皮革的褶皱时使用的工具的形状。但他留了一些肚脐附近的褶皱，提醒人类很久以前发生在他们身上的事。

“由于他们被分成两半了，每个人都想念自己的另一半，希望能与另一半在一起。他们用胳膊搂着彼此，交织在一起，想要形成一个单独的个体。所以他们死于饥饿和凝滞不动，因为他们不想离开彼此。当其中一半死去，另一半被剩下时，剩下的那一半就寻找另一个，与另一个交织在一起。有时他遇到的那一个是女人的一半（这一半我们现在称为‘女人’），有时是剖开的男人的一半。不管怎样，他们继续以这种方式死去。

“宙斯怜悯他们，想出了另一个办法：他把他们的生殖器移到前面来；那之前，他们的生殖器在身体的后面，不是与彼此交配进行有性繁殖，而是在地上繁殖，就像蝉一样。所以宙斯把生殖器移到前面，这样通过男女交配进行繁殖。这样做的目的在于，如果男人遇到女人，进行交配，就会繁殖后代，人类就可以延续。并且，如果两个男人在一起，他们至少能得到性交的满足感，然后平息情欲、放松、继续工作，考虑生活中的其他事情。

“从远古时代人类对彼此内在的渴望就是这样开始的。它吸引我们本性的两部分恢复到一起，尽力合二为一，治愈人类从前剖开的伤口。我们每个人都是人类要匹配的一半，因为我们像比目鱼一样被分成两半，被一分为二，我们每个人都在寻找匹配自己的另一半。从阴阳人（那时称为雌雄同体）被切开的男人为女人所吸引，许多奸夫属于这一群体。同样，为男人所吸引、成为淫妇的女人也属于这一群体。那些被从女性切开的女人对男人一点儿也不感兴趣，而更多地受到女人的吸引，女同性恋属于这个群体。

“那些被从男性切开的人喜爱男性。当他们还是少男时，由于他们是男性的一部分，他们受到男人的吸引，喜欢与男人一起睡、被他们拥抱。这些是他们那一代中最好的人，不管是少男还是青年，因为他们天生是最勇敢的。有些人说他们无耻，但并不是这样。他们这样做并不是由于无耻，而是因为他们大胆、勇敢、有阳刚之气，并赞赏其他人的这种品质。下面就是明显证据：这样的男人长大后，是唯一能成为政治家的人。当他们成人后，会受到少男的性吸引；他们没有要结婚娶妻生子的本能愿望，尽管按照规范他们会被迫做这些。他们自己对不结婚而和爱人相守共度人生很满足。总之，这样的人成为少男的爱人，少男热爱自己的男性爱人，总是喜欢他们共同的本性。

“当少男的爱人或其他类人遇到自己的另一半时，他就会欣喜若狂，显示出喜爱、关怀和爱慕。两人一刻也不想离开彼此。这些人终生都在一起度过，但仍说不出想从彼此那里得到什么。我的意思是，没有人会认为他们想要的仅是性交，这正是他们在彼此的陪伴中找到如此多的乐趣并对它如此重视的原因。显然他们每个人心中都有一些无法表达的愿望；他像圣人一样，部分领会了自己所想要的，并隐晦地对别人进行暗示。想象一下，当他们躺在一起时，赫菲斯托斯拿着工具在旁边看着他们，并问：‘人类，你想从对方身上得到什么？’如果他们不知道，想象他会接着问：‘这是你们想要的吗，完完整整地在一起，无论白天黑夜都不分离？如果这是你们想要的，我就把你们融合在一起，这样你们两个就变成一个人了。然后你们两人只要活着，就可以共享生命，因为你们是一个人；当你们死亡时，你们作为一个人而不是两个人，共享冥界中的死亡。但是先想想这是不是你们渴望的，实现这种状态是否能满足你们。’我们都知道，听到这种提议的人没一个会拒绝，显然没人会想要其他东西了。每个人都会想，他现在听到的正是他一直以来渴望的东西：与所爱的人在一起，融为一体，合二为一而不是两个人。其原因就是这是我们最初的自然状态，我们过去是完整的个体：‘爱’是渴望并追求完整之名。

“在这之前，如我说的，我们是一体的；但是现在，由于自己的罪恶，我们被宙斯分开了，就像阿卡迪亚人被斯巴达人分开了一样。还有这种危险，即如果我们对神灵不守规矩，我们会被进一步分开，像墓碑上浮雕中的人一样走动，被从鼻子锯成两半，像半个骰子一样。所以每个人都应该鼓励他人对神灵显出全部应有的尊敬，这样我们就可以避免一种惩罚，实现另一种结果，把爱神作为我们的领袖和将领。没人应该违背爱神，站在错误的神的一边即是违背爱神。如果我们是神的朋友并把他拉到我们这一边，我们应该做现在几乎无人做的事——找到真正属于我们的爱人并与之亲近。

“我不想让厄律克西马库认为我的发言仅是个喜剧，针对的是鲍桑尼亚和阿伽松。很可能他们属于这种类型，都是男性本质的另一半。但我所说的也适用于所有的男人和女人：只有当爱得出结论，每个人找到自己的爱人并恢复最初的本性，我们人类才能获得幸福。如果这是理想状态，当前环境下最接近它的必定是最好的：即找一个与你自己的品性最适合的爱人。如果我们想赞美对这件事负责的神，我们当然应该赞美爱神。在当前情况下，他为我们做了能做的最好的，指引我们走向天生与我们接近的事物。他也为我们提供了未来最大的希望：即如果我们尊敬神，他将把我们恢复为最初的本性，使我们愈合，从而给我们最好的幸福。

“好了，厄律克西马库，这就是我关于爱的发言，和你的迥然不同。就像我刚才说的，别把我的发言当作玩笑。咱们继续，看看剩下的发言者有什么要说的——更确切地说是两个，因为只剩下阿伽松和苏格拉底了。”

“我会按你说的做的，”厄律克西马库说，“不管怎样，我非常欣赏你的颂辞。如果我事先不知道苏格拉底和阿伽松是爱情这个题目的专家的话，我会担心他们可能没什么可说的了，因为我们已经有这么多种发言了。不过，照目前的情况，对于他们两位，我还是很有信心的。”

苏格拉底说：“那是因为你们成功参与了我们的竞争。如果你处在我的位置上，更确切地说是处在阿伽松也做了精彩发言之后我所在的位置，你将会诚惶诚恐，处在和我一样的窘境之中。”

“你在设法给我施咒语，苏格拉底，”阿伽松说，“让我觉得观众对我的发言有很高期望，从而让我紧张。”

“阿伽松，如果我那样做的话，那就未免太健忘了吧，”苏格拉底说，“你站在舞台上，领着演员们高视阔步地登台，面对众多的观众展示自己的作品时没有一点儿慌张，我看到了你那时展示出来的勇气和自信。所以我认为你不会在我们这个小团体面前紧张。”

“但是，苏格拉底，”阿伽松说，“我希望你不要认为我对剧场如此着迷，以至于没有意识到少数几个有智慧的人比一群无知的人更使人担心。”

“阿伽松，”苏格拉底说，“如果我认为你在任何方面都天真无邪，那我就是大错特错了。我很清楚，如果你发现了一些你认为聪明的人，你给予他们的注意力会比给予一般群众的多。但恐怕我们不属于那一类；毕竟我们也在那里，是那群人的一部分。但如果你找到了其他一些聪明的人，若你觉得在他们面前做了一些错事，你可能会感到羞愧——你是不是这个意思？”

“是的。”阿伽松答道。

“但如果你在一般群众面前做了错事就不会感到羞愧吗？”

这时候费德鲁斯插话了：“亲爱的阿伽松，如果你回答苏格拉底的问题，只要他有讨论的伙伴，尤其是有魅力的人，他不会在乎我们当前的活动是否会有进展。我喜欢听苏格拉底的讨论，但我必须负责对爱神的颂辞，从你们每个人的发言中提取一些内容作为你们的贡献。因此你们两人做完对神的颂辞后，再继续进行辩论吧。”

“你说得对，费德鲁斯，”阿伽松说：“我没有理由不发言。至于和苏格拉底的辩论，以后会有足够多的机会。

“我首先想说一下我认为应该怎么说，然后再开始讲。我认为之前的所有发言者都不是赞美神灵，而是称颂人类从神那里得到幸福。没人谈论给予我们这些东西的神灵自身的本性。不管话题是什么，做颂辞只有一种正确的方式，就是定义颂扬的主题的性质及这个主题产生的效果。所以，就爱神来说，正确的做法是先赞美他的性质，然后赞美他的天赋。

“我敢说，虽然所有的神灵都是幸福的，但爱神（如果这样说合适且不冒犯任何人的话）是最幸福的，因为他是最英俊、最优秀的。他最英俊，是因为：首先，费德鲁斯，他是最年轻的神。他自己匆忙地从老年（它比应该的更快地发生在我们身上）逃离，也为这一点提供了证据。爱天生讨厌老年，并与之保持距离。他总是与年轻人结交，是他们中的一分子；古语说得对，物以类聚。虽然我赞同费德鲁斯说的许多话，但我不赞同爱神比克罗诺斯和伊阿珀托斯年长。我敢说，他是诸神中最年轻的，且会永葆青春。根据赫西奥德和巴门尼德说的，古代诸神对彼此做的事（他们说的是真的）是由于必要性而非爱。如果爱神在他们当中，诸神就不会阉割或囚禁彼此，或进行许多其他暴行；就像现在及爱神开始管理诸神时一样，他们之间会有友谊与和平。

“他既年轻，又娇嫩；但需要有荷马那样素养的诗人才能说出他有多娇嫩。荷马把妄想神说成是一位女神，她也很娇嫩；至少她的脚很娇嫩，如他说的：

但对大地来说，她的脚很娇嫩；

她从不靠近人类，而是行走在他们的头上。

荷马说她不在坚硬的东西上行走，而是走在柔软的东西上，我认为这是她的娇嫩性的明显证据。爱神的娇嫩也可运用同样的证据。他不在大地或头骨（它一点儿也不软）上行走，而是行走并居住在最柔软的东西之中。他在神和人类的品性和头脑中安家；但并不是所有的头脑，而是当行走在坚韧的性格上时，当发现具有柔和性格的人时，他就定居下来。由于他不断地与最柔软的事物中最柔和的成员接触，不只用他的脚，而是全身心地接触，他必定极其娇嫩。

“所以他很年轻、很娇嫩，形体上也是流动的。否则，如果他很粗暴的话，他就不能完全遮盖人们的心灵，或穿梭于其中时不被发觉。他形体良好、流畅的充分证据在于他的优雅，人们普遍认为这是爱的独特特征（粗俗与爱总是互为仇敌）。他面容姣好可通过他总是在花丛中打发时间这个事实显示。爱神不栖身在没有花朵或花朵凋谢的身体、心灵或事物上；但当他发现有花朵盛开和芳香的地方，他就停留下来。

“关于爱神的美貌已经说够多了（虽然还有许多可说）；我接下来必须说的话题是爱神的美德。最重要的一点是，爱神在与神或人交往时，不做不公正的事，他自己也没遭受不公正的事。当爱神身上发生神秘事时，从来不是靠武力进行的（因为爱从来不是被迫的）。当爱神做事时，他也从不使用武力，因为每个人都赞成爱的所有命令；任何双方同意的事，就是‘城邦的主宰即法律’规定为正义的事。

“和正义一样，爱神也是非常节制的。人们普遍认为，节制掌管着欢愉和欲望，没有什么欢愉能比得上爱。如果欢愉较弱的话，必定是受爱掌控，他必是它们的主人；如果爱掌控着欢愉和欲望，他必定异常节制。

“至于勇敢，‘即使阿瑞斯也敌不过’爱神。不是阿瑞斯俘获了爱，而是爱俘获了阿瑞斯（据说是阿佛洛狄特的爱），俘获者掌控着被俘获者。掌控着其他人中最勇敢者的人必定是所有人中最勇敢的。

“我已经说了爱神的公正、节制和勇气；还需要说的是他的智慧。我必须尽可能充分地阐述这一点。首先——像厄律克西马库敬重自己的专业领域一样，我也对自己的领域表示敬重——爱神是如此熟练的诗人，他使其他人也成为了诗人。任何人受到爱的触动时，都会变成诗人，‘即使以前与缪斯是陌生人的人也这样’。我们可以把这作为证据，认为爱神是各种艺术作品的优秀创作者，因为你不可能给予他人你没有的东西，或教导他人你自己不知道的东西。当然，关于生物的创造，谁会否认是由于爱，一切生物才存在并被创造出来呢？关于在艺术或工艺方面的专门技术，我们不是都知道那些受爱神教导的人最后都声名显赫，而那些没被他触动的人都默默无闻吗？阿波罗跟随着自己的欲望和爱为他指引的路，才发现了箭术、医药和预言，这使得阿波罗成为爱神的学生。同样，他使缪斯成为他在音乐方面的学生，赫菲斯托斯成为他在冶炼方面的学生，雅典娜成为他在编织方面的学生，宙斯成为他在掌管神和人类方面的学生。所以只有当爱神出生后，诸神的活动才变得有条理——爱美，当然，因为爱不可能指向丑陋。在那之前，如我开始说的，神在必要的统治之下做了许多坏事。但一旦爱神降生，所有的好事都由于爱美而发生在神和人身上。

“所以，费德鲁斯，在我看来，爱神自身是极美、极优秀的，并且创立了各种美好善良的东西。我心情很激动，想用韵文来表述，我认为爱促成了

人类的和平，大海的风平浪静，

狂风的平息，痛苦的寂然长眠。

爱排除了我们的隔阂，用亲密填满我们，使我们聚在一起像现在这样分享感受，节日、合唱和祭祀时他来担当我们的领导者。他温和，排除了野蛮。他对友好慷慨大方，对敌意心胸狭窄。他亲切、和善；受到智者的关注、神的钦佩；拒绝他的人渴望他，欣赏他的人珍惜他；他是豪华、典雅、精美、优雅、欲望、渴望的父亲；他关心好人，无视坏人；在困难、恐惧、渴望和演说中，他是最好的舵手、水兵、伙伴和拯救者。对所有的神和人类来说，他是最优美、最好的领导者；每个人都应该跟着他唱优美的赞美诗，分享他唱的歌，吸引每一位神灵和人类的心灵。

“费德鲁斯，这就是我的发言，”他说，“是我对爱神的献辞；在我能掌控的范围内，结合了诙谐和一定程度的严肃性。”

阿里斯托得摩斯说，阿伽松发完言后，在场的每个人都发出了钦佩的呐喊声，因为这个年轻人的发言某种程度上很好地映射在了他自己及爱神身上。苏格拉底看着阿里斯托得摩斯说：“阿库门努的儿子，你还认为我之前的忧虑是庸人自扰吗？我刚才说阿伽松会做精彩发言，我将难以为继，不是很有预见性吗？”

“有一点，”厄律克西马库说，“你很有预见性，就是你说阿伽松将做精彩发言；但我认为你不会无言以对的。”

“我的好朋友，”苏格拉底说，“跟在如此优美华丽的发言后面，我或其他任何人怎么不会无言以对呢？其余部分还不让人吃惊；但到最后时，谁会不被他优美的语言和措辞打动呢？我知道，我的发言远远达不到这种精妙，我非常惭愧，差点儿从这儿逃跑（我若是有其他地方可去，就逃跑了）。他的发言让我想起了高尔吉斯，所以我的体验和荷马描述的一模一样。我还担心阿伽松在发言结束时，会拿雄辩的演说家高尔吉斯的头脑指向我的发言，使我哑口无言。然后我意识到，我若同意加入你们一起颂扬爱神、宣称拥有爱情方面的专长，我就是在愚弄自己；实际上我对颂扬某物都包含什么内容一无所知。我非常天真，竟以为你们会讲讲颂扬这个主题的真相；我认为这应该是基础，然后从中选择最出色的特点，以能呈现主题的最佳方式对其进行阐述。我自豪的是我认为能做精彩发言，因为我知道如何就一个主题进行颂扬的真相。

“但事实上，似乎这不是赞美事物的正确方式。相反，你应该宣称你的主题有最伟大、最出色的品质，不管它是否真的有；如果你说的不是真的，也没什么关系。现在提议做的似乎是我们每个人应该装出赞美爱神的样子，并不是说我们真的应该这样做。你们其余人找到任何可说的事物，把它归因于爱，说他像这样，对那件事负责，使他看起来尽可能地出色、优秀，必定就是这个原因。你们显然是对无知者这样做（当然不是对理解这个主题的人这样做）；你们的颂扬当然很优美，令人印象很深刻。

“但是我并不知道进行颂扬的正确方式，我是由于无知才同意在轮到我时进行发言的。但那是‘舌头’承诺的，而不是‘心’；所以忘了我的承诺吧。我不会进行那种颂扬的——我不能那样做。然而，若你们愿意的话，我准备告诉你们真相，不过是以我自己的方式，不与你们的发言进行竞争，这可能会让我自己看起来有点儿荒谬。所以，费德鲁斯，告诉我是否有进行那种发言的必要，那样的发言会讲出爱的真相，但使用的是发言时正好出现在我头脑中的词和句子。”

费德鲁斯及其他人让他以自己认为最好的方式进行发言。

“费德鲁斯，”苏格拉底说，“你能也允许我问阿伽松几个小问题，这样我可以根据与他达成的共识进行发言吗？”

“我同意，”费德鲁斯说，“随便问吧。”

然后，阿里斯托得摩斯说，苏格拉底开始了他的发言。

“亲爱的阿伽松，我认为你的发言有个很好的开头，你说我们应该先说出爱的品性，然后说他产生的效果。我认为以那样的方式开头值得赞扬。那么，既然你在其他方面出色地阐述了爱的性质，也请告诉我这一点。爱的性质是对某物的爱，还是没有对象的爱？我并不是问爱是否是某个特定父母的孩子；如果在这个意义上我问爱是对母亲的爱还是对父亲的爱，会很荒谬。但是假设我问的问题是，一位父亲是否是某人的父亲。如果你想给出正确答案，你当然会说父亲是儿子或女儿的父亲，是吗？”

“当然。”阿伽松说。

“母亲也是一样的吗？”

他也同意这一点。

“那么”，苏格拉底说，“再回答一些，你就会更好地理解我头脑中所想的。假设我问：兄弟，在他是兄弟的情况下，是否是某人的兄弟？”

他说是的。

“也就是说，是兄弟或姐妹的兄弟？”

他同意。

“现在告诉我关于爱的情形，”他说，“爱是对某物的爱，还是没有对象的爱？”

“毫无疑问是对某物的爱！”

“现在，”苏格拉底说，“记住爱是什么。但是告诉我：爱是否渴望他所爱的对象？”

“渴望。”他说。

“当他渴望并爱时，他是否拥有他渴望和爱的对象？”

“没有——至少可能没有。”他说。

“考虑一下，”苏格拉底说，“渴望针对的是你需要的东西，当然不只是可能的，而是必须是这样的，如果你不需要某物，你不会渴望它。我觉得它肯定是必须的；你觉得呢？”

“我也这样认为。”阿伽松说。

“好的。现在，高个子的人想要高个子，或强壮的人想要强壮吗？”

“根据我们已经同意的说法，那是不可能的。”

“是的，因为没人需要他已经拥有的品质。”

“是的。”

“假设某个强壮的人想要强壮，”苏格拉底说，“行动迅速的人想要迅速，健康的人想要健康。你可能会想，在这样及所有像这样类似的情况下，那些拥有这些品质的人也渴望他们已经拥有的东西。我这样说是想阻止我们产生错误的想法。如果你考虑一下，阿伽松，这些人必定任何时候都拥有这些品质，不管他们是否想要，因此这不可能是他们渴望的。所以如果某个人说，‘我很健康，我想要健康’，或‘我很富有，我想要富有’，或‘我渴望我已经拥有的东西’，我们应该跟他说：‘朋友，你已经拥有财富或健康或力量了，你想要的是在未来拥有它们，因为目前不管你是否想要它们，你已经拥有它们了。当你说你渴望已经拥有的东西时，问问自己你的意思是否是你想要现在拥有的东西在将来仍然拥有。’他必须同意这一点，是不是？”

阿伽松说是的。

苏格拉底说：“这些情况下某人做的事是爱他缺少的、不拥有的东西，也就是将来继续拥有他现在拥有的东西。”

“当然。”他说。

“所以渴望的这个及所有其他情况是对缺少的、实际上不拥有的东西的渴望。渴望和爱针对的是你不拥有的、缺少的、需要的东西。”

“当然。”他说。

“那么好吧，”苏格拉底说，“咱们总结一下刚才达成一致的事。首先，爱是对某物的爱；其次，某物是他当前需要的东西。”

“是的。”他说。

“现在，记住这一点，回想一下你刚才在发言中说的爱是什么。如果你愿意的话，我来提醒你。我认为你是这样说的，神的事是通过对美好事物的爱组织的，因为不可能爱丑陋的事物。这是不是你说的？”

“是的，我是这样说的。”阿伽松说。

“朋友，你说的话似乎有理，”苏格拉底说，“如果你说得对，那么爱岂不是必须爱美、而不爱丑陋吗？”

他同意。

“我们不是同意他爱他需要和不拥有的事物吗？”

“是的。”他说。

“由此断定爱需要美且不拥有美吧？”

“肯定是这样。”他说。

“好吧，你会说需要美且完全没有美的事物是美的吗？”

“不会。”

“如果是这样，你仍然假定爱是美的吗？”

阿伽松说：“苏格拉底，我似乎不知道刚才自己在说些什么。”

“哎呀，你刚才做的仍是很精彩的发言，阿伽松，”他说，“不过请再回答一个小问题：你认为好的事物也是美的吗？”

“我这样认为。”

“那么如果爱需要美的东西，好的东西是美的，则他需要好的东西吧？”

“我无法反驳你，苏格拉底，”他说，“咱们接受事物就像你说的那样吧。”

“你无法反驳的是真理，亲爱的朋友阿伽松，”苏格拉底说，“反驳苏格拉底一点儿也不难。”

“现在我让你喘口气。我尝试向你复述我曾听到的关于爱的故事，那是曼提尼亚一个叫狄奥提玛的女人告诉我的。她对这及许多其他事物都很了解。有一次，她告诉雅典人供奉哪些祭祀，从而把瘟疫推迟了十年。她也是教导我爱的方式的人。我将汇报她所说的话，把它作为我和阿伽松得出的结论的基础，不过是尽我一己之力罢了。

“阿伽松，如你所说的，人们应该首先说明爱是谁及他有什么样的品性，然后再说明他的效力。我认为最简单的是汇报我曾经和狄奥提玛进行的一次讨论的内容，在讨论时她对我提出了一些问题。我对她说的几乎和阿伽松刚才跟我说的完全一样：爱神是位伟大的神，他自身也是美的。她反驳我的论据跟我用于反驳阿伽松的也一样，根据我的推理，证明爱既不美也不好。

“我说，‘你是什么意思，狄奥提玛？那么爱是丑陋的、坏的了？’

“她说，‘这话多么亵渎神明啊！你认为任何不美的事物必然是丑陋的吗？’

“‘我当然这样认为。’

“‘不智慧的事物必是无知的吗？你难道没有意识到某种介于智慧和无知之间的事物吗？’

“‘那是什么？’

“‘就是有正确的见解，但不能说明有这些见解的理由。难道你没意识到这不是认知吗？因为只有能给出理由才具有知识；但它也不是无知，因为无知不会知道真理。当然，正确的观点具有这种情形，介于理解和无知之间。’

“‘你说得对。’我说。

“‘那么不要以为不美的事物必是丑的，不好的事物必是坏的。同样，你自己也同意爱既不好也不美时，不要认为他因而必是丑陋且坏的，而应该是介于这两者之间。’

“‘但是，’我说，‘每个人都赞成爱是位伟大的神。’

“‘你的意思是不知道的每个人，’她说，‘还是包括那些知道的？’

“‘当然是每个人。’

“她笑着说，‘但是苏格拉底，如果人们否认爱是神的话，怎么赞同他是位伟大的神呢？’

“‘这些人是谁？’我说。

“‘你是一个，’她说，‘我是另一个。’

“听到此后，我询问，‘你怎能这样说呢？’

“‘很简单，’她说，‘告诉我，你认为所有的神都是幸福、美丽的吗？或者你敢提议任何神不美、不幸福吗？’

“‘以宙斯的名义，我不会。’我说。

“‘你认为那些拥有好和美的事物的人是幸福的吗？’

“‘当然。’

“‘但是你刚才赞同爱是因为需要好和美的事物，他才渴求那些他需要的东西。’

“‘是的，我同意那一点。’

“‘因此如果他需要美和好的事物他怎能是神呢？’

“‘似乎不可能。’

“‘那么，你是否看出你认为爱不是神？’

“‘但爱会是什么呢？’我说，‘凡人？’

“‘远非如此。’

“‘那是什么呢？’

“‘就像之前讨论的那些例子一样，’她说，‘他介于凡人和神仙之间。’

“‘狄奥提玛，那使他成为什么？’

“‘他是伟大的精灵，苏格拉底。归为精灵的一切事物都介于神和人之间。’

“‘他们有什么职能啊？’我问道。

“‘他们解释并传递人至神及神至人的消息。他们传达人类的祈祷和祭祀，并传达神的命令和礼品，作为对祭祀的回报。他们作为这两者的媒介，填补了他们之间的空缺，使宇宙形成了一个相互连接的整体。他们是所有占卜活动的媒介，在祭祀、仪式、符咒、预言和巫术方面具有祭司的专长。神不与人直接接触；他们完全通过精灵这个媒介与人交流和沟通（不管是清醒还是熟睡状态）。具有这些方面智慧的人是受精灵感召的人，而具有其他领域专长和技艺的人只是技工。有许多不同种类的精灵，其中一个便是爱。’

“‘谁是他的父母？’我问道。

“‘这说来话长，’她答道，‘不过无论如何我会告诉你的。阿佛洛狄特出生后，其他神来吃宴席，其中包括创造神的儿子资源神。当他们吃完晚宴后，贫乏神来乞讨，像其他人在宴席上做的那样，她也站在门口。资源神喝多了仙酒（这是在葡萄酒发现前神喝的酒），走到宙斯的花园，醉着睡着了。贫乏神想了一个计划，就是通过怀有资源神的孩子来减轻自己的资源匮乏；她与他睡在了一起，怀上了爱神。所以爱神之所以成为阿佛洛狄特的追随者和随从，是因为他是在她出生那天怀上的；他也天生热爱美，因为阿佛洛狄特很美。

“‘由于他是资源神和贫乏神的儿子，爱神的处境就像这样。首先，他总是贫乏；一点儿也不娇嫩和漂亮，如人们通常认为的那样，他很强硬，有坚硬的皮肤，没有鞋子，没有家。他总是露宿在地上，没有床，躺在露天的门廊下和路边；他和他母亲的本性一样，总是生活在贫乏的状态中。另一方面，他与他父亲相像，谋划得到美和好的东西。他很勇敢、冲动、热情；是位令人敬畏的猎人，总是耍花招；他渴望知识，并有足够的智谋得到它；毕生热爱智慧；擅长使用音乐、药物和诡辩。

“‘究其本性而言，他既不是神仙也不是凡人。他成功的时候，好几次在光棍节突然闯入生活，然后死去，然后（像他父亲一样）复活。他获得的资源不断地枯竭，所以爱神既不是完全没有资源，但也不富有。他也处于智慧和无知之间。情况是这样的。没有一位神热爱智慧，或有变得智慧的欲望——因为他们已经很智慧了；任何已经智慧的人也不会热爱智慧。无知者也不热爱智慧，或有变得智慧的欲望。无知者的问题恰恰在于，虽然不好、不聪明，但他认为自己很令人满意。如果某人认为自己不需要某物，就不可能渴望自己认为不需要的东西。’

“‘狄奥提玛，如果智慧者和无知者都不热爱智慧，’我问，‘那么谁热爱智慧？’

“‘即使一个孩子，’她说，‘到现在也会意识到是那些介于这两者之间的，爱神是其中之一。智慧是最美的事物之一，而爱神爱美。所以爱神必定热爱智慧；作为智慧的热爱者，他介于智慧和无知之间。究其原因还是因为他的出身：他父亲智慧、资源丰富，而他母亲两者皆无。所以这就是爱这个精灵的本性，亲爱的苏格拉底。但你对爱持有原来的观点一点儿也不奇怪。从你所说的判断，我觉得你把爱看作爱的对象，而不是施爱者：那是你把爱想象得非常美的原因。但实际上，美丽、优雅、完美和幸福是值得被爱的对象的特征，而施爱者的本性与之迥异，我已经说过了。’

“‘好吧，狄奥提玛，’我说，‘我确信你的观点是对的。但爱若是这样，他对人类有什么用处呢？’

“‘那是接下来要讲的，苏格拉底，’她说，‘我会尽力告诉你。目前为止我们讲了爱的本性和出生；而且，根据你的想法，爱是对美的事物的爱。不过，假设某个人问我们，“为什么爱是对美的事物的爱？”或者，更清晰地说，“对美的事物的热爱者有一个渴望——他渴望的是什么？”’

“‘渴望它们成为自己的。’我说。

“‘但是这个回答引出了另一个问题，’她说，‘当美的事物成为他自己的后他将得到什么？’

“‘我没有想好那个问题的答案。’

“‘但是，’她说，‘假设某人改变了问题，用“好”这个字代替“美”，并问：“那么，苏格拉底，好的事物的热爱者有一个渴望——他渴望的是什么？”’

“‘渴望它们成为自己的。’我说。

“‘当好的事物成为他自己的后他将得到什么？’

“‘这我就容易回答了，’我说，‘他会幸福。’

“‘所以拥有好的事物使幸福的人感觉幸福；你不必问进一步的问题，“为什么某人想要幸福？”这个回答似乎标志着询问的终结。’

“‘是的。’我说。

“‘你认为这个愿望和这种形式的爱对所有人来说都是共同的，每个人都想要好的事物永远成为自己的吗，或者你有什么想法？’

“‘就像你说的那样，’我说，‘它是每个人共同的愿望。’

“‘那样的话，苏格拉底，’她说，‘如果每个人总是爱相同的事物，我们为什么不说每个人都是爱人呢；我们为什么称某些人为爱人，而某些不是呢？’

“‘这也是我感到疑惑的事。’我说。

“‘没什么可疑惑的，’她说，‘我们现在正在做的是挑选出一种爱，把属于整个种类的名字（“爱”）应用到它身上，而我们对其他种的爱使用的是不同的名字。’

“‘你能再给我举个例子吗？’我问道。

“‘好的，这就是一个。你知道创作形成了一个大体的种类。当任何以前不存在的事物形成时，其中的原因总是创作。所以所有技艺的产品都是创作品，制作它们的艺人都是创作者？’

“‘是的。’我说。

“‘但你知道他们没被称为创作者，而是有不同的名字。在创作的整个种类中，我们选出与音乐和韵文有关的一部分，用整个种类的名字称呼它。只有这才被称为创作，那些拥有这种技能的人才被称为创作者。’

“‘是的。’我说。

“‘爱也是这样。本质上，在所有情况下，对好的事物或幸福的各种类型的渴望就是构成“强大、热烈的爱”的事物。但这可以通过多种途径实现，那些通过其他途径这样做的人，如通过挣钱或竞技或哲学等，不被称为“钟情的人”或“爱人”。只有那些将热情指向术语规定属于整个种类的特定类型的人，才被称为爱、钟情的人和爱人。’

“‘我想是这样。’我说。

“‘已经提出了这样的观念，’她说，‘即爱人是那些寻找自己另一半的人。但，朋友，我的观点是，除非结果是好的，否则爱指向的既不是他们的另一半，也不是他们的整体。毕竟，如果人们认为自身的脚或手患病，他们甚至准备好将那些部分切断。我认为并不是我们每个人都眷恋自己的特性，除非你把好的说成是“他自己的”、“属于他的”，坏的说成是“不属于他的”。要点就是人们爱的唯一对象是好的事物——你难道不同意吗？’

“‘以宙斯之名，我同意！’我说。

“‘那么，’她说，‘我们能简单地说人们热爱好的事物吗？’

“‘能。’我说。

“‘但是，’她说，‘我们不应该补充说他们爱的对象即是他们应该拥有好的事物吗？’

“‘是的，我们应该补充那一点。’

“‘不只那一点，’她说，‘还有他们应该永远拥有好的事物。’

“‘我们也必须补充那一点。’

“‘那么总而言之，’她说，‘爱即是对永远拥有好的事物的渴望。’

“‘你说的绝对正确。’我说。

“‘考虑到爱总是有这个整体目标，’她说，‘我们也应该问问这个问题。如果人们在追求这个目标中显示出的热情和强烈程度被称为爱，那么他们必须用什么方式及什么类型的行动追求它呢？爱真正有什么职能：你能告诉我吗？’

“‘如果我能，狄奥提玛，’我说，‘我就不会对你的智慧感到吃惊了，不会不断以学生的身份来找你，向你学习这些东西了。’

“‘那么我会告诉你，’她说，‘爱的职能是既在身体也在灵魂中产生美。’

“‘需要先知才能阐明你说的话，’我说，‘我理解不了。’

“‘好吧，’她说，‘我会更清楚地解释这一点的。所有的人在身体和灵魂方面都会生育，当我们到了一定年龄，自然会渴望生育。我们不能生育丑的东西，只能生育美的东西。是的，男人和女人之间的性交是一种生育。这个过程中有种神圣的东西；这就是平凡的生物在怀孕和生产中获得永生的方式。在不和谐状况下这是不能发生的。丑陋与神圣不和谐，而美与它适合。所以美作为命运或爱勒提亚，是掌管生育的女神。怀孕的生物接近美的事物时，就变得温和、快乐、放松，并生育幼儿，就是这个原因。但当它接近丑的事物时，就皱眉、在痛苦中缩紧身体；它躲避、变得干瘪，不繁殖；它把婴儿隐藏在身体内部，感觉不适。这就是那些怀孕和肚子已经隆起的人对美如此兴奋的原因：美的承载者身份使他们能解除生育的痛苦。你瞧，苏格拉底，’她说，‘爱的对象不如你所想的那样是美。’

“‘那是什么呢？’

“‘是美之中的繁殖和诞生。’

“‘很可能是这样。’我说。

“‘当然是这样，’她说，‘为什么繁殖是爱的对象？因为繁殖是凡人能永远活着并不朽的最近途径。如果我们之前赞同的事正确的话，即爱的对象是一直拥有好的事物，则结果就是我们除了渴望好的事物，还渴望不朽。它是从爱的对象也必须不朽这个论点推断出的。’

“狄奥提玛在与我的交谈中告诉了我关于爱的方式的所有这些内容。一天她问道，‘苏格拉底，你认为这种爱和渴望的原因是什么？你难道没注意到各种动物（有翼的鸟以及有脚的动物）在感受到繁殖的欲望时陷入了多么可怕的状态。它们受到爱的刺激，首先想要与彼此交配，然后哺育幼儿。即使最弱的动物也愿意为了自己的幼崽与最强的动物搏斗，不惜牺牲性命；它们准备好遭受饥饿的折磨，以便为幼崽提供食物，并为它们做其他任何事。你可能会想，人类这样做是因为他们理解其中的原因；但是，就动物而言，是什么引起了这种对爱的兴奋——你能告诉我吗？’

“我再一次说不知道。

“她说，‘如果你不理解这一点，你认为你会成为爱的方式方面的专家吗？’

“我说，‘但是，狄奥提玛，正如我之前说的，那正是我来向你学习的原因，因为我意识到我需要老师。所以请告诉我这及其他与爱的方式有关的一切的原因吧。’

“‘好吧，’她说，‘如果你相信爱的自然对象是我们经常赞同的东西，你就不应该对此感到意外。关于人类的论点也适用于动物；为了永生并不朽，平凡的生物会尽最大的努力。它只有通过繁殖才能实现这一点：它总是留下下一代，新的一代取代老的一代。这一点甚至也适用于每个生物存活且一直未变的时期——例如，人们说某个人从幼年到老年都是同一个人。虽然他被称为同一个人，但他身体的成分从来不是一样的，而是一些方面在不断地更新，其他方面，如毛发、皮肤、骨骼、血液和全身等，在不断地衰退。这不仅适用于身体，也适用于心灵：属性、人格特征、信念、欲望、欢愉、痛苦、恐惧——这些没有一个在我们之中是保持不变的，而是一些在浮现，一些在消失。更显著的是我们的知识也在改变这个事实，一些知识在形成，而其他的在消失，所以在知识方面我们不是同一个人；的确，每一条目的知识都经历了同样的过程。之所以学习，就是因为知识在不断地消失。遗忘是知识的消失，而学习将新的信息放回到我们的记忆中，取代消失的部分，所以知识一直存在，看起来似乎是一样的。

“‘这就是凡俗的事物保持存在的方式，不是像神圣的事物似的通过保持完全一样实现，而是因为变老、消逝的事物留下了同类的另外的新事物。苏格拉底，这就是凡俗的事物能在生理上及所有其他方面不朽的方式；但不朽的事物是通过与之不同的方式实现这些的。所以如果各种事物天生地珍视自己的后代，你也不应感到吃惊。各种事物展示出热情是为了实现不朽，而这正是爱的本质。’

“但实际上，我听到她的话后非常吃惊，就问她，‘嗯，狄奥提玛，你很有智慧，但事物真的如你所说的那样吗？’

“她像位十足的智者一样，说，‘你可以确信这一点。如果你看看人们热爱荣誉的方式，就会明白起作用的也是这同一个原则。在考虑人们因热爱出名及“永远保存不朽的名声”而受的巨大影响后，如果没能明白我所说的这点，你就应该对自己的愚笨感到惊讶。他们爱这胜过爱子孙，更愿意为这冒各种风险，倾家荡产，遭受任何折磨，并愿为荣誉而死。”她说，‘阿尔刻提斯愿为阿德墨托斯而死，或者阿喀琉斯愿意与帕特洛克罗斯一起死去，或者你们雅典的英雄科德洛斯愿意牺牲自己来保卫儿子们的王国，如果他们没有想到对自己勇气（我们至今仍然对其表示尊敬）的记忆将会永存的话，你认为他们会这样做吗？他们当然不会，’她说，‘我认为是这种永恒的美德和光荣的名声促使每个人这样做，而且他们越优秀越会这样；他们热爱的是不朽的名声。

“‘身体具有生育能力的男人，’她说，‘会更多地受到女人的吸引；他们通过生育后代来表达自己的爱，尽力获得不朽、怀念及永远的幸福。心灵具有生育能力的男人，’她说，‘有些人心灵的生育能力比身体的更旺盛，他们生育适合头脑记住并诞生的东西。所以什么适合呢？智慧及其他种的美德：这些是由所有的诗人及具有创新精神的手艺人诞生的。许多最重要、最出色的智慧，’她说，‘是与城市和家庭的组织相关联的，这被称为节制和公正。再拿年轻时心灵中就孕育这些美德的人为例。当他还没有伴侣且成年后，他就感受到生产和繁殖的欲望。我认为，他也四处走动，寻找美，以在其中繁殖；他永远不会在丑陋中繁殖。由于他怀孕了，他会受到美的身体而不是丑的身体的吸引；如果他也足够幸运，找到了美、高尚且有天赋的心灵，他会受到这种结合的强烈吸引。对于这样的人，他会立即发现自己有谈论美德、好的男人应该是什么样子及应该怎么做的素材，并尽力教导他。

“‘我认为，当某个人与这种美接触并形成关系后，他才生产、繁殖长久以来孕育的孩子。不管他们是否陪伴彼此，都会想着对方的美，并且与对方一起抚养繁殖的孩子。这样的人与彼此的伙伴关系更亲近，友谊更牢不可破，胜过父母的情分，因为他们这种伙伴关系诞生的孩子更美、更永久。每个人都更愿意拥有这样的孩子，而不是凡俗的孩子。人们羡慕荷马、赫西奥德及其他优秀的诗人，就是因为他们留下了这种孩子，这些孩子自身的不朽，也为他们带来了不朽的名声和怀念。或者，’她说，‘拿莱克格斯留下的孩子为例，它们为斯巴达（你可能会说整个希腊）带来了安全。梭伦也由于创立的法律而为你们雅典人所敬仰；还有其他人，他们在希腊和其他国家的其他地方，展示出了许多卓越的成就，形成了各种美德。已经有许多教派成立，来仰慕生出那种孩子的这些人，但这种情况从未发生在生出凡俗孩子的人身上。

“‘甚至你，苏格拉底，可能也接受过我目前为止描述的爱的仪式。但这些仪式如果进行得得体的话，其目的应是抵达未解之谜的最终愿景；我不确定你是否能领会这一点。但我会告诉你这些的，’她说，‘我会尽全力讲的；你尽可能地领会吧。

“‘某个人处理这件事的正确方式，’她说，‘应该是在年轻的时候开始接近美的身体。最初，如果他的向导正确指引他的话，他应该只爱一个身体，并在那种关系中产生美的交谈。接下来，他应该意识到任何一个身体的美都与另一个的密切相关，如果他要追求形式美，而不把所有身体的美看作是完全相同的，则非常愚蠢。一旦他明白这一点，就会热爱所有美的身体，并仅对一个身体释放自己的激情，轻视这种激情并把它视为微不足道的。之后，他应该把心灵的美看得比身体的美更有价值，这样，如果某人有美好的心灵，即使形貌不美，他也会对他感到满足，会爱他、关心他，与他进行那些能帮助年轻人变得更好的交谈。结果，他会被迫观察实践和法则中的美，明白每种美都与其他美密切相关，这样他就会把身体的美看作是微不足道的事物。实践之后，向导必须为他们指引知识的形式，这样他也会明白它们的美。现在他从总体上看待美，而不是仅看个别的例子，就不会像奴隶般的爱慕身体之美、任何特定的人的美，或具体的实践的美。取代这种卑贱、心胸狭窄的奴役的是，他将转向美的汪洋大海，凝视着它，通过对知识无尽的爱，产生许多华美、宏伟的对话和思想。最后，当他以这种方式变得成熟、强大后，他会突然看到一种特殊的知识，这种知识的对象是我接下来要讲的那种美。

“‘现在，’她说，‘尽你最大的努力集中精神。任何人在受到关于爱的方式这么多教导、以正确的次序和方式看待美的事物后，现在将会抵达爱的方式的终极目标。他会在美的性质中突然看到一些极其美的事物；而这，苏格拉底，正是以前所有努力的最终目标。首先，这种美一直存在，不生不灭；不增不减。其次，它不是一方面美而另一方面丑，或某个时间美而另个时间不美，或与这有关美而与那有关就丑；也不会因为它对一些人来说美而对其他人来说丑就这里美而那里丑。美也不会以脸或手或身体的任何部分的形式出现在他面前；或者以具体的某条知识的形式出现；或者在别的东西中出现在其他地方，例如在生物、大地、天堂或其他东西中。它会以自身的形式单独出现，形式上总是单一的；所有其他美的事物也有这些特性，但方式不同，当其他事物出现或消失时，它不以任何形式增加或减少，也不会做出任何改变。

“‘当某个人通过这些阶段成长，以正确的方式热爱少男，并开始看到那种美的时候，他就接近目标了。这是接近爱的方式或由其他人指引的正确方法：总是从这些美的事物开始，本着抵达那种美的目的成长。像使用楼梯的人一样，他应该从一个身体到两个身体，从两个身体到所有美的身体，从美的身体到美的实践，从实践到美的学习形式。从各种学习形式中，他应该在那种除了美本身别无他物的学习形式处告终，这样他就能完成学习美的真正本质的过程。

“‘在那种生命形式中，亲爱的苏格拉底，’这位曼提尼亚的局外人说，‘如果人的生活值得过的话，就在于凝视美本身。如果你曾注意到，它似乎与金钱、衣服、美少男和青年处于完全不同的层次上。现在你看到这些的时候会如痴如醉，和其他许多人一样，愿意看着自己的情郎并与其永远在一起，如果可能的话，愿意不吃不喝，除了凝视着他们、与他们在一起之外其他什么也不做。因此，’她说，‘如果某个人能看到美本身，看到绝对、纯粹的美，而不是与人的血肉之躯、颜色和大量凡俗的废物杂乱在一起，如果他能看到以独立形式存在的神圣的美本身，我们应该想象它是什么样子呢？你是否会认为，’她说，‘如果某个人以自身正确的部位朝那个方向看，并凝视那个对象、与它做伴，他的生命会是无意义的？你难道没有意识到，’她说，‘只有在那种生命中，当某个人以能看到的部位查看美时，他才能不仅孕育出美德的影像（因为这不是他接触的影像），而且孕育出真正的美德（因为他接触的是真正的美）。那些孕育出真正的美德并对其进行培育的人才有机会受到神的热爱，并变得不朽——如果有人能不朽的话。’

“好吧，费德鲁斯及在座各位，这就是狄奥提玛所说的，我很信服她的话。因为我对其信服，所以我尽力说服他人，若要达到这样，你不可能轻易地为人性找到一位比爱神更好的伙伴。我宣称每个人都应该尊敬爱神，就是以此为基础的，我自己也尊敬爱的方式，并极其小心地实践着它们。这就是我劝说他人这样做的原因，在当前及其他每个场合，我尽自己所能赞美爱神的力量和勇气。这就是我的发言，费德鲁斯。如果你愿意，你可以把它看作是对爱神的颂词，或者你可以给它任何你想给它的名字。”

阿里斯托得摩斯说，苏格拉底的发言完毕后，其他人都在祝贺他，而阿里斯托芬尝试着表达自己的观点，因为苏格拉底在某个阶段提到了他的发言。突然，传来一阵敲击前门的响亮的噪音，听起来像是一些纵酒狂欢者，他们也听到了吹笛女的声音。

“仆人们，去看看是谁，”阿伽松说，“若是我的朋友，就请他们进来；若不是，就告诉他们宴会结束了，我们正要上床睡觉。”

不一会儿，他们听到了庭院中亚西比德的声音；他醉得一塌糊涂，大声嚷嚷着，问阿伽松在哪里，让仆人带自己去见他。他被带了进来，由吹笛女和其他人搀扶着。他站在门口，戴着常春藤和紫罗兰编织而成的厚重花环，头上缠着许多丝带，说：

“晚上好，先生们。你们愿意让喝醉的人（非常醉的人）加入你们的宴会吗？还是我们应该为阿伽松戴上花环（这正是我们来的原因），然后就走呢？我昨天没能来参加你们的庆典，”他说，“但现在我头上戴着丝带来了，这样我可以直接把丝带从我头上取下来，戴到（我想宣布）最智慧、最美的人头上。我想你们会因为我喝醉了嘲笑我的。但即使你们嘲笑我，我也非常清楚我讲的是实话。不过请立马告诉我，我是否可以进来。我能和你们一起喝酒吗？”

大家大声叫着，告诉他进来，坐在长椅上，阿伽松也邀请他进来。所以他由朋友搀着进来了。他解开丝带，打算系到阿伽松头上，丝带滑落到了他的眼睛上。所以他没有注意到苏格拉底，而是坐在阿伽松旁边，在他和苏格拉底之间，苏格拉底看到他后就挪开了。他坐下后，拥抱了阿伽松，并把花环系到他头上。

阿伽松说：“仆人，把他的鞋脱掉，这样他可以坐下来，我们三人坐得舒服一些。”

“好的，”亚西比德说，“但和我们一起喝酒的第三位是谁？”他说话的时候，转了一下身，看到了苏格拉底。他看到他后，跳了起来说，“哦，赫拉克勒斯大神啊，这是怎么回事？这是苏格拉底吗？你又坐在这儿等着我，这样你可以玩老把戏，在我最不希望看到你的地方突然冒出来。你为什么来这里？你为什么选择坐在这里？我看出来了，你没有选择坐在阿里斯托芬或其他愿意愚弄自己的人旁边，而是务必坐在屋子中最有魅力的人旁边。”

苏格拉底说：“阿伽松，请保护着我。我对这个人的爱变得多么令人讨厌啊！自从我开始爱他，我就不能看或和有魅力的单身人士说话，否则他就变得非常妒忌、愤怒，变得发疯一样，对我大喊大叫，几乎要痛打我一顿。所以现在一定要保证他不对我做任何事，让我们和平相处；或者如果他开始变得暴力，请保护我。他对自己爱人的癫狂依恋让我很害怕。”

“我和你之间不可能有和平，”亚西比德说。“我下次再跟你算这次的账。但是现在，阿伽松，”他说，“还给我一些丝带，我把它们系到他这个神奇的头上。否则，他会批评我把丝带系到你头上而不是他头上，尽管他总是赶走口头抗辩的来者（两天前你还这样做过）。”

他说着的时候，取下了一些丝带，系到了苏格拉底头上，又坐了下来。他坐下后，说：“先生们，我看你们都很清醒。这可不行；你们得喝酒。这是我们事先同意过的。我们选个司仪，负责大家的饮酒，直到大家都喝醉，我推选——我自己！阿伽松，你若有大高脚杯，拿一个过来。哦，不必了；小子，把那个凉酒器给我，”他看到了那个能盛四品脱多酒的器具。他把它倒满，自己喝了下去，然后让仆人为苏格拉底满上。他边这样做边说：“先生们，并不是我的花招会对苏格拉底产生任何影响。不管你让他喝多少，他也不会醉。”

仆人为苏格拉底斟满，在他喝的时候，厄律克西马库说：“亚西比德，这是什么行为？我们在轮流喝酒的时候不打算聊聊天或唱唱歌，而是好像口渴似的只喝酒吗？”

亚西比德说：“你好啊，厄律克西马库，最杰出——且最温和——的父亲生出的最杰出的儿子。”

“你也好啊，”厄律克西马库说：“但我们应该怎么做呢？”

“你让我们怎么做我们就怎么做。我们应该听从你，因为‘一个医生抵得过许多人’；所以告诉我们你想做的事吧。”

“那么请听我说，”厄律克西马库说，“你来之前，我们决定尽自己所能从左到右轮流做最好的发言，赞美爱神。我们其余人都已经发过言了。虽然你酒喝得很好，但你还没发言，所以你应该发个言。你说过之后，就可以命令苏格拉底做任何你想要他做的事，他也可以对他右边的人这样做，以此类推。”

“好主意，厄律克西马库，”亚西比德说，“但我觉得让一个喝醉的人和清醒的人做的发言相竞争不公平。而且，亲爱的朋友，我希望你不要相信苏格拉底刚才说的任何话。你难道没意识到真理和他说的正好相反吗？如果他在附近的时候我赞美其他人，不管是神还是人，他都会痛打我一顿。”

“多么亵渎神明啊！”苏格拉底说。

“以海神波塞冬的名义起誓！”亚西比德说，“不要在这一点上反驳我。你在附近的时候我决不会赞美其他人的。”

“那好吧，如果你愿意的话，就那样做吧，”厄律克西马库说，“做一个对苏格拉底的颂辞。”

“你是什么意思？”亚西比德说，“你认为我应该那样做吗，厄律克西马库？我应该在你们大家面前攻击他、惩罚他吗？”

“等一下，”苏格拉底说，“你计划的是什么——做一个嘲笑我的颂词，还是其他什么？”

“我会讲实话——你让我那样做吗？”

“不过我当然会让你讲实话；实际上，我命令你那样做。”

“那我就开始了，”亚西比德说，“不过我先说明一下。如果我说了任何不真实的事，要是你愿意的话就打断我，指出我说的是假的。我不想说任何假的事情。不过如果我记事情的顺序不对，不要感到惊讶。对于处于像我这样情形中的人来说，要流畅、有序地列举出你的特性的各个方面，可真不容易。

“先生们，我试着通过比喻来赞美苏格拉底。可能他会认为这是在嘲笑他；但比喻是用来说明真相的，而不是用来嘲笑的。我要说的是，他就像你们看到的坐在雕刻家作坊中的西勒诺斯的那些雕像。那些人物拿着牧羊人的管乐器或长笛；打开它们后，你们会发现里面有神的雕像。我还认为他像森林之神玛尔叙阿斯。苏格拉底，你自己也不能否认你外表上像他们；不过接下来你将听到你在其他方面与他们如何相像。

“你很无礼、口出恶言，不是吗？如果你不承认这一点，我来提供证据。你不是会吹长笛吗？实际上，你比玛尔叙阿斯吹得好多了。他凭借嘴的力量使用乐器蛊惑人们，今天吹奏他的长笛乐曲的人也都是如此。（我把奥林匹斯的曲调真正看作是玛尔叙阿斯的，因为玛尔叙阿斯是奥林匹斯的老师。）不管这些曲调是由专业演奏者还是可怜的吹笛女演奏，由于其神圣的起源，它们是唯一能用符咒迷惑人们的曲调，显示出哪些人准备好了接受神的启示。你和玛尔叙阿斯的唯一区别在于你不用乐器、仅用语言就能产生同样的效果。当我们听到其他人演讲时，即使他是位优秀的演说家，也几乎对我们产生不了什么影响。但每当有人听到你说话或听到他人（即使他是个蹩脚的说话者）复述你的话，不管是谁（女人、男人或少男）都会如痴如醉、像施了符咒一样。

“若不是你们认为我喝醉了，先生们，我愿意发誓，他的话对我产生影响是真话——现在这些话仍对我产生影响。每当听他说话，我的狂热比科律班忒斯的还有过之而无不及。当他说话时，我的心脏扑通扑通地跳动，眼泪奔流而出，我看到许多其他人也受到同样的影响。我听过伯里克利及其他优秀演说家的演说，我认为他们说得很好。但他们从未对我产生过这种影响；他们没有扰乱我的整体人格，让我对自己生命的奴役性质感到不满。但坐在这里的这位玛尔叙阿斯经常对我产生这种影响，让我认为自己的生活不值得过。你不能说这不是真的，苏格拉底。即使现在我也清楚地知道，如果我放任自己听他说话，我会无法抵制，再次经历相同的体验。他让我承认，尽管由于种种巨大缺陷，我忽视自己，却反而卷入到雅典的政治活动中。所以我强迫自己捂着耳朵走开，就像人们逃离妖妇一样，防止自己在变老之前坐在他旁边。

“只有在他的陪伴下我才会有这种体验，你们可能会认为我不会有这种体验——与某人在一起感到羞耻；我只有在他的陪伴下才感到羞耻。我清楚地知道，我不能反对他，应该做他让我做的事；但离开他后，我就会因人们的赞赏而忘乎所以。所以我表现得像个逃亡的奴隶一样，从他那里逃脱；每当看到他，我都由于他让我赞同的话而感到羞愧。我经常觉得看到他从人间消失我会高兴；但如果这真的发生，我知道我会更不安。我就是不知道怎样与这个人打交道。

“这就是这位森林之神吹笛时对我及其他许多人产生的影响。让我来告诉你们，这个比喻在某些方面也非常恰当，看看他有多么令人惊讶的力量。你们应该认识到你们中没有一个人真正懂他。但既然已经开了头，我会说明他是什么样子的。你们看到苏格拉底受美貌少男吸引，总是兴奋地与他们一起消磨时间。他也完全愚昧，一无所知。他给人这种印象，不是很像西勒诺斯吗？正是这样。这种行为仅是他的外壳，就像西勒诺斯的雕像的外壳一样。但如果你们能把他打开往里看，我亲爱的酒友，你们无法想象他有多么节制！你们应该知道，他根本不在乎某人是否漂亮（他对此怀有难以置信的蔑视）或富有，或拥有普通人视为的其他优势。他把所有这些看得毫无价值，也把我们看得一文不值。（请相信我！）他整个一生都在伪装，在玩弄人。

“当苏格拉底表情严肃、内心被打开的时候，我不知道你们中是否有人看到过他身体内部的雕像。不过我看到过一次，它们看起来如此神圣、珍贵，如此美丽、让人惊讶，以至于（简而言之）我不得不做苏格拉底让我做的任何事。我认为他对我的相貌感兴趣是认真的，这对我来说是天赐之物、是难得的好运，因为，如果我让他满足，我就能听到他所知道的一切。你们瞧，我为自己的美貌感到骄傲。这之前，我从未在没有随从的情况下和他单独相处；但一有了这个想法，我就把随从打发走，独自一人和他在一起。是的，我必须告诉你们整个真相；所以仔细听着，如果我说了任何不正确的话，苏格拉底，你必须反驳我。

“好吧，先生们，我们就在那里，只有我们两人。我认为他会立即与我进行爱人与情郎独处时进行的那种对话，心里很高兴。但根本没发生那种事。他与我进行与平常一样的交流，一天过完后就走了。我邀请他来到健身房，与他一起锻炼，我以为可以以那种方式取得些进展。所以我们进行锻炼，旁边没有一人，还摔了很多次跤——怎么跟你们说呢？我还是一无所获。

“由于通过这些方式一无所获，我决定对这个人展开直接攻击，既然已经开始了就不放弃。我觉得我应该了解实际情况如何。我邀请他一起就餐，就好像我是爱人他是情郎一样。他没有立即接受我的邀请，不过最后还是同意来了。第一次就完餐后他就想走，那一次我有点儿害羞，就让他走了。不过我又进行了一次这个计划，就完餐后，我一直和他谈话到深夜。然后他想走的时候，我找了个借口，说太晚了，让他留了下来。所以他在我旁边的沙发上躺下睡觉，那是他就餐的地方，房间里除了我们两个就没其他人了。

“到目前为止，任何人听我说都无所谓了。不过从现在开始，有些事你们一般不会听到我说，正如俗语所说，‘仆人离开时酒后吐真言’，仆人不离开时也会吐真言！而且，我认为既然开始了对苏格拉底的颂扬，那么让他的自豪行为湮没无闻将是我的失误。此外，我的经历就像人被蛇咬了一样。有人说拥有这种经历的人只愿意向那些同样被咬过的人述说其中情形，因为只有他们才能懂，且如果那种痛苦驱使你做和说一些令人震惊的事，他们也会体谅。但我是被更痛苦的东西咬的，其中的每一口都极端痛苦（咬的是心或灵魂），或随便你们怎么称呼它。我受到的是哲学言论的撞击和撕咬，当它抓住一个年轻、天才的灵魂时，会比蛇更猛烈地攀附，使其做和说各种各样的事。而且我能看到在座的各位，像费德鲁斯、阿伽松、厄律克西马库、鲍桑尼亚、阿里斯托得摩斯和阿里斯托芬（我无需提及苏格拉底自己）以及其余各位。你们都有哲学的疯狂和醉酒般的狂热，所以你们都会听到我要说的话。你们得体谅我那时做的事和现在说的话。但是你们，仆人及所有其他下人，都堵上你们的耳朵！

“所以，先生们，灯灭之后，仆人离开了房间，我决定不应该再拐弯抹角，而是坦率地告诉他我心里所想的。我推了他一下，说，‘苏格拉底，你睡着了吗？’

“‘还没有。’他说。

“‘你知道我在想什么吗？’

“‘想什么啊？’他说。

“‘我认为，’我说，‘只有你才配得上做我的爱人，但你似乎很害羞，不愿跟我提及。我告诉你我的感受吧。我认为如果你对我或我的朋友有需求，我不满足你这方面或其他任何方面的需求会很愚蠢。对我来说，没有什么比成为优秀的人更重要了，我认为要实现这个目的，没有人能比你给予我更有力的帮助。如果我未能满足像你这样的人的需求，考虑到明理的人会怎样看待我，与普通、愚蠢的人怎样看待我相比，我会更羞愧。’

“他听了我说的，以他自己典型的极度讽刺语气对我说了这些：‘亲爱的亚西比德，如果你说的关于我的话是真的，且我确实有能力让你成为更好的人的话，你似乎绝不是傻瓜。你肯定从我身上看到了无与伦比的、与你自己的美貌相比优越许多的美。如果你看到了这一点，尝试着与我达成协议，我们用一种美交换另一种美，那么你是打算从我身上大赚一笔。你在试图以外表换取真正的美，所以实际上是在进行“以铜换金”的交易。但仔细看看，我的好朋友，你认为我对你有价值，请确保你没弄错。视力衰退的时候，灵魂才开始变得敏锐，你离那一点还远着呢。’

“听到这些之后，我说，‘依我看，情况就是这样，我的计划正如我所说的。现在由你来决定怎样对你我来说是最好的。’

“‘好吧，’他说，‘至少这一点你说得对。将来我们要考虑做对我们最好的事，既包括这方面的也包括其他事情的。’

“他对我作如此回复后，我认为由于我对他放了箭，他被射中了。我站起来，没给他再多说任何话的机会，把他包裹进我厚厚的户外斗篷里（当时是冬天），躺在他的短斗篷下。然后我用双臂搂着这个像上帝一样、令人惊讶的人，整夜都和他一起躺在那里。你不能说这是谎话，苏格拉底。在我做完这些之后，他彻底击败了我的美貌（并轻视、嘲笑、侮辱了我的美貌），尽管我很看重这些相貌，陪审团诸位先生们。我这样称呼你们，是因为你们成为了苏格拉底的傲慢事件中的陪审团！我以上帝及女神的名义向你们发誓，第二天早上起来时，我跟苏格拉底睡觉，与跟我父亲或兄长睡觉相比，没有什么差别。

“那之后，你们认为我有什么样的心情？虽然我觉得自己受辱了，但我钦佩他的品行、自制能力和勇气。他是位明智且意志坚强的人，我从未期望能找到这样的人。所以，尽管我不能生他的气或不能没他的陪伴，但我不知道怎样赢取他的心。我很清楚，他完全不为金钱所动，就像埃阿斯不会为武器所伤一样；我视为唯一能赢取他的方法也被证实无效。我感到困惑；我来回踱步，完全沉湎于这个人，比其他人都更甚。

“这些事情发生之后，我们一起参与了雅典抵御波提狄亚的战役，一起领受了那里的混乱。首先要指出的是他比我更能忍受战争的严苛——实际上，他比其他所有人都更能忍受。我们被切断粮食供应之后，就像出征时有时会发生的那样，没有人比他更能忍受饥饿。但另一方面，我们能大吃一顿时，他又是最能享受盛宴的。例如，他虽然不愿意喝酒，但被迫喝时，他能把我们都打败。最令人吃惊的是没人曾看到苏格拉底喝醉过。我觉得你们很快就会看到这一点的证据了。

“而且当提到忍受冬天的严寒时（那里的冬天酷寒难耐），他的忍耐力也是非凡的。有一次，霜冻很厉害，没有人出去，或者就是出去，也会把自己裹得严严实实的，靴子上另外系上毡或羊皮。但苏格拉底在这种天气下还是穿着以前穿的户外斗篷出去，他光着脚走在冰上比别人穿着靴子走得还稳健。士兵们怀疑地看着他，认为他轻视他们。

“这件事就说到这里；但战场上‘这位刚毅的人接下来所做和忍受的事’值得一听。一天早上，他开始考虑一个问题，就站在那里思考，没取得进展就不放弃，而是一直站在那里思索。中午时，人们注意到了他，惊愕地对彼此说苏格拉底从破晓就开始站在那里思考事情了。最后，到傍晚时，吃过晚饭后，一些爱奥尼亚人把铺盖拿到外面（当时是夏天），部分是为了睡觉凉快点儿，部分是为了密切注视苏格拉底，看他夜晚是否也会一直站在那里。他一直站在那里，直到第二天黎明太阳出来时；然后他向太阳祈祷，就离开了。

“如果你们想知道他在战斗中是什么样子——现在正是我向他还债的机会。在将军授予我英勇奖章之后的战斗中，是苏格拉底（没有其他人）救了我。我受伤后，他没有离开我，所以他不仅救了我的盔甲和武器，还救了我的生命。实际上那个时候我让将军把英勇奖章授予你，苏格拉底。这一点上你不能批评我，或说我撒谎。但将军受到我社会地位的影响，想把奖章授予我时，你自己比将军更热心地认为我应该得到奖章。

“先生们，还有一件事。当军队从代里恩混乱地撤退时，苏格拉底是值得一看的景观。我当时在骑兵服役，而他是甲兵。人们那时已经四散了，他和拉凯斯一起撤退。巧合的是，我就在附近，我看到他们时，就立即鼓励他们，告诉他们我不会留下他们不管的。在那里，我比在波提狄亚能更好地观察苏格拉底（因为我在马背上，不那么担心自己的安全），首先让我心里一震的是他比拉凯斯镇静得多。接下来，我注意到他在那里散步，就像在雅典一样（阿里斯托芬，引用你的话就是）‘大摇大摆，环顾四周’。他冷静地环顾着朋友和敌人，即使在远处的人也知道，如果有人袭击这个人，他会顽强反抗的。就这样，他和他的同伴安全撤退了。通常，战斗中人们不会袭击显出这种神情的人；他们更愿意追赶仓皇逃离的人。

“还有其他许多卓越的事，可以用来赞美苏格拉底。其中的一些显著特点可能也可在其他人身上找到。但最令人吃惊的一点是他完全不像其他任何人，不管是过去的还是现在的。如果你想说阿喀琉斯是什么样子，你可以拿他与布拉西达斯或其他人相比，伯里克利的话，你可以拿他与涅斯托耳或安忒诺耳相比（还有其他的人），你可以以同样方式作其他比较。但这个人非常奇特，他谈话的方式也很奇特，无论你多么努力地找，永远也不会找到现在或过去与他相近的人。实际上，你们能做的最好的就是像我做的那样，当我比较他及他的谈话方式时，不是与人类相比，而是与西伦尼和森林之神对比。

“这是我开始时忘记说的：他的论述也非常像那些你们打开的西伦尼。如果你准备听苏格拉底的论述，起初似乎非常荒谬。这是他使用的词和语句的缘故，它们就像无礼的森林之神粗糙的皮肤一样。他谈论驮货的驴子、铁匠、鞋匠、皮匠，似乎总是用相同的话得出相同的论点；所以不习惯他的人或无知的人会觉得他的论述很荒谬。但如果你能打开它们，看看内部，就会发觉只有那些论述才有道理。你也会发觉它们是最神圣的，包含最多的美德影像。它们涉及大部分（更确切地说是所有）的主题，如果你想成为优秀的人，必须细阅所有这些主题。

“先生们，这就是我赞美苏格拉底的话。我也掺杂了一些对他的责备，告诉你们他是怎么侮辱我的。我并不是唯一一个受到他这样对待的人；还有格老孔的儿子查米德斯、狄奥克莱斯的儿子欧西德莫斯及许多其他人。他欺骗他们，让他们认为他是自己的爱人，结果他却是被爱的人，而不是施爱的人。我警告你，阿伽松，不要被他骗了，而要从我们的遭遇中吸取教训，要谨慎一些，如谚语所说，不要成为傻瓜，只从自己遭受的痛苦中学习。”

亚西比德的坦率发言带来了许多乐趣，因为他似乎还在爱着苏格拉底。苏格拉底说：“我认为你非常清醒，亚西比德。否则你不能够隐藏你整个发言的动机，巧妙地用这种方式掩盖着它。你在最后泄露了出来，好像是你的事后想法——好像你整个演讲的目的不是为了离间我和阿伽松一样。你这样做是因为你认为我应该只爱你一人，而不是其他人，阿伽松应该只被你爱，而不被其他人爱。但你没有侥幸成功；我们看出了你的这场森林之神和西勒诺斯把戏的目的。但是，亲爱的阿伽松，不要让他得逞；一定不要让任何人离间我和你。”

然后阿伽松说：“你知道，苏格拉底，我认为你一定是对的。他坐在我和你中间，把我们分开，是别有用心。但他不会得逞的。我过去，坐在你旁边。”

“请过来吧，”苏格拉底说，“坐在这一边。”

“哦，宙斯啊！”亚西比德说，“我真是受够了这个人！他认为他总得胜过我。但如果没有别的办法（你这个令人惊讶的人）就让阿伽松坐在我们俩之间吧。”

“那是不可能的事，”苏格拉底说，“你已经赞美过了我，现在该我赞美我右边的人了。如果阿伽松坐在我们之间，他不是也得赞美我，而不是受我赞美吗？看在上帝的份上，不要阻止这个年轻人受到我的赞美；我有赞颂他一番的强烈愿望。”

“好哇，”阿伽松说，“亚西比德，现在我决不会再待在这里了。我必须换位置，让苏格拉底赞美我。”

“又是这样，”亚西比德说，“总是老样子。苏格拉底在时，别人休想接近有魅力的人。现在，看他多么机智地找到一个貌似有理的借口，说明为什么这个人应该坐在他旁边。”

所以阿伽松站起来，去坐到苏格拉底旁边。突然，一大群饮酒狂欢者来到了前门。由于某个人刚出去了，他们发现门是开着的；所以他们直接闯了进来，加入了他们，坐在沙发上。到处都是嘈杂声，所有的顺序都被打破了；每个人都被迫喝了大量的酒。阿里斯托得摩斯说厄律克西马库、费德鲁斯及其他一些人离开了，而他睡了很长时间，因为那时候夜很长。将近黎明时他醒了过来，那时公鸡已经开始打鸣了。他一醒来，就看到其他人要么正睡着，要么已经离开了，只有阿伽松、阿里斯托芬和苏格拉底还醒着，正用一个大碗喝酒，碗从左到右传递着。苏格拉底正与他们说话。阿里斯托得摩斯说大部分争辩他已记不得了，因为他错过了开头，中间又睡着了。但他说，要点是苏格拉底迫使他们同意同一个人应该既能写喜剧又能写悲剧，擅长写悲剧的人一定也擅长写喜剧。虽然他们昏昏欲睡，没跟上他的思路，但他让他们同意这一点；阿里斯托芬先睡着了，天已经破晓时阿伽松也睡着了。

他们睡着之后，苏格拉底站起来，离开了。阿里斯托得摩斯像往常一样跟着他。苏格拉底去了学园（吕格恩），洗了脸，像平时一样在那里度过了一天，直到傍晚才回家休息。

洞穴寓言（选自《理想国》）

一、苏格拉底一开始提到了哲学家必须具备的各种素质，然后着重强调这些素质必须建立在学问的基础之上，最终则是建立在为善的学问基础之上。对苏格拉底来说它是善的本质，正如此段文字所阐明的那样。一些人认为善即快乐，或者认为善即学问。苏格拉底简明扼要地驳斥了此类观点，却拒绝直接给出自己的看法，而是借用一个比喻来描述他的观点。

“好了，我们总算完成了这部分任务——真是不容易啊；下面继续讨论下一个问题，研究如何通过学习和不懈的追求，造就出这个社会制度的捍卫者。他们要学习什么东西？从什么年龄起就要开始学习？”

“对，这就是我们下一个要讨论的问题。”

“我耍了一点小聪明，”我说，“我把娶妻、生子、确立统治者这些难题都放到了后面去讨论。不过，到头来我并没占到一点便宜，最终还是要论及的。我心中构想的那个真实社会必定会触怒一些人，而且也难以实现。这一点我十分清楚，不过我还是要把它描绘出来。妇女和儿童问题我已经谈过了，现在得重新讨论统治者的问题。你记得我们曾经说过：他们必须要热爱自己的国家，必须经历快乐和痛苦的双重考验，以确保他们在面对痛苦、恐惧和各种兴衰荣辱时，仍然能够矢志不渝；没能通过测试的人，必须予以淘汰；经受住了考验而且毫发无损的人，就好比真金一样不怕火炼，理应被拥立为统治者，生要享有荣光，死要加以褒奖。我们大概就是这么说的。不过，由于担心过早卷入我们今日的议题，当时我们神不知鬼不觉巧妙地回避了这个问题。”

“是的，我记得这件事。”他说。

“你知道，我在说出这番不太成熟的观点之前，也是犹豫再三的，”我回答道，“不过，现在我可以斗胆直言：从最完美的意义上讲，我们的守护者只能是哲学家。”

“好吧，就照你说的。”

“想一想这样的人总共能有几个。我们前面曾经说过，这些人必须具备某种品格，而这种品格又包含了多个方面的品质。通常一个人不会坐拥全部品质，多数情况下仅具有某些品质。”

“此话怎讲？”

“一方面具备好学、强记、头脑机灵、敏锐等各方面的素质，而且积极进取、视野广博，但另一方面却常常不愿意过按部就班、安静稳定的生活；敏锐的性格让其性情变得扑朔迷离、变幻莫测，毫无稳定可言。”

“说得对。”

“而且，你可以信赖的始终如一的稳重之人，尽管在战争面前毫不畏惧，但同样也不会为说教所动。他们这种难以撼动的性格最终确实会令他们变得麻木不仁。当需要他们奉献才智的时候，他们会打着哈欠，昏然入睡。”

“确实是这样的。”

“但是我们需要的是完全兼备两种品格的人，让他们接受最高等的教育，并赋予他们地位和权力。”

“没错。”

“这样的人才可谓凤毛麟角。”

“是很少见。”

“我们不仅应当在前面描述的苦与乐的环境中考验他们，还应当在以往曾经忽略的系列智力学习中考查他们，以检验其是否具有追求最高层次学问的毅力，是否会像其他人畏惧体能测试一样回避退缩。”

“很公道的测试。不过，”他问，“最高层次学问指的是什么？”

“你一定记得，”我回答道，“先前我们在区分过头脑三要素之后，又讨论了正义、自我控制、勇气和智慧问题。”

“如果连这我都不记得，”他说，“我就不配再听别的东西了。”

“那你还记得我们在谈论这些话题之前说过什么吗？”

“说过什么？”

“我们说过，只有绕过一个很大的弯路，才有可能获得真正清晰的认识，不过我们可以根据前面的讨论给出一些暗示。你说那已经够好的了。正因为你的那句话，后面的描述在我看来便不是十分精确了。对你来说是否足够精确，只有你自己知道。”

“我认为你提出的衡量标准不错。我想其他人也是这么认为的。”

“我亲爱的阿得曼托斯，在这类问题上，任何失真的东西都不能作为衡量标准，”我答道，“你不能用本身不完善的东西去衡量任何东西——尽管人们有时会满足于此，而不愿做进一步深究。”

“是的，通常是因为他们太懒惰了。”

“国家和法律的守护者最要不得这种品行。”

“说得不错。”

“那么，他就必须走那条较长的路，”我说，“他必须像锻炼身体一样刻苦地进行智力训练；否则，就像我们刚才说的那样，最终他永远都达不到那个本应属于他的做学问的最高境界。”

“最高境界？”他问道，“可是有比我们讨论的正义和其他品质更高层次的东西吗？”

“有。”我说，“我们不应该仅满足于拥有这些品质的一个草图，而不去充实每个细节。如果我们在小事情上都能全身心投入，力求尽可能高的精确度和清晰度，而在最重要的事情上反而不需要最高的精确度了，这不是十分荒谬吗？”

“是十分荒谬，”他表示同意，“但别指望蒙混过关，你还得回答最高层次的学问是什么这个问题。”

“我不指望蒙混过关，”我答道，“你问吧。其实你已经听过很多遍了。要么你是真的不明白，要么你就是一直存心给我难堪——我觉得是后一种情况，因为你肯定经常听过我说，学问的最高层次是关于善的本质的学问，正义一类事物的实用性和价值从中得以体现。你非常清楚这就是我要说的。另外，我还要补充一点，我们这方面的学问还很不够。如果我们对此一无所知，那么，其他方面的学问纵使再完美，对我们来说也是毫无裨益的。这就好比是说，如果你无法从你拥有的东西中得到任何好处，那么，即使拥有它也没什么用处。换句话说，如果东西不好的话，你认为拥有它还有任何意义吗？如果拥有所有其他形式的学问，但唯独没有善的学问，也就是说，缺乏有关什么是好的、什么是有价值的这方面的知识，这样的话，还有什么意义吗？”

“肯定没有任何意义。”

“当然，你也清楚，大多数普通人都认为快乐就是善，而阅历丰富的人则认为学问才是善。”

“是这样的。”

“但是，那些持后一种观点的人却无法向我们解释清楚他们所指的是哪种学问。如果他们被逼问急了，最后就会说他们指的是善的学问。”

“这是很荒谬的。”

“他们先是批评我们不懂善，但回头与我们交谈时，却又把我们当成懂善的；因为他们说这就是‘善的学问’，就好像他们在说‘善’字的时候，我们都能理解他们的意思。如果是这样的话，他们就无法回避自身的荒谬。”

“完全正确。”

“那些把善定义为快乐的人呢？他们面临的困惑会少一些吗？是不是他们也不得不承认存在恶的快乐？”

“他们当然得承认。”

“结果他们会发现自己承认同一事物是既有善的一面，又有恶的一面，对吗？”

“对。”

“所以说这个议题明显极具争议。”

“的确是这样。”

“再者，当涉及到正义或价值观方面的问题时，不论是占有，还是行动，抑或是荣誉，很多人宁肯注重外在的东西，也不在意实实在在的东西；可是，没有人仅满足于拥有看起来好的东西，他们要的是实实在在好的东西。在这个问题上外在的东西没有任何用处。这些现象是不是也很明显呢？”

“绝对明显。”

“那么，善是全部劳动付出的结果，是每个人心中的目标，并且它预言了自身的存在，尽管人们发现很难把握它究竟是什么；由于没有像处理其他事物那样的把握，所以善缺少其他事物所具有的价值。我们将要把一切事物都托付给这些最优秀的公民。如果他们对如此重要的问题一窍不通，我们能答应吗？”

“绝对不答应。”

“不管怎样，如果一个人不知道何处有善的话，那么，让他来保卫正义和价值观，也就没有多大的用处。我猜只有在他搞明白何处有善之后，才能充分理解这些。”

“你猜得有道理。”

“所以说，只有将我们的社会置于拥有这门学问的守护者监管之下，社会才能得到妥善管理。”

“必须这样，”他说，“可是你呢，苏格拉底？你认为善是学问呢，还是快乐呢？还是其他的什么东西？”

“你这个人哪！”我惊叫了一声，“我很久之前就看出来了，你对别人的意见总是感到不满意！”

“可是，苏格拉底，给了你这么长时间谈论这个话题，”他抗议道，“你却只给我们讲别人的意见，而不是你自己的意见。我认为你不应该这样。”

“的确不应该。不过，如果一个人谈论自己不懂的事情时却给人一种好像他什么都懂的感觉。你认为这样就对吗？”

“他没有权利像个万事通似的高谈阔论。但他应该精心准备，把自己的想法说出来。”

“嗯，”我说，“难道你没注意，如果没有知识的支撑，观点总是很可悲的一件事吗？最理想的情况就是瞎蒙却蒙对了——虽然自己不甚理解，但却恰好持一种正确的意见，就好比一位盲人走对了路一样。不是有这样的人吗？”

“是有这样的人。”

“那么，如果你能够从其他人那里得到异常清晰的描述的话，那你还会想从我这里得到一幅简陋不堪、难以理解、支离破碎的画面吗？”

“现在你就行行好吧，都快到终点了，千万不要放弃啊，苏格拉底。”格老孔乞求说，“如果你能像解释正义、自我控制等概念一样来解释什么才是善，我们就会心满意足的。”

“那样的话，我也会心满意足的，我亲爱的伙计。”我回答道，“不过，我担心这超出了我的能力所限。我要是这样做的话，只会让我自己出丑，惹来他人耻笑。所以，请允许我们暂时把善的本质是什么的问题先放在一边，在今天所讨论的范围里恐怕是找不出一个令我满意的答案的。不过，如果你喜欢的话，我会谈一件事。它在我看来就好似是善的孩子，与善长得非常像——你愿不愿意听？”

“给我们讲讲这个孩子的事吧。孩子家长的那笔账就先记在你的账上，留着以后再讲。”他说。

“我希望欠你们的债能够连本带息地还给你们，而不仅仅是支付贷款利息。”我回答道，“不过，现在你们只能把善的孩子的故事当作利息收下。当心我不留神把到期利息金额写错了，那样的话你们就上当了。”

“我们会加倍小心的，”他说，“接着往下讲吧。”

二、太阳的比喻［……］

“我必须首先征得你们的同意，并提醒大家我们在前面的讨论中曾经说过的事情，实际上还有在许多其他场合讲过的事情。”

他问：“都是些什么？”

我回答说：“我们说过，有很多特定的东西都非常美，还有很多东西非常善，诸如此类，而且在描述过程中我们还对它们进行了区分。”

“是的，我们是说过。”

“接着我们针对我们认为数量很多的那些特定的东西，又谈到了美本身和善本身等问题。然后，我们通过对比，推断出每样事物都是独一无二的种类，并称之为每样事物‘真正是什么’。”

“是这样的。”

“我们说过这些特定的东西是视觉意义而不是智能意义上的东西，而其种类则是智能意义上而不是视觉意义上的东西。”

“当然。”

“我们看到的一切是用身体的哪个部分看到的呢？”

“视觉。”

“我们用听觉来听，用其他感官来感知与之相应的事物。”

“当然了。”

“不知道你注意到了没有，”我问，“我们的感官设计者在赋予我们视力，让我们能够看见东西的时候是多么的慷慨？”

“没有注意到。”

“那么我们就再来看一遍。听觉和声音是否需要借助他们自身之外的另外一种形式的东西，才能让耳朵听得到，让声音听得见（即第三种要素），没有它的话，既没法听，也听不见？”

“不需要。”

“其他大部分感官，也可能是全部感官，也都是如此。你知道有什么感官需要这种东西吗？”

“不，我不知道。”

“但不知道你是否注意到了视觉及可见的东西的确需要这种东西？”

“怎么会呢？”

“假设眼睛具有视力，眼睛的主人也准备用视力去看东西，再假设物体具有颜色，可你知道，要是不专门地、自然地借助用于这个第三种要素的话，他什么东西也看不到，颜色也依然不可见。”

“那是什么东西？”他问。

“一种叫作光的东西。”我答道。

“对。”

“也就是说，如果光算是一种宝物的话，那么，视觉与物体的可见性就是用这样一条比任何东西都宝贵的纽带连接在一起。”

“光当然算是宝物。”

“那么，在众多天体当中你认为是哪个天体成就了这一切？又是哪个天体发出的光能够让我们的眼睛完美地看到东西，东西也能够为我们所见呢？”

“我的看法跟你和其他人是一样的，当然是太阳。”

“那么视力与这种神圣的光源有怎样的关联呢？”

“怎样的关联？”

“太阳不等同于视力，也不等同于视力所依赖的东西，也就是我们所说的眼睛。”

“它们是不同的东西。”

“但在所有的感觉器官当中，眼睛是最像太阳的。”

“是很像。”

“所以，眼睛的视觉能力，是太阳所赋予的一种能力。”

“是的。”

“而且，虽然太阳本身不是视力，但它却是视力产生的原因，并且能够为视力所见。”

“是这样的。”

“其实，那就是善的孩子。”我说，“善所生的孩子与善长得极为相像。在思想世界里，善与智能和可理解的事物之间存在的关联，同样也存在于有形世界里视力和可见物体之间。”

“你能再详细解释一下吗？”他问。

“你知道，当我们把目光转向阳光照射不到的物体时，借助于月光或星光，物体的颜色会看起来灰暗一片，眼睛好像失明了一样，仿佛视力原本就是模糊的。”

“是的。”

“但是，当我们把目光转向阳光照射的物体时，就会看得很清楚。这时眼睛明显是有视觉的。”

“肯定是这样的。”

“让我们借这个比喻来描绘一下心灵。当心灵之眼凝视着被真理和现实照亮的事物时，是完全能够认识和理解这些事物的。显然，心灵具有智能；但是，当心灵之眼盯住充满变数和衰败景色的黄昏世界时，心灵只能形成飘忽不定的意见，视野会变得模糊起来，明显缺少智能。”

“真的是这么回事。”

“那么说，赋予学问以真理，赋予认知者心灵以认知能力，这便是善的本质。它是学问和真理的动因，自身是为人所知的，但又不是学问和真理本身，而是一种更加辉煌的东西。你如果是这么想的，就对了。就好比说，把光和视觉看作与太阳类似的东西是正确的，但把它们看作太阳本身则是错误的。同样道理，把学问和真理看作与善类似的东西是可以的，但把它们看作是善本身则是大错特错，善是更高层次上的东西。”

“如果善是学问和真理的源泉，而且比之更加灿烂辉煌，你可真是把它奉若神明了。我想你不会指的是快乐吧？”他问。

“你这个想法真可怕。”我答道，“我们继续我们的比喻。”

“往下讲吧。”

“太阳不仅让我们看到世间万物，而且推动万物出生、成长和获取营养的进程，但其并非这个过程本身。这个观点我想你也同意。”

“同意。”

“因此，可以说善不仅促成学问知识为人所理解，而且促成对它们自身和现实的理解；不过，善本身不是指现实，而是超越了现实，并较之更加高贵、更加权威。”

“真是奇迹般的超然。”格老孔略带戏谑地说。

“这可不能怪我，”我抗议道，“是你让我心里怎么想的就怎么说的。”

“是我让的。请继续往下说。不管怎么说，如果你那个太阳的比喻还没讲完的话，还请你把它讲完。”

“离讲完还早着呢。”

“那就接着讲，不要遗漏任何东西。”

“恐怕必须略去很多内容。”我说，“不过，我会尽力把我目前所知道的一切都讲出来。”

“好的，请吧。”

分割线

柏拉图解释说，分割线比喻是太阳比喻的续篇，旨在进一步说明太阳比喻所涉及的现实中两种层次之间的关系。但它是从一个特定的角度来讲述的，即我们用来理解这两种层次或领域的心智状态。因此，这个线的目的主要也不是用来给事物分类。与可知领域相关的两种心智状态，都是与同种类型的东西（本质）打交道，尽管每种心智状态的处理方式各不相同；虽然在物质世界里，物质的东西与其自身的影子有区别，但这种差异主要用于阐明需要了解的东西当中存在的“真实”或真实性的程度——如果我们的学问仅局限于它的影子或影像，那么，我们对自身学问的东西了解就太有限了。就这个问题而言，就是仅仅局限于肤浅的外表了［……］

“那么，”我继续说道，“你必须假设存在我前面提到的这两种能力。一种能力比可知层次或领域内的所有东西都至高无上，另一种能力则凌驾于可见领域内一切东西之上——我不会说是在物质宇宙当中，否则你会认为我是在玩文字游戏。不管怎么说，你头脑面对的是两个层次上的东西，一个是可见的东西，一个是可知的东西。对吗？”

“对。”

“那好，假设有一条线，你把它分成了长短不等的两份。然后，你再按照相同的比例，把它们分成两部分，分别代表可见层次和可理解层次。你会在可见的层次上看到一个以模糊与清晰相对照的形式展现的、由影像构成的二次分段。如果你听得懂我说的话，我这里的‘影像’首先指的是阴影，然后指水面和其他光滑细致的表面反射的影子。”

“我听得懂。”

“其他二次分段代表着这些影像对应的原始实物本身——我们身边的各种动物、植物和人造物品。”

“说得很好。”

“你是不是准备说这些分段的区别在于：一个是真实的，一个是不真实的，而且，影像与原物之间的关系，就如同意见领域和学问领域之间的关系呢？”

“我肯定会这么说。”

“下面再考虑一下如何划分这条线上的可知部分。”

“如何划分呢？”

“在其中一个二次分段上，心智这次把可见领域中的原始实物作为影像，一切探究只能在假设的基础之上进行，从中得到的不是基本原理，而是结论性的东西；在另外一个二次分段上，它从假设上升到了不包含假设的基本原理，而且没有用到在另一个二次分段中用到的影像，而只是用类型自身或通过类型自身进行探究。”

“我听不大懂。”

“我再试着解释一下。不过，我刚刚谈到的东西会对你有点帮助。我想你也知道，那些学习几何、算术一类课程的学生，一开始会假设有奇数和偶数、几何图形、三种角以及与课程相应的其他东西；他们把这些东西都当成已知的，把它们作为最基本的假设。由于这些东西属于尽人皆知的东西，因此，完全没有必要对其自身进行任何的解释。他们以此为起点，通过一系列连贯的步骤，得出了他们想要得到的结论。”

“对，这个我肯定懂。”

“你还知道他们使用可见的图形进行研究。但是，他们心里想的实际上不是这些图形，而是这些图形所代表的原始事物；他们所研究的并不是他们所绘制出的正方形、对角线或是其他什么图形本身。他们所绘制或仿真的图形，在水中投下了自身的影子，并反射出去——他们只把这些当作影像而已，而他们研究的真实物体只有理性的眼睛方能看到。

“非常正确。”

“我把此类东西称为可知的东西。我还说过，心智在研究它的过程中迫不得已使用了假设，但由于无法摆脱和超越假设，也就无法上升到基本原理的层面；不过，同样是这些东西，由于它们在较低的层面上留有影像和影子，用它们的示意图与其进行对比，会因其更加清晰而受到重视，也就更有价值。”

“我明白了，”他说，“你说的是几何学和相近学科发生的事。”

“那么，当我提到这条线上可知部分的另外一个二次分段时，你就会明白我的意思是指辩论过程本身通过辩证法的力量所理解的东西；它不是把假设当作原理，而是当作真正意义上的假设，也就是说，把它作为出发点和上升到更高层次的跳板，那里没有假设，只有万物的基本原理；而一旦掌握了基本原理，通过遵循其后面的推论，回过头来又可以得出结论。整个过程没有涉及到可感知的世界里的任何东西，而只是从一种本质到另一种本质，最后归结为本质。”

“我明白你的意思了，但没有全懂，”他说，“你所描述的东西貌似说来话长。但是，你想区分辩证法所研究的真实与可知的部分，因为这部分比所谓的‘学科’所研究的东西清晰程度更高一些。尽管这些学科在研究他们自身的题材时也要使用推理，而不是感官知觉，但他们把假设当成了基本原理。由于他们在研究过程中从假设出发，无法到达基本原理的层次，所以，你认为他们在这个问题上面没有展现出理智。尽管借助于基本原理，它是可知的。我认为，你把几何学家一类人的思维习惯称为推理，而不是理智，意思是说，推理是介于意见和理智之间的一种东西。”

“你理解得非常好。”我说，“可以这么认为，与四段分隔线对应的是四种心智状态；位于最顶层的是理智，第二层的是推理，第三层的是信念，最下面的一层是幻觉。你可以按比例排一下，假设它们的清晰程度与题材所具有的真实程度相对应。”

“我懂了，”他答道，“我同意你的建议，把它们排列一下。”

洞穴的比喻

那个分割线比喻当中所蕴含的真理，可以用更形象化的方法展现，尤其是它可以告诉我们更多有关分隔线比喻当中称之为信仰和幻觉的两种心智状态方面的事。我们看到了心智从幻觉升华到了纯哲学，也看到了伴随其成长所经历的艰难困苦。哲学家在到达视野的最高点后，应返回到山洞中，为他的同伴服务。他极不情愿这样做，但这却成了他的主要资本［……］

“接下来，我想让你描述一下我们人类的启蒙状态或者愚昧状态。把一个地下密室想象成类似洞穴的东西，长长的密室入口面对阳光，入口的宽度与洞穴一样宽。住在这个地下密室里的人，从小就被囚禁于此。他们的腿和脖子被锁链绑得很紧，头也无法转动，只能直视前方。在他们的身后、上方，有一团火正在熊熊燃烧。在囚徒与火之间，有一条走道相通。通道的前面竖起了一面幕墙，就像在木偶表演（皮影戏）中操纵者与观众之间放置的那种幕布。”

“明白。”

“继续想象有一群人携带各式装备在幕墙后面行走，并在它的上方投射出了影子，包括用木头、石头和其他各种材料制作的人和动物。也可以想象得到，这些人中有的在谈话，还有的沉默不语。”

“真是怪异的画面，怪异的囚徒。”

“这都是依据真实生活描绘出来的啊，”我回答道，“你说说看，这些可怜的囚徒除了可以看见火光在他们对面的洞壁上投射的影子之外，你认为他们还可以看到自己或他们的同伴吗？”

“如果一辈子都不允许他们转头，他们又怎么可能看到其他东西呢？”

“他们能看到通道上被搬运的那些东西吗？”

“当然不能。”

“那么，假使他们能够互相交谈，难道他们不会断定他们所看到的影子都是真实的事物吗？”

“他们难免会这样认为。”

“假使囚室里他们正对着的那面墙能够反射回声，如果一个人路过时发出了声音，难道你不认为他们会断定这个声音就是他们面前的影子所发出的吗？”

“他们只能这样想。”

“所以，他们完全相信，这里提到的物体的影子就是全部的事实真相。”

“是的，他们难免这样认为。”

“那么，设想一下，如果有一天解除了他们的禁锢，治愈了他们的错觉，那将会是一番怎样的景象？假设将其中一个人松了绑，然后强迫他站立起来，转过头，目视火堆，并向火堆走去；这些动作会令他痛苦不堪，眼前的一切会让他眼花缭乱，难以看清原先他只能看见其影子的物体。如果有人告诉他，他以前看到的东西都是空洞的、虚假的，他现在看到的东西才更接近于真实，观看的方法也更正确，这是因为他面对的是更真实的东西。如果在此基础上，再指着从他面前经过的每样东西，强迫他说出这些东西都是什么。如果是这样的话，你觉得他会怎么回答呢？难道你不认为他会不知所措，并且认为他以前见过的东西比现在指给他看的东西更真实吗？”

“是的，他会认为以前的更真实。”

“如果强迫他对着火光看的话，会伤害到他的眼睛。他会转身回到他能够看得清的事物中去，他认为这些东西比指给他看的东西要清晰得多。”

“是的。”

“如果把他强行拉上那条陡峭崎岖的上坡道，直至把他拖出洞外，见到洞外的阳光，”我继续说着，“这个过程会令他非常痛苦，他也会非常抵触。当他来到阳光下，耀眼的阳光会刺得他的眼睛无法睁开，人们说的真实物体他一样东西也看不清。”

“一开始肯定看不清。”他表示同意。

“因为在他可以看清洞外世界里的东西之前，肯定需要时间慢慢地去适应外面的光线。首先，他会发现最容易做的事就是看影子，然后是看人和其他物体在水中的倒影，最后再去观看物体本身。此后，他会发现在夜晚时分观察天体和天空会容易一些，还会发现在夜里观看月光和星光，要比在白天看太阳和太阳光容易得多。”

“当然了。”

“他最终能够做到直视太阳本身，而不必通过太阳在水或其他介质中的倒影来观看，而是直接盯住太阳看。”

“必须最后做这事。”

“不久，他就会得出一个结论：正是太阳才带来了四季变化和昼夜更替。太阳主宰着可见世界里的一切，并且从某种意义上讲，太阳也是他和他的囚徒同伴过去看到的一切的起因。”

“很明显他会得出这个结论的。”

“当他想起他在洞穴里的那个最初的家，想起曾经被当作智慧的那些东西，想起他的那些囚徒同伴，难道你不认为他会为自己的幸运感到庆幸，并为他的同伴感到难过吗？”

“非常有可能。”

“囚徒当中有可能也存在某种荣誉感，那些把闪过的影子出现的先后顺序记得最牢的囚徒，还有那些预言影子未来出现次序最准确的囚徒，会因其敏锐的眼力而受到大家的赞扬。那个获释的囚徒还会热衷于这种表扬、羡慕这种能力或荣誉吗？他可能宁愿‘在失去主人的房子里当一名农奴’，实际上你让他在世界上做其他什么都行，他也不愿意再和囚徒们持相同的看法，过相同的生活。难道他不会如荷马所说的这样吗？”

“会的，”他回答说，“他宁愿做什么都行，但就是不愿意像他们一样生活。”

“那么，当他有朝一日回到洞穴，”我问，“坐回到他原来的位子上时，你觉得会发生什么事情？难道他的眼睛就不会因为阳光突然消失而完全被黑暗所笼罩，于是就什么都看不见了吗？”

“肯定会这样的。”

“假使在他视力没有恢复、眼睛也没有习惯黑暗之前（这个过程需要一段时间）让他和其他囚徒展开区分影子的比赛——他还有可能会自欺欺人，愚弄自己吗？囚徒们会说，他的外面世界之旅把他自己的视力都给毁了。上到上面去的想法根本一点都不值去试。假使有人试图释放他们，并带他们到上面去。如果他们抓住他，一定会杀了他。”

“他们肯定会杀了他。”

“我亲爱的格老孔，”我接着说，“现在，必须把这个比喻与前面所讲的东西贯穿在一起讲。视力所揭示的世界好比囚室，囚室里面的火光好比太阳的力量。如果你把去到上面的世界以及在那里看到的一切与心灵上升到可知领域联系在一起，你就不会理解错误。不管怎样，这就是我的解释，也是你急于想听的东西；不过，真相终究如何只有上帝才知道。但在我看来，在可知世界里最后感知到的、物有所值的东西，也是必须克服困难才能感知的东西，就是善的本质；一旦看清善的本质，就可以推断出它是一切万物中正义和价值的根源，在可见世界里发出光芒，是光的源头，而在可知世界本身，则是主宰真理和智慧的根源。无论是在公共生活当中，还是在私人生活当中，若要行事理智，就必须能看得到善的本质。”

“你的话当中我能理解的，”他说，“我都赞同。”

“那么你也许也会同意我的这个看法：那些达到此境界的人不愿意参与人间凡事，他们的心灵也希望被留在上面的那个可知世界中。如果真是这样的话，其实不足为怪。如果我们的那个比喻恰当的话，这种事情是会发生的。”

“是的，可以料到。”

“这种人从神圣的沉思当中返回到凡间，接踵而来的烦恼会令其苦不堪言。如果他此时仍看不见东西，还没有习惯周围的黑暗环境，就强行让他在法庭或其他什么地方，对正义的影子，或者对作为和构成影子的影像进行审判，对从未见过正义本身的人们所持有的、有关正义的观念进行辩论。如果是那样的话，你也不会认为很奇怪的。”

“这没有什么可奇怪的。”

“但凡有点理解力的人，”我说，“都会记得有两种方式可能会让人的眼睛失去视力，从亮处到暗处，或者从暗处到亮处。他们认为同样的情况也适用于心智。所以，当他看到一个受到困扰的、无法判明事理的心智时，他不会不加思索地大声嘲笑它，而是会先问一下自己，它是否来自于一个更清晰的世界，因不习惯这里的黑暗而受到困扰，或者它是否刚刚从先前的无知状态逃脱出来，被来自更清晰的世界发出的强烈光芒刺得眼花缭乱。生命的第一种状况有理由祝贺，生命的第二种状况则有理由同情。如果你想讥笑的话，就讥笑从上面的阳光世界下降到黑暗世界的心灵吧，这样就不会显得那么荒谬。”

“你讲得非常合乎情理。”

“如果这是事实的话，”我继续说，“那么，我们必须摒弃职业教育家的教育观念，他们宣称能够把知识灌输到原先没有知识的大脑中——就好像是说他们可以把视力赋予到失去视觉的眼睛里一样。”

“他们肯实这样说过。”他说。

“不过，我们的讨论表明了以下事实：对知识的接受能力是与生俱来的，而用于学习的器官像眼睛一样，是无法从暗处转向亮处的，除非整个身体能够转动；同样道理，必须让心智作为一个整体，从变革的世界中脱身出来，直至心智之眼可以承受直视现实，直视现实中最耀眼的东西，即我们称之为善的东西。难道不是这样的吗？”

“是这样。”

“那么，心智本身的这种转向，也可以作为一门专业技能，用来尽可能简单高效地完成这种转换。我们关心的不是植入视力，而是确保原本拥有视力的人既没有转错方向，也没有看错。”

“可能是这么一回事。”

“所以，剩下的我们通常称之为心灵美德的东西，也许与身体的优点十分相似，因为这些优点其实都不是与生俱来的，而是通过后天的训练和实践获得的；不过，学问看起来肯定拥有更加神圣的性质，一种从来不会丧失能力的东西。不过，其效果可能是有用的和有益的，也可能是无用的和有害的，视其调转的方向而定。你难道没有注意到，那种通常被称为坏人，但却很聪明的人，其目光有多敏锐？他们心胸狭窄，但在事关他们自身利益的事情上却目光敏锐，极为犀利；不是说他们的视力有多么微弱，而是说他们被用于邪恶的目的，所以，他们的视力越敏锐，就越邪恶。”

“这倒是真的。”

“但是，”我说，“假设从他们很小的时候，就把这种品性与这个多变的世界本该有的重负隔离开来，强加到他们身上的是各种感官享乐，如贪食。这些东西扭曲了他们的灵魂，使之变得低级趣味；再假设他们的这种品性得到了释放，转向了真理，那么同样这些人的同样器官，会对真理有同样敏锐的视力，就像现如今他们对所面对的事物具有的那种敏锐视力一样。”

“非常有可能。”

“没有受过教育、不懂真理的人，是永远管理不好这个社会的，那些终生单纯追求学术的人，同样也是永远管理不好这个社会的。难道不是这样的吗？实际上从我们讲过的东西里必然会得出这个结论。没有受过教育的人，其在公共场合和私下场合的所有行为，都没有一个专一的人生目标来指导；而知识分子则不愿采取任何实际行动，一心只想逃离这个世界，到某种人间天堂中生活。”

“同意。”

“那么作为立法者，我们的职责就是迫使最优秀的人才学到我们称之为最高级知识的东西，使他们上升到我们前面描述过的那种善的境界。当他们实现了这个目标，并且有了足够的洞察力时，要防止他们做出如今尚被允许的那些行为。”

“你这是什么意思？”

“我的意思是说他们会滞留在上面的世界里，拒绝再次回到下面洞穴里那些囚徒的身边，无论大事小事，都拒绝分担他们的劳动，拒绝分享他们的奖赏。”

“不过，”他抗议道，“这确实不公平。我们在强迫他们过一种比原先更差的生活。”

“我们立法的目的，”我再次提醒他说，“不是社会中某个特定阶层，而是整个社会享有的特殊福利；通过劝说或强制手段，让全体公民团结起来，一同分享每一个个体对社会提供的利益；培养这种态度的目的在于，不要让人们各自为战，而是让每个人都成为整个链上的一环。”

“你说得对；我把这茬忘了。”他说。

“那么，格老孔，”我接着说，“你也看到了，我们不应该不公平地对待我们的哲学家。可是，当我们要求他们对别人进行某种照顾和承担某种责任时，其实我们提的这些要求是相当公平的。我们应当告诉他们，出生在其他国家的哲学家是有理由拒绝参加辛苦的政治工作的，因为这些哲学家是完全自发产生的，或是在无意当中产生的。只有那些完全靠自己成长起来的事物，才会有这种感觉。它们不欠任何人的情，也不需要报答养育之恩。‘但是，’我们会说，‘我们为了你自己，也为了整个社会，而把你培养成了领导者和蜂巢里的蜂王；你受到了比其他人更好和更完整的教育，更有资格把哲学和政治实践相结合。因此，你们必须轮流下到洞穴里，和你的同伴一起生活，并养成在黑暗中观察的习惯；一旦你的习惯养成了，你的观察能力就会比他们好上一千倍。你能够区分不同的阴影，知道它们是什么东西的阴影，因为你已经看过了美好、公正和至善东西的真相。所以说我们的国家和你们的国家，对他们的影子战斗及被他们视为无比荣耀的政治权力争夺战，保持着真正的清醒，而不是像当今大多数社会那样仅仅生活在梦想之中。事实完全不同：由最不热心掌权的人治理的国家，其政府必定是最好的和最平和的政府，而由渴望权力的人统治的国家，其政府必定是最差的政府。’”

“我非常同意。”

“那么，我们的学生在听到了我们这番话以后，会不会表示异议，并拒绝分担他们在政府中的重任呢？尽管他们大部分时间其实都是在上面纯洁的世界中度过的。”

“他们不会拒绝，因为我们是向正义的人提出正义的要求。不过，当然了，他们会把治理国家当成无法回避的义务，这一点与现在的统治者不同。”

“是的，当然。”我表示同意，“事实上，你必须为未来的统治者找到一种他们喜欢的、比治理国家更好的生活方式，只有这样，国家才可能治理良好；只有到那个时候，政府才是由真正富有的人来统治。他们的富有不是用金子堆砌出来的，而是至善和理性的生活所带来的真正幸福。如果你找的都是些生活贫困、连个人需求都无法满足的人处理公共事务，这些人希望从政治生涯中捞取好处，来弥补自身的不富足，他们永远都不可能治理好国家。他们开始争权夺利，随之而来的内部冲突和国内冲突会毁掉他们自己和整个社会的。”

“你说得真对。”

“真正的哲学生活方式会蔑视政治权力地位。除此之外，还有其他什么生活方式吗？”

“没有其他方式。”

“不过，我们希望得到权力的人只能是那些不喜欢权力的人，否则，就会出现权力相争。”

“那是肯定的。”

“他们最懂治国方略，有着其他形式的满足，生活也过得比政客们更充实。除了这些人之外，你还能强迫谁去担当国家守护者的职责呢？”

“没有别的什么人了。”

The Symposium

apollodorus
：In fact，I'm well prepared to answer your question. As it happens，the other day I was going to the city from my home in Phalerum，and someone I know spotted me from behind and called me from a distance. He said（with playful urgency）：

‘Hey，the man from Phalerum！You！Apollodorus，won't you wait？’

I stopped and waited．

He said，‘Apollodorus，I've just been looking for you to get the full story of the party at Agathon's，when Socrates，Alcibiades and the rest were there for dinner：what did they say in their speeches on love？I had a report from someone who got it from Philip's son，Phoenix；but he said you knew about it too．He wasn't able to give an exact report．Please give me your account．Socrates is your friend，and no one has a better right to report his conversations than you．But before you do，’ he added，‘tell me this：were you at this party yourself or not？’

‘It certainly wasn't an exact report you were given，’ I replied，‘if you think this party was recent enough for me to be there．’

‘Yes，I did think that，’ he said．

‘How could you think that，Glaucon？Don't you know that it's many years since Agathon stopped living in Athens，but it's not yet three years since I started to spend my time with Socrates and made it my job to find out what he says and does every day？Before then，I used to run around aimlessly. I thought I was doing something important，but really I was in the most pathetic state – just like you now！– thinking that philosophy was the last thing I should be doing．’

‘Don't make fun of me，’ he said；‘just tell me when this party took place．’

‘When you and I were still children，’ I said，‘and Agathon won the prize with his first tragedy．It was the day after he and his chorus held a sacrificial feast to celebrate their victory．’

‘So it really was a long time ago，’ he said．‘Who gave you your report；was it Socrates himself？’

‘Certainly not！’ I said．‘It was the same person who told Phoenix，someone called Aristodemus from Cydathenaeum，a little man who always went around barefoot．He was at the party because he was，I think，one of the people most in love with Socrates at that time．But，of course，I checked with Socrates afterwards some of the points he told me，and he confirmed Aristodemus’ account．’

‘Come on，’ he said，‘why don't you repeat this to me now？After all，walking on the road to the city gives us a good chance to talk and listen as we go along．’

So as we walked along this is what we talked about，and that's why，as I said at the start，I'm well prepared．If I need to go through it for you as well，that's what I must do．In fact，whenever I discuss philosophy or listen to others doing so，I enjoy it enormously，quite apart from thinking it's doing me good．But when I hear other kinds of discussion，especially the talk of rich businessmen like you，I get bored and feel sorry for you and your friends，because you think you're doing something important，when you're not．Perhaps you regard me as a failure，and I think you're right．But I don't think
you're a failure，I know
you are．

companion
：You're always the same，Apollodorus．You're always running down yourself and other people．You seem to believe that simply everyone is in a sad state except Socrates，beginning with yourself．How you ever got the nickname of ‘the softy’，I don't know．In your conversation，you're always just the same as you are now，savage in your attacks on yourself and everyone – except Socrates．

apollodorus
：Well，my dear friend，it's quite obvious，is it，that if I take this view about myself and you，I'm raving mad？

companion
：It's not worth quarrelling about this now，Apollodorus．Please，just do what I asked you，and tell me how the speeches went．

apollodorus
：All right，they went something like this – but it would be better if I try to tell the story from the beginning，just as Aristodemus did．

He said that he met Socrates，who'd just had a bath and put on sandals – things he hardly ever did．He asked Socrates where he was going looking so smart．

Socrates replied，‘To dinner with Agathon．Yesterday I stayed away from his victory celebrations，avoiding the crowd；but I promised to join him today．That's why I've smartened myself up，so that I can look good when I go to the home of a good-looking man．But what about you？’ he asked．‘How would you feel about coming to dinner without an invitation？’

‘I'll do whatever you say，’ Aristodemus replied．

‘Come with me，then，’ Socrates said，‘so we can prove the proverb wrong，and make it say：“Good men go uninvited to good men's banquets”．Homer，after all，doesn't just prove the proverb wrong but comes close to treating it with contempt．His Agamemnon is an exceptionally good fighter，while Menelaus is a “soft spearman”．But when Agamemnon sacrifices and holds a feast，he makes Menelaus，the inferior man，go uninvited to the banquet of a better man．’

Aristodemus replied to this，‘But I'm afraid that I will also match Homer's description rather than yours，Socrates，and be the inferior man who goes uninvited to the banquet of a clever one．If you take me along，think about what excuse you'll give；I won't admit I've come uninvited，I'll say you've invited me．’

‘“The two of us going together on our way” ’，he said，‘will work out what to say．Come on，then．’

After this conversation，Aristodemus said，they went off．But Socrates fell into his own private thoughts and kept dropping behind as they went along．When Aristodemus stopped too，Socrates told him to go ahead．When Aristodemus reached Agathon's house，he found the door open，and was caught in a ridiculous situation．One of the household slaves met him right away and took him to the room where the others were lying on their couches；and he found them just about to have dinner．As soon as Agathon saw him，he said，‘Aristodemus！You've come at just the right time to have dinner with us．If you've come for any other reason，put it off．I looked for you yesterday to invite you，but couldn't find you．But what about Socrates – why haven't you brought him along？’

When he turned round（Aristodemus said），he saw Socrates wasn't following after all．He explained that Socrates had brought him
along，and that he was coming to dinner at Socrates’ invitation．

‘I'm very glad you are，’ Agathon said．‘But where is he？’

‘He was behind me just now．I can't think where he must be．’

‘Go and look，slave，’ Agathon said，‘and bring Socrates here．And you，Aristodemus，share Eryximachus’ couch．’

A slave washed Aristodemus’ hands and feet，so he could lie down．One of the other slaves came and said，‘Socrates is here；he's retreated into your neighbour's porch and is standing there，and won't come in，although I've asked him to．’

‘That's odd，’ Agathon said．‘Go on asking him in and don't leave him alone．’

‘No，’ Aristodemus said；‘leave him．This is one of his habits．Sometimes he goes off and stands still wherever he happens to be．He'll come soon，I'm sure．Don't bother him，leave him alone．’

‘Well，if you think so，that's what we must do，’ Agathon said．‘Now，slaves，serve dinner to the rest of us．You generally serve whatever you like，when nobody is supervising you – and I've never done that．On this occasion，treat me as your guest for dinner as well as the others，and look after us in a way that will win our compliments．’

So they started having dinner，but Socrates still didn't come in．Agathon kept on saying they should send for Socrates，but Aristodemus wouldn't let him．In fact，Socrates came quite soon（he hadn't taken too long doing what he usually did），when they were about half-way through dinner．Then Agathon，who happened to be lying on his own on the bottom couch，said，‘Come and lie down beside me，Socrates，so that，by contact with you，I can share the piece of wisdom that came to you in the porch．It's clear you found what you were looking for and have it now；otherwise you wouldn't have stopped．’

Socrates sat down and said，‘How splendid it would be，Agathon，if wisdom was the sort of thing that could flow from the fuller to the emptier of us when we touch each other，like water，which flows through a piece of wool from a fuller cup to an emptier one．If wisdom is really like that，I regard it as a great privilege to share your couch．I expect to be filled up from your rich supply of fine wisdom．My wisdom is surely inferior – or rather，questionable in its significance，like a dream – but yours is brilliant and has great potential for growth．Look at the way it has blazed out so fiercely while you're still young；it was on display the other day，with more than thirty thousand Greeks there to see it．’

‘You're treating me with contempt，’ Agathon said．‘We'll argue for our rival claims to wisdom a bit later，and Dionysus will be our judge．But turn your attention to dinner fi rst．’

After this，Aristodemus said，Socrates lay down and had dinner with the rest．They then poured libations，sang a hymn，and performed all the other customary rituals，and turned to drinking．Pausanias took the initiative，saying something like this：‘Well，gentlemen，what's the most undemanding way to do our drinking？I can tell you that I'm in a really bad state from yesterday's drinking and need a rest．I think that's true of many of you，as you were there yesterday – so think about how to do our drinking in the most undemanding way．’

Aristophanes said，‘You're right，Pausanias，in saying we should cut down the demands we make on ourselves in our drinking．I'm one of those who were thoroughly sodden yesterday．’

After this，Eryximachus，the son of Acumenus，said，‘I agree with you．But there's still one more person I need to hear from，to find out what stamina he has for drinking，and that's Agathon．’

‘I've got absolutely no stamina either，’he said．

‘It's a stroke of luck for us – I mean，for Aristodemus，Phaedrus and the rest – that you who've got the strongest heads for drinking have given up．We're never up to it．Of course，I don't count Socrates：he can drink or not drink，so it'll suit him whatever we do．Well，since nobody here seems keen on drinking a lot，perhaps you won't find it so tiresome if I state the real facts about getting drunk．It has become clear from my medical experience that drunkenness is harmful for human beings．So if I had my way I wouldn't want to go too far in drinking and I wouldn't advise anyone else to do so，especially when you've still got a hangover from the night before．’

Phaedrus of Myrrhinus spoke up at this point：‘I usually follow your advice，especially where medicine is concerned．The rest of us here will do so too，if they're sensible．’

At this，they all agreed not to make the present occasion a real drinking-session，but just to drink as much as was pleasant．

‘Well then，'said Eryximachus，‘now that it's agreed that each of us should drink as much as he wants，without any kind of compulsion，my next proposal is that we should send away the flute-girl who's just come in，and let her play for herself，or for the women in their part of the house，if she prefers，and that we should spend the evening in conversation．Also，if you're willing，I'd like to propose a topic for discussion．’

They all agreed and told him to make his proposal．Eryximachus said，‘I want to begin by quoting the Melanippe
of Euripides：“Not mine the story” that I'm going to tell，but that of Phaedrus here．He often makes this complaint：“Isn't it terrible，Eryximachus，” he says，“that the poets have composed hymns and paeans to other gods，but none of them has ever composed a eulogy of Love，though he is such an ancient and important god．If you look at our best sophists（for instance，the excellent Prodicus），they write eulogies in prose to Heracles and the rest．Perhaps that's not so very surprising；but I once found a book by a clever writer in which salt gets amazing praise for its beneficial properties，and you can find encomia to many other such things．It's terrible that people have given serious attention to subjects like that，but nobody to this day has yet had the courage to sing the praises of Love as he deserves．Such a great god and so neglected！” I think Phaedrus is quite right on this point．I'd like to please him by making a contribution to this project；also this seems a good occasion for those of us here to celebrate the god．If you agree，we won't need anything to occupy us but discussion．I propose that each of us should make the finest speech he can in praise of Love，and then pass the topic on to the one on his right．Phaedrus should start，because he is in the top position，and is also the originator of the topic．’

‘Nobody will vote against you，Eryximachus，’Socrates said．‘I certainly couldn't refuse，since the subject of love is the only one I claim to understand．Nor could Agathon and Pausanias；nor could Aristophanes，whose whole occupation is centred on Dionysus and Aphrodite；nor could anyone else I see here．Of course，this arrangement isn't fair on those of us whose positions come last．But if the first comers say all that is required and do it well，that will satisfy us．Good luck to Phaedrus as he starts off and makes his eulogy of Love！’

All the rest agreed with this and told Phaedrus to do as Socrates said．Of course，Aristodemus didn't remember all that each speaker said and I don't remember all he said．But I'll tell you the speeches of the people he remembered best and that I thought most important．

As I say，Aristodemus told me that Phaedrus spoke first，starting along these lines：saying that Love was regarded by humans and gods as a great and awesome god for many reasons，especially his origin．

‘The god’，he said，‘is held in honour because he is one of the most ancient，as is proved by this fact：Love has no parents and none are ascribed to him by prose writers or poets．Hesiod says that first Chaos came into existence，

and then

Broad-breasted Earth，a secure seat for everything for ever，And Love．

Acusilaus agrees with Hesiod，saying that after Chaos two things came into existence，Earth and Love．On his origin，Parmenides says that “the very first god she devised was Love”．So Love's great antiquity is widely accepted．

‘Because of his antiquity，he is the source of our greatest benefits．I would claim that there is no greater benefit for a young man than a good lover and none greater for a lover than a good boyfriend．Neither family bonds nor public status nor wealth nor anything else is as effective as love in implanting something which gives lifelong guidance to those who are to lead good lives．What is this？A sense of shame at acting disgracefully and pride in acting well．Without these no individual or city can achieve anything great or fine．

‘Take the case of a man in love who is caught acting disgracefully or undergoing something disgraceful because he fails to defend himself out of cowardice．I think it would cause him more pain to be seen in this situation by his boyfriend than by his father，his friends or anyone else．We see the same thing in the case of the boyfriend：he feels most ashamed in front of his lovers when he is caught in some disgraceful situation．If there was any mechanism for producing a city or army consisting of lovers and boyfriends，there could be no better form of social organization than this：they would hold back from anything disgraceful and compete for honour in each other's eyes．If even small numbers of such men fought side by side，they could defeat virtually the whole human race．The last person a lover could bear to be seen by，when leaving his place in the battle-line or abandoning his weapons，is his boyfriend；instead，he'd prefer to die many times．As for abandoning his boyfriend or failing to help him in danger – no one is such a coward that he could not be inspired into courage by love and made the equal of someone who's naturally very brave．When Homer speaks about a god “breathing might” into some of his heroes，this is just the effect that love has on lovers．

‘Besides，it's only lovers who are willing to die for someone else；and this is true of women as well as men．The Greeks have adequate proof of this fact in Pelias'daughter Alcestis，who was the only one willing to die for her husband，though his father and mother were still living．Acting out of love，she showed so much more affectionate concern than they did that she made them look like strangers to their son，and relatives only in name．The gods，as well as human beings，saw this as a very fine act．Although many people have performed many fine acts，and although the gods have granted to only a handful of these the privilege of releasing their life again from Hades，they released her life，in admiration at her act．This shows how much even the gods value the commitment and courage that come from love．

‘But they sent Orpheus，the son of Oeagrus，empty handed from Hades；they showed him only a phantom of the wife he'd come to fetch and didn't give him the woman herself．They thought he was soft（he was only a musician）because he didn't have the courage to die for his love like Alcestis，but found a way of entering Hades while still alive．They punished him for this，and made him die at the hands of women．

‘By contrast，they honoured Achilles，the son of Thetis，and sent him off to the islands of the blessed．He learnt from his mother that if he killed Hector he would then die himself，but that if he didn't he would go home and die in his old age．He had the courage to choose to act on behalf of his lover by avenging him：he not only died for him but also died as
well as
him，since Patroclus was already dead．This won special admiration and exceptional honours from the gods，because it showed how much he valued his lover．Aeschylus talks nonsense when he says that Achilles was Patroclus’lover：he was more beautiful than Patroclus（indeed，he was the most beautiful of all the heroes），and was still beardless，as well as much younger than Patroclus，as Homer tells us．Although the gods certainly give special honour to the courage that comes from love，they show still greater amazement and admiration，and respond more generously，when a boyfriend shows affectionate concern towards his lover than when a lover does towards his boyfriend．A lover is more god-like than a boyfriend because he is divinely inspired．That's why they gave higher honour to Achilles than Alcestis，and sent him to the islands of the blessed．

‘That's why I say Love is the most ancient of the gods，the most honoured，and the most effective in enabling human beings to acquire courage and happiness，both in life and death．’

Phaedrus'speech went rather like that，according to Aristodemus．After Phaedrus，there were some others which Aristodemus couldn't remember very well；so he missed them out and went on to report Pausanias'speech．Pausanias said，‘I don't think our project has been specified properly，Phaedrus，in that we've been told simply to praise Love．If Love were a single thing，this would be fine，but in fact it isn't；and since it isn't，it's better to define in advance which type we should praise．I'll try and put things right by stating first which Love we should praise，then giving the god the praise he deserves．

‘We all know that Aphrodite is inseparable from Love．If there was a single Aphrodite，there would be a single Love；but since there are
two kinds of Aphrodite，there must also be two Loves．And surely there are two kinds of Aphrodite？One of these is older and is the daughter of Uranus，though she has no mother：we call her Uranian or Heavenly Aphrodite．The younger one is the daughter of Zeus and Dione：we call her Pandemic or Common Aphrodite．So it follows that each type of Love should have the same name as the goddess whose partner he is，and be called Heavenly or Common too．Of course，all gods should receive praise，but we must try and distinguish between the functions of these two gods．

‘Every activity in itself is neither right nor wrong．Take our present activity：we could be drinking or singing or discussing．None of these is right in itself；the character of the activity depends on the way it is done．If it is done rightly and properly，it is right；if it is not done properly，it is wrong．So not every type of loving and Love is right and deserves to be praised，but only the type that motivates us to love rightly．

‘Common Love is genuinely “common” and undiscriminating in its effects；this is the kind of love that inferior people feel．People like this are attracted to women as much as boys，and to bodies rather than minds．They are attracted to partners with the least possible intelligence，because their sole aim is to get what they want，and they don't care whether they do this rightly or not，So the effect of love on them is that they act without discrimination：it is all the same to them whether they behave well or not．The reason is that their love derives from the goddess who is much younger than the other，and who，because of her origin，is partly female and partly male in character．

‘The other love derives from the Heavenly goddess，who has nothing of the female in her but only maleness；so this love is directed at boys．This goddess is also older，and so avoids abusive violence．That's why those inspired with this love are drawn towards the male，feeling affection for what is naturally more vigorous and intelligent．You can also distinguish，within the general class of those attracted to boys，the ones who are motivated purely by the heavenly type of love．These are attracted to boys only when they start to have developed intelligence，and this happens around the time that they begin to grow a beard．I think that those who begin love-affairs at this point show their readiness to spend their whole lives together and to lead a fully shared life．They do not plan to trick the boy，catching him while he is still young and foolish，and then leaving with a laugh，running off to someone else．

‘There should even be a law against affairs with young boys，to prevent great effort being spent on something whose outcome is unclear．In the case of young boys，it is unclear whether they will end up good or bad in mind or body．Good men make this rule for themselves and are glad to do so．The followers of Common Love should be forced to adopt the same kind of rule，just as we forcibly prevent them，as far as we can，from having affairs with free-born women．These are the men who bring censure on love，so that some people go so far as to say that it is wrong to gratify a lover at all．People say this because they have in view the inappropriate and unjust behaviour of this type of men；surely，there is no action which would rightly be criticized if it were done in an orderly way and in line with the normal conventions．

‘The conventions governing love-affairs in other cities are easy to grasp since they have been defined in straight-forward terms．But here and in Sparta they are complex．In Elis and Boeotia，and wherever people are poor at speaking，the rule has been laid down straightforwardly that it is right to gratify lovers，and no one，young or old，would say that it is wrong．No doubt，this is to save them the trouble of trying to win over young men by persuasion，bearing in mind that they're incompetent speakers．But in much of Ionia and elsewhere in the Persian Empire the rule is that love-affairs are wrong．In Persia，it is because of their tyrannical government that they condemn them，as well as intellectual and athletic activities．No doubt，it doesn't suit their government that their subjects should have big ideas or develop strong friendships and personal bonds，which are promoted by all these activities，especially by love．In Athens the tyrants found this out by their own experience：it was Aristogiton's love and the strength of Harmodius'reciprocal affection that brought their dominance to an end．So where there is a general rule that it is wrong to gratify lovers，this can be attributed to the defects of those who make this rule：the government's lust for rule and the subjects’cowardice．Where the rule is that it is straightforwardly right，this is because of the mental sluggishness of the rule-makers．

‘Here in Athens our conventions are much better than those；but，as I've said，they are not easy to understand．It is said to be better to love openly than secretly，especially if you love boys of social distinction and good character，even if they are not particularly good looking．Also the lover receives an extraordinary amount of encouragement from everyone，which suggests that he isn't doing anything disgraceful；it is regarded as a fine thing to catch the boy you want and disgraceful to fail．When the lover is trying to catch the boy，convention allows him to win praise for doing extraordinary things．If he dared to do these things with any other aim and objective，his reward would be massive disapproval．

‘Imagine that someone who wanted to get money from a person，or political office or some other position of influence，was prepared to behave as lovers do towards the boys they love．Imagine that he went down on his knees as a suppliant，begging for what he wanted，and swore oaths，and spent all night on someone's doorstep，and was prepared to undergo the kind of slavery that no slave would put up with．He would be held back from behaving like this by friends and enemies alike；his enemies would criticize him for humiliating himself to get what he wanted，while his friends would tell him to stop and be ashamed of what he'd done．But when a lover does all these things，he is indulged and allowed by convention to escape criticism，implying that his objective is wholly admirable．Most remarkable of all，it is widely supposed that the only person forgiven by the gods for failing to keep an oath is the lover．A lover's oath，they say，is no oath at all．So，according to our convention，gods as well as humans allow lovers every kind of indulgence．From this standpoint，you would think that in this city it is regarded as wholly admirable to be a lover and to respond affectionately to one's lovers．

‘On the other hand，when boys attract lovers，their fathers put attendants in charge of them，with specific instructions not to let the boys have conversations with their lovers．The boys’friends and peer group call them names if they see anything like this going on，and older people don't stop the name-calling or tell them off for saying these things．When you look at this，you would think，by contrast，that love-affairs were regarded as wholly wrong here．

‘The position，I think，is this．The matter is not straight-forward；and，as I said before，a love-affair in itself is neither right nor wrong but right when it is conducted rightly and wrong when conducted wrongly．It is wrong to gratify a bad man in a bad way，and right to gratify a good man in the right way．A bad man，in this connection，is the lover of the common type，who loves the body rather than the mind．He is not constant，because he loves something that is not constant：as soon as the bloom of the body fades，which is what attracted him，“he flies away and is gone”，bringing disgrace on all he said and promised．But the man who loves goodness of character is constant throughout his life，since he has become united with something constant．

‘The aim of our practice is to test lovers thoroughly and in the right way，to ensure that boys gratify one type but keep away from the other．That is why，at the same time，we encourage lovers to chase boys and encourage boys to run away from lovers．It's a kind of competition to test which type the lover belongs to and which type the boy belongs to．This explains why it's considered wrong to be caught quickly：this is to ensure that time intervenes，which is thought to be a good way of testing most things．It also explains why it is considered wrong to be caught by a lover's money or political power．In such cases，the boy is either frightened into submission by ill-treatment or enjoys the benefits of money or political success and fails to look down on this sort of thing．None of these things are thought to be stable or permanent，apart from the fact that no genuine affection can be based on them．

‘Only one way remains，according to our rules，in which it is right for a boy to gratify his lover．I said earlier that the lover's willingness to undergo every kind of slavery isn't humiliating or reprehensible．Similarly，according to our rules，there's only one remaining type of voluntary slavery that isn't reprehensible：the type which aims to produce virtue．Our view is that if someone is willing to put himself at someone else's service in the belief that the other person will help him improve in wisdom or some other aspect of virtue，this willing slavery isn't wrong or humiliating．

‘These two rules must be combined（the one governing the love of boys and the one governing the love of wisdom and other kinds of virtue），to create the conditions in which it is right for a boy to gratify his lover．These conditions are realized when lover and boyfriend come together，each observing the appropriate rule：that the lover is justified in any service he performs for the boyfriend who gratifies him，and that the boyfriend is justified in any favour he does for someone who is making him wise and good．Also the lover must be able to develop the boyfriend's understanding and virtue in general，and the boyfriend must want to acquire education and wisdom in general．When all these conditions are met，then and then alone it is right for a boyfriend to gratify his lover，but not otherwise．

‘In this case，there's nothing wrong with being deceived；but，in every other case，love is wrong，whether or not you are deceived．Suppose that a boy thinks his lover is rich and gratifies him in the hope of making money；if the lover turns out to be poor and the boy doesn't get any money，what he does is still wrong．This kind of boy has shown something about his character：that he would do any service for anyone to make money，and that is not right．On the same basis，suppose a boy thinks that his lover is a good man and gratifies him in the hope of becoming better through the lover's friendship．If the lover turns out to be a bad person，quite lacking in virtue，there's no disgrace in being deceived in this way．This kind of boy has also shown something about his character：that he's keen to do anything for anybody to gain virtue and become better，and there's no motive more admirable than this．So it's absolutely right to gratify a lover in the hope of gaining virtue．This is the heavenly love that belongs to the Heavenly goddess and is a source of great value to the city and to individuals，because it forces the lover to pay attention to his own virtue and the boyfriend to do the same．All other forms of love derive from the other Love，the Common one．

‘This is my contribution on Love，Phaedrus，’he said；‘it's as good as I can manage on the spur of the moment．’

When Pausanias came to a pause（I have learnt this kind of word-play from the experts），Aristodemus said，it was Aristophanes'turn to speak．But，as it happened，he was having an attack of hiccups，from overeating or some other cause，and couldn't speak．He said to Eryximachus（the doctor was lying on the couch below his），‘You're the right person either to put a stop to my hiccups or to speak instead of me until they're over．’Eryximachus replied，‘I'll do both．I'll take your place and you take mine when your hiccups are over．While I'm speaking，your hiccups might stop if you hold your breath for a long time；if they don't，gargle with some water．If they're really persistent，get something to tickle your nose with，and make yourself sneeze，If you do this once or twice，they'll stop，however persistent they are．’

‘Start your speech as soon as you can，'said Aristophanes，‘and I'll do this．’

Eryximachus said，‘This is what I think：Pausanias started his speech well but did not carry it through to a proper conclusion，so I should try to complete his line of argument．I think he drew a good distinction in saying there are two kinds of Love．But Love is not only expressed in the emotional responses of human beings to beautiful people，but in many other types of response as well：in the bodily responses of every kind of animal，in plants growing in the earth，in virtually everything that exists．I feel sure it's from medicine，my own area of expertise，that I've realized how great and wonderful a god Love is，and how his power extends to all aspects of human and divine life．

‘I'll begin with medicine，to give pride of place to this form of expertise．It's inherent in the nature of bodies that they manifest these two kinds of love．It's generally agreed that bodily health and disease are different states and dissimilar from each other．When things are dissimilar，the objects of their desire and love are dissimilar．Therefore，love is different in the case of a healthy and a diseased body．Pausanias just said that it's right to gratify good people but wrong to gratify self-indulgent ones．It's just the same with the body：in the case of each body，it is right to gratify the good parts and you should do this（and that's what it means to practise medicine）；but it's wrong to gratify the bad and diseased parts and you should deprive them of satisfaction if you're going to be an expert doctor．

‘Medicine，in essence，is knowledge of the forms of bodily love as regards filling and emptying．The person who is most of all a doctor can distinguish，within these processes，between right and wrong love．The good practitioner can bring about changes，so that the body acquires one type of love instead of the other；he knows how to implant one type of love，when it isn't there but should be，and to remove the other type of love that is there．He should be able to take the most antagonistic elements in the body and create friendship and love between them．The most antagonistic elements are opposites such as cold and hot，bitter and sweet，dry and wet，and so on．The one who discovered how to implant love and concord between these was our ancestor Asclepius（that's what we're told by poets like those here，and I believe them）and that's how he established the art of medicine．

‘Medicine，as I say，is wholly governed by this god，and so are athletics and agriculture；and it's clear to anyone who thinks about it for a moment that the same point applies to music．This is perhaps what Heraclitus has in mind，though he doesn't express it very well．He says about unity that “by diverging，it agrees with itself … like the harmony of a bow or a lyre”．It is quite absurd to say that a harmony diverges from itself or that it exists while its components are still divergent．But perhaps what he had in mind was that musical expertise creates harmony by replacing a previous divergence between high and low notes with agreement．Surely there can be no harmony between high and low while they are still divergent．Harmony is concord，and concord is a kind of agreement；but agreement cannot be created from divergent things while they are still divergent，and harmony cannot be created unless divergent things agree．Similarly，rhythm is created by replacing a previous divergence between fast and slow tempo with agreement．Just as medicine creates agreement in one area，music creates it in another，by implanting love and concord between the elements involved；music，in its turn，is knowledge of the forms of love in connection with harmony and rhythm．

‘In the structure of harmony and rhythm，considered in itself，it's not difficult to recognize the workings of love；and so the twofold character of love does not show itself here．But when it's a question of using rhythm and harmony to produce an effect on people，either by making up music（what they call “composition”）or by making proper use of the tunes and verses composed（which is called “education”），difficulties arise and a good practitioner is needed．Here the same principle again holds good：you should gratify and promote the love of well-ordered people，or people who are not yet well ordered but may in this way improve．This love is the good and heavenly one，the love of the Heavenly Muse．But the common love is that of the Muse Polymnia；when this type of love is applied，it must be with caution，to ensure that the recipient enjoys the pleasure it provides without being made self-indulgent．Similarly，in my area of expertise，a key part of the job lies in the correct handling of the desires met by the art of cookery，to ensure that people enjoy this pleasure without getting ill．So in music，medicine，and in every other sphere，both human and divine，as far as we can，we must pay careful attention to these two kinds of love，because both kinds are there．

‘The character of the seasons is also determined by these two kinds of love．When those elements I mentioned before（hot and cold，dry and wet）are influenced by the well-ordered Love，they are in harmony with each other and achieve a temperate mixture．Their arrival brings good harvests and health to humans and other animals and plants，and causes no damage．But when the lawless and violent Love dominates the seasons，they cause great destruction and damage．These conditions tend to produce epidemics and other abnormal diseases for beasts and plants．Frost，hail and blight are the result of the mutually aggressive competition and disorder that is the effect of this kind of love．So what we call astronomy is the knowledge of the workings of love，as these affect the movements of the stars and the seasons of the year．

‘Also，all types of sacrifice and the whole sphere of divination（these are the ways in which gods and humans communicate with each other）are wholly directed at maintaining one kind of love and curing the other．Every kind of impiety towards one's parents（living or dead）or the gods tends to occur when people fail to gratify，respect or give pride of place in every action to the well-ordered Love，but do so to the other one．Prophecy has been given the job of keeping an eye on those whose love is the wrong kind and curing this．It also has the job of producing friendship between gods and humans by understanding how the operations of love in human life affect right behaviour and piety．

‘So Love as a whole has great and mighty – or rather total – power，when you put all this together．But it is the Love whose nature is expressed in good actions，marked by self-control and justice，at the human and divine level that has the greatest power and is the source of all our happiness．It enables us to associate，and be friends，with each other and with the gods，our superiors．

‘It may be that my eulogy of Love has missed out a good deal，but if so this was not intentional．If I have left anything out，it's up to you，Aristophanes，to fill in the gaps．Or，if you have in mind a different kind of eulogy of the god，do carry on，now that your hiccups have stopped．’

Now that it was Aristophanes'turn（Aristodemus reported），he said：‘Yes，they've stopped all right，but not until I applied the sneeze-treatment to them．It makes me wonder whether it is the “well-ordered” part of my body that wants the kind of noises and tickles that make up a sneeze．At any rate，the hiccups stopped right away when I applied the sneeze．’

‘My dear Aristophanes，’Eryximachus said，‘be careful what you're doing．By joking before you start to speak，you're making me watch out for jokes in your speech too，when otherwise you could give your speech without interference．’

‘You're right，Eryximachus，’Aristophanes said，‘and I withdraw what I said．But，if you're watching out in my speech，don't think I'm afraid of saying something funny – that would be pure profit and typical of my Muse – but of saying something ludicrous．’

Eryximachus said，‘You think you can take a shot at me and run away！Well，take care；you'll have to answer for what you say．But even so，if I decide to，I'll let you off．’

‘Actually，Eryximachus，’Aristophanes said，‘I do intend to take a different approach from the one taken by you and Pausanias in your speeches．I think people have wholly failed to recognize the power of Love；if they'd grasped this，they'd have built the greatest temples and altars for him，and made the greatest sacrifices．In fact，none of this is done for him，though he deserves it most of all．He loves human beings more than any other god；he is their helper and the doctor of those sicknesses whose cure constitutes the greatest happiness for the human race．I shall try to explain his power to you，and you will teach this to others．

‘First of all，you must learn about human nature，and what has happened to it．Long ago，our nature was not the same as it is now but quite different．For one thing，there were three human genders，not just the present two，male and female．There was also a third one，a combination of these two；now its name survives，although the gender has vanished．Then “androgynous” was a distinct gender as well as a name，combining male and female；now nothing is left but the name，which is used as an insult．

‘For another thing，the shape of each human being was a rounded whole，with back and sides forming a circle．Each one had four hands and the same number of legs，and two identical faces on a circular neck．They had one head for both the faces，which were turned in opposite directions，four ears，two sets of genitals，and everything else was as you would imagine from what I've said so far．They moved around upright as we do now，in either direction，as they wanted．When they set off to run fast，they supported themselves on all their eight limbs，and moved quickly round and round，like tumblers who do cartwheels by keeping their legs straight as they go round and round．

‘The reason why there were these three genders，and why they were as described，is that the parent of the male gender was originally the sun，that of the female gender the earth，that of the combined gender the moon，because the moon is a combination of sun and earth．They were round，and so was the way they moved，because they took after their parents．They were terrible in their strength and vigour；they had great ambitions and made an attack on the gods．The story told by Homer about Ephialtes and Otus，how they tried to climb up to heaven to attack the gods，really refers to them．Zeus and the other gods discussed what to do to them and couldn't decide．The gods didn't see how they could kill them，wiping out the human race with thunderbolts as they'd done with the giants；if they did that，the honours and sacrifices the gods received from them would disappear．But they couldn't let them go on behaving outrageously．After much hard thought，Zeus had an idea：“I think I have a plan by which human beings could still exist but be too weak to carry on their wild behaviour．I shall now cut each of them into two；they will be weaker and also more useful to us because there will be more of them．They will walk around upright on two legs．If we think they're still acting outrageously，and they won't settle down，I'll cut them in half again so that they move around hopping on one leg．”

‘After saying this，Zeus cut humans into two，as people cut sorb-apples in half before they preserve them or as they cut hard-boiled eggs with hairs．As he cut each one，he told Apollo to turn the face and the half-neck attached to it towards the gash，so that humans would see their own wound and be more orderly；Zeus also told him to heal the other wounds．Apollo turned round the face；he pulled the skin from all around the body towards what's now called the stomach（like a purse being pulled tight with a drawstring），and finished it off by making one opening in the middle of the stomach，which we call the navel．He also smoothed off the other numerous wrinkles，and shaped the chest with the kind of tool used by shoemakers when they smooth the wrinkles of leather on the last．But he left a few on the stomach round the navel，to remind them of what had happened to them long ago．

‘Since their original nature had been cut in two，each one longed for its own other half and stayed with it．They threw their arms round each other，weaving themselves together，wanting to form a single living thing．So they died from hunger and from general inactivity，because they didn't want to do anything apart from each other．Whenever one of the halves died and one was left，the one that was left looked for another and wove itself together with that．Sometimes the one it met was half of a whole woman（the half we now call a “woman”），sometimes half a whole man．In any case，they kept on dying in this way．

‘Zeus took pity on them and came up with another plan：he moved their genitals round to the front；until then，they had genitals on the back of their bodies，and sexual reproduction occurred not with each other but on the earth，as in the case of cicadas．So Zeus moved the genitals round to the front and in this way made them reproduce in each other，by means of the male acting inside the female．The aim of this was that，if a man met with a woman and entwined himself with her，they would reproduce and the human race would be continued．Also，if two males came together，they would at least have the satisfaction of sexual intercourse，and then relax，turn to their work，and think about the other things in their life．

‘That's how，long ago，the innate desire of human beings for each other started．It draws the two halves of our original nature back together and tries to make one out of two and to heal the wound in human nature．Each of us is a matching half of a human being，because we've been cut in half like flatfish，making two out of one，and each of us is looking for his own matching half．Those men who are cut from the combined gender（the androgynous，as it was called then）are attracted to women，and many adulterers are from this group．Similarly，the women who are attracted to men and become adulteresses come from this group．Those women who are cut from the female gender are not at all interested in men，but are drawn much more towards women；female homosexuals come from this group．

‘Those who are cut from the male gender go for males．While they are boys，because they are slices of the male gender，they are attracted to men and enjoy sleeping with men and being embraced by them．These are the best of their generation，both as boys and young men，because they are naturally the bravest．Some people say that they are shameless，but that isn't true．It's not out of shamelessness that they do this but because they are bold，brave and masculine，and welcome the same qualities in others．Here is clear evidence of this：men like this are the only ones who，when grown up，end up as politicians．When they become men，they're sexually attracted by boys；they have no natural interest in getting married and having children，although they are forced to do this by convention．They are quite satisfied by spending their lives together and not getting married．In short，such people become lovers of boys and boys who love their male lovers，always welcoming their shared natural character．

‘When a lover of boys，or any other type of person，meets that very person who is his other half，he is overwhelmed，to an amazing extent，with affection，concern and love．The two don't want to spend any time apart from each other．These are people who live out whole lifetimes together，but still couldn't say what it is they want from each other．I mean，no one can think that it's just sexual intercourse they want，and that this is the reason why they find such joy in each other's company and attach such importance to this．It's clear that each of them has some wish in his mind that he can't articulate；instead，like an oracle，he half-grasps what he wants and obscurely hints at it．Imagine that Hephaestus with his tools stood over them while they were lying together and asked：“What is it，humans，that you want from each other？” If they didn't know，imagine that he asked next：“Is this what you desire，to be together so completely that you're never apart from each other night and day？If this is what you desire，I'm prepared to fuse and weld you together，so that the two of you become one．Then the two of you would live a shared life，as long as you live，since you are one person；and when you died，you would have a shared death in Hades，as one person instead of two．But see if this is what you long for，and if achieving this state satisfies you．” We know that no one who heard this offer would turn it down and it would become apparent that no one wanted anything else．Everyone would think that what he was hearing now was just what he'd longed for all this time：to come together and be fused with the one he loved and become one instead of two．The reason is that this is our original natural state and we used to be whole creatures：“love” is the name for the desire and pursuit of wholeness．

‘Before this，as I say，we were unified；but now，because of our crimes，we have been split up by Zeus just as the Arcadians have been by the Spartans．There's a danger that，if we aren't well ordered in our behaviour towards the gods，we'll be split up further，and go around like figures in bas-relief on gravestones，sawn in half down the nose，like half-dice．So everyone should encourage others to show all due reverence towards the gods，so that we can avoid one outcome and achieve the other，with Love as our leader and general．No one should work against Love，and to get on the wrong side of the gods is to work against Love．If we are friends of the god and have him on our side，we shall do what few people now do – find and become close to the loved ones that are really our own．

‘I don't want Eryximachus to think that my speech is just a comedy，directed at Pausanias and Agathon．It may well be that they are among this type and are both halves of the male nature．But what I'm saying applies to all men and all women too：our human race can only achieve happiness if love reaches its conclusion，and each of us finds his loved one and restores his original nature．If this is the ideal，under present circumstances what comes closest to it must be the best：that is to find a loved one who naturally fits your own character．If we want to praise the god who is responsible for this，we would rightly praise Love．In present circumstances，he does the best for us that can be done，leading us towards what is naturally close to us．He also holds out to us the greatest hopes for the future：that if we show reverence towards the gods，he will restore us to our original nature，healing us and so giving us perfect happiness．

‘Well，Eryximachus，this is my speech about love，a rather different one from yours．As I asked you，don't treat my speech as a comedy．Let's go on and hear what each of the remaining speakers has to say – or rather the two of them，as only Agathon and Socrates are left．’

‘I'll do as you say，’Eryximachus said，‘and in any case I much enjoyed your speech．If I didn't know that Socrates and Agathon were experts on the ways of love，I'd be very worried that they might run out of things to say，since we've already had such a wide variety of speeches．But，as things are，I'm quite confi dent．’

Socrates said，‘That's because you've taken part successfully in our competition．If you were in my position，or rather where I'll be when Agathon too has given a good speech，you'd be very frightened and in just as much of a quandary as I am．’

‘You're trying to put a spell on me，Socrates，’Agathon said，‘by making me nervous at the thought that the audience has high expectations of my giving a good speech．’

‘But I would have a short memory if I did that，Agathon，'said Socrates．‘I saw the courage and self-confidence you showed when you went out on to the platform with the actors，facing such a huge audience without any embarrassment，before presenting your own work．So I shouldn't expect you to become nervous in front of our small group．’

‘But Socrates，’Agathon said，‘I hope you don't think I'm so obsessed with the theatre that I don't realize that，for anyone with any sense，a small number of intelligent people are more alarming than a crowd of unintelligent ones．’

‘It would be quite wrong of me，Agathon，’Socrates said，‘to think you could be unsophisticated in any way．I'm well aware that if you found some people you thought were wise，you would pay more attention to them than to the crowd．But I'm afraid we don't fall into that category；after all，we were there and were part of that crowd．But if you found some other wise people，you might feel ashamed if you thought you were doing something wrong in front of them – is that what you mean？’

‘That's right，’Agathon replied．

‘But wouldn't you feel ashamed if you thought you were doing something wrong in front of the crowd？’

At this point Phaedrus interrupted and said，‘My dear Agathon，if you answer Socrates’questions，he won't care whether we get anywhere with our present project，as long as he's got a partner for discussion，especially someone attractive．I enjoy hearing Socrates engaging in discussion，but I must look after the eulogy of Love and extract from each one of you a speech as your contribution．So when the two of you have made your offering to the god，then you can have your discussion．’

‘You're right，Phaedrus，’Agathon said；‘there's no reason for me not to make my speech．Socrates will have plenty of opportunities for discussion another time．

‘I want first of all to say how I should speak，then give my speech．I think that all the previous speakers，instead of praising the god，have congratulated human beings on the good things that come to them from the god．Nobody has spoken about the nature of the god himself who has given us these things．There is only one right way of making a eulogy，whatever the topic，and that is to define the nature of the subject of the speech and the nature of that for which he is responsible．So，in the case of Love，the right thing is to praise his nature fi rst，and then his gifts．

‘I claim that，though all the gods are happy，Love – if it is proper to say this and does not cause offence – is the happiest，because he is the most beautiful and best．He is the most beautiful for this reason：first of all，Phaedrus，he is the youngest of gods．He himself provides good evidence for this point by fleeing head-long from old age，fast though that is（it comes to us sooner than it should）．Love naturally hates old age and keeps his distance from it．He always associates with the young and is one of them；the ancient saying is right，that like always stays close to like．Although I agree with many other things that Phaedrus said，I don't agree that Love is older than Cronus and Iapetus．I claim that he is the youngest of the gods and stays young forever．The things the gods did to each other in ancient times，which Hesiod and Parmenides report，happened（if their reports are true）because of Necessity and not Love．The gods would not have castrated or imprisoned each other or done those many other acts of violence if Love had been among them；there would have been friendship and peace between them，as there is now and has been since Love began to rule among the gods．

‘He is young，and sensitive as well as young；but it would take a poet of Homer's quality to bring out how sensitive the god is．Homer describes Delusion as a goddess，and also sensitive；at least her feet are sensitive，as he says：

But her feet are sensitive；to the ground

She never draws close，but walks on the heads of men．

I think Homer gives clear evidence of her sensitivity，in saying that she does not walk on what is hard，but what is soft．We can use the same evidence for Love's sensitivity．He does not walk on the ground，nor on skulls（which are not at all soft），but walks and lives in the softest of all things．He makes his home in the characters and minds of gods and humans；and not in all minds，one after another，but whenever he finds one with a tough character he moves on，and whenever he finds one with a soft character he settles down．Since he is in continual contact with the softest members of the softest type of thing，not just with his feet but with all of him，he must be extremely sensitive．

‘So he is very young and sensitive，and is fluid in shape as well．Otherwise，if he was tough，he couldn't envelop someone's mind completely or pass unnoticed at first entry into it and then out of it．Good evidence that he has a well-formed and fluid shape comes from his gracefulness，which is universally accepted as a special feature of Love（gracelessness and Love are always enemies to each other）．His beauty of complexion is shown by the fact that he spends his time among flowers．Love does not settle on a body or mind or anything that has no bloom or has lost its bloom；but when he finds somewhere full of bloom and fragrance，there he settles and stays．

‘Enough has been said（though still more remains）about the god's beauty；the next topic I must speak about is Love's virtue．The most important point is that Love does no injustice and has none done to him，when dealing with either gods or humans．When Love has anything done to him，it isn't by force（since Love is never forced）．When Love does anything，he doesn't use force，since everyone consents to all Love's orders；and whatever is agreed by mutual consent，that is what “laws，the sovereign of the city” defi ne as just．

‘As well as justice，Love has the biggest share of moderation．It is generally agreed that moderation is mastery of pleasures and desires，and that no pleasure is stronger than Love．If the pleasures are weaker，they must be mastered by Love and he must be their master；and if Love masters pleasures and desires，he must be exceptionally moderate．

‘As for courage，“not even Ares can stand up to” Love．It isn't Ares who captured Love but Love who captured Ares（Love of Aphrodite，as the story goes），and the capturer is master of the captured．Whoever masters the one who is bravest of the others must be the bravest of all．

‘I've spoken about the god's justice，moderation and courage；it remains to speak about his wisdom．As far as possible，I must try to treat this fully．First of all – to give honour to my expertise in the way that Eryximachus gave honour to his – the god is so skilled a poet that he makes others into poets．Everyone turns into a poet，“even though a stranger to the Muses before”，when he is touched by Love．We may take this as evidence that Love is a good composer in，broadly，every type of artistic production，because you can't give someone else what you don't have or teach someone what you don't know yourself．Certainly，as regards the production of living things，who will deny that it is by Love's skill that all living things come into being and are produced？As for expertise in art or craft，don't we know that whoever is taught by this god ends up being famous and conspicuous，while whoever is untouched by the god is obscure？It was by following where his desire and love led him that Apollo discovered the arts of archery，medicine and prophecy，and this makes Apollo a pupil of Love．In the same way，it makes the Muses pupils of his in music，Hephaestus in metalwork，Athena in weaving and Zeus in steering gods and humans．So the activities of the gods only became organized when Love was born among them – love of beauty，of course，as love cannot be directed at ugliness．Before then，as I said at the start，the gods did many terrible things，we are told，under the rule of Necessity．But once this god was born，all good things came to gods and humans through the love of beauty．

‘So it seems to me，Phaedrus，that Love is himself supreme in beauty and excellence and is responsible for similar qualities in others．I feel moved to express this in verse and say that he is the one who makes

Peace among humankind and windless calm at sea，

Rest for the winds，and sleep for those distressed．

Love drains us of estrangement and fills us with familiarity，causing us to come together in all shared gatherings like this，and acting as our leader in festival，chorus and sacrifice．He includes mildness and excludes wildness．He is generous of goodwill and ungenerous of ill-will．He is gracious and kindly；gazed on by the wise，admired by the gods；craved by those denied him，treasured by those enjoying him；father of luxury，elegance，delicacy，grace，desire，longing；careful for good people，careless of bad people；in trouble，in terror，in longing，in discourse，he is the best helmsman，marine，comrade，rescuer．For the whole company of gods and humans，most beautiful and best of leaders；every man should follow him singing beautiful hymns of praise，sharing the song he sings to charm the mind of every god and human．

‘There's my speech，Phaedrus，’he said，‘my dedication to the god；it combines entertainment with a degree of seriousness，as far as I can manage．’

After Agathon had finished his speech，Aristodemus said，there were shouts of admiration from everyone present，because the young man had spoken in a way that reflected well on himself and on the god．Socrates looked at Eryximachus and said，‘Well，son of Acumenus，do you still think my earlier anxiety was groundless？Wasn't I speaking prophetically when I said just now that Agathon would give an amazing speech and that I would be lost for words？’

‘On one point’，Eryximachus said，‘you were prophetic，in saying that Agathon would give a good speech；but I don't think you'll be lost for words．’

‘My good friend，'said Socrates，‘how can I fail to be lost for words，or anyone else，who has to follow such a beautiful and varied speech？The rest was not quite so amazing；but who could fail to be struck by the beauty of language and phrasing at the end？I saw that I couldn't even get close to this degree of beauty in my speech，and was so ashamed I nearly ran away（and would have done if I'd had anywhere to go）．The speech reminded me of Gorgias，and so I had just the same experience that Homer describes．I was afraid that Agathon would end his speech by directing the Gorgon-like head of the formidable orator Gorgias at my speech and turn me into speechless stone．Then I realized I'd made a fool of myself in agreeing to take my turn with you in eulogizing Love and in claiming expertise in the ways of love；in fact I knew nothing about what was involved in eulogizing something．I was so na．ve that I thought you should tell the truth about the subject of the eulogy；I thought this should be the basis from which to select the finest features and present them in a way that showed the subject at its best．I took pride in thinking that I would give a good speech because I knew the truth about how to give a eulogy of a subject．

‘But in fact，it seems，that isn't the right way of praising something．Instead，you should claim that your subject has the greatest and finest possible qualities，whether it really does or not；and if what you say isn't true，it doesn't matter very much．What was proposed，it seems，was that each of us should give the appearance of praising Love，not that we should actually do so．That must be why the rest of you find anything that can be said and ascribe it to Love，saying that he is like this and responsible for that，to make him look as fine and good as possible．You're obviously doing this for the ignorant（not，of course，for those who understand the subject）；and your eulogies have certainly been beautiful and impressive．

‘But I didn't know the right way of giving a eulogy，and it was out of ignorance that I agreed to give one in my turn．But “it was the tongue” that promised，“not the heart”；so let's forget about it．I'm not giving another eulogy of that kind – I couldn't do it．However，I am prepared to tell the truth，if you'd like that，though in my own way，not competing with your speeches，which would make me look ridiculous．So let me know，Phaedrus，whether there's any need for a speech like that，one which tells the truth about Love，but which uses whatever words and phrases happen to occur to me as I go along．’

Phaedrus and the others told him to give his speech in whatever style he thought best．

‘Phaedrus，’Socrates said，‘would you also allow me to ask Agathon a few little questions，so that I can make my speech on the basis of agreement with him？’

‘I give my consent，’Phaedrus said；‘ask away．’

After that，Aristodemus said，Socrates made this start to his speech．

‘My dear Agathon，I thought you made a good start to your speech，when you said that we should bring out Love's character before turning to the effects he produces．I think that's an admirable way to start．Well then，now that you've given a fine and magnificent exposition of the nature of Love in other respects，tell me this too．Is it Love's nature to be love of something or nothing？I'm not asking whether Love is the child of a particular mother or father；it would be absurd of me to ask whether Love is love of a mother or father in this sense．But suppose I'd asked the question，whether a father is father of someone or not．If you'd wanted to give the right answer，you'd surely have said that a father is father of a son or daughter，wouldn't you？’

‘Certainly，'said Agathon．

‘The same goes for a mother？’

He agreed to this too．

‘Well then，'said Socrates，‘answer a little further，and you'll have a better idea of what I've got in mind．Suppose I asked this：is a brother，in so far as he is a brother，brother of
someone or not？’

He said that he was．

‘That is，a brother of
a brother or sister？’

He agreed．

‘Now try to tell me about love’，he said．‘Is Love love of nothing or something？’

‘Of something，undoubtedly！’

‘For the moment，'said Socrates，‘keep to yourself and bear in mind what love is of
．But tell me this much：does Love desire what it is love of or not？’

‘Yes，’he said．

‘When he desires and loves，does he have in his possession what he desires and loves or not？’

‘He doesn't – at least probably not，’he said．

‘Think about it，’Socrates said．‘Surely it's not just probable but necessary that desire is directed at something you need and that if you don't need something you don't desire it？I feel amazingly certain that it is necessary；what do you think？’

‘I think so too，'said Agathon．

‘That's right．Now would anyone who was tall want to be tall or anyone who was strong want to be strong？’

‘That's impossible，according to what we've agreed already．’

‘Yes，because no one is in need of qualities he already has．’

‘That's true．’

‘Suppose that someone who was strong wanted to be strong，'said Socrates，‘and someone who was fast wanted to be fast，and someone who was healthy wanted to be healthy．You might think that in these and all such cases people who are like that and who have those qualities also desire what they already have．I make this point to stop us getting the wrong idea．If you think about it，Agathon，these people must necessarily have each of the qualities they have at any one time，whether they want to or not；and so this can't be what they desire．So if someone says，“I'm healthy and want to be healthy”，or “I'm rich and want to be rich”，or “I desire the things that I've got”，we should say to him，“My friend，you already have wealth or health or strength．What you want is to have them in the future，since at the present you have them whether you want them or not．When you say that you desire what you've already got，ask yourself whether you mean that you want what you've got now to go on being there in the future．” He'd have to agree to that，wouldn't he？’

Agathon said that he would．

Socrates said，‘What someone is doing in these cases is loving something that isn't available to him and which he doesn't have，namely the continued presence in the future of the things he has now．’

‘Certainly，’he said．

‘So this and every other case of desire is desire for what isn't available and actually there．Desire and love are directed at what you don't have，what isn't there，and what you need．’

‘Certainly，’he said．

‘Come on then，'said Socrates；‘let's sum up what we've agreed．First，that Love is of something；second，that it is of something that he currently needs．’

‘Yes，’he said．

‘Now，bearing this in mind，recall what you said in your speech about what Love is of．If you like，I'll remind you．I think you said something like this，that the affairs of the gods were organized through love of beautiful things，since it's impossible to love ugly things．Isn't this more or less what you said？’

‘Yes，I did，’Agathon said．

‘What you say is plausible，my friend，’Socrates said．‘If this is right，then mustn't Love be love of beauty and not of ugliness？’

He agreed．

‘Didn't we agree that he loves what he needs and doesn't have？’

‘Yes，’he said．

‘It follows that Love needs beauty and doesn't have it？’

‘That must be the case，’he said．

‘Well，would you say that something that needs beauty and is wholly without beauty is beautiful？’

‘No．’

‘If this is so，do you still suppose that Love is beautiful？’

Agathon said，‘It looks，Socrates，as though I didn't know what I was talking about then．’

‘Ah well，it was still a beautiful speech，Agathon，’he said．‘But answer just one more small question：do you think that things that are good are also beautiful？’

‘I think so．’

‘Then if Love is in need of beautiful things，and good things are beautiful，he would be in need of good things？’

‘I can't argue against you，Socrates，’he said．‘Let's accept that things are as you say．’

‘It's the truth you can't argue against，my dear friend Agathon，’Socrates said．‘It's not at all difficult to argue against Socrates．

‘Now I'll let you go．I'll try to restate for you the account of Love that I once heard from a woman from Mantinea called Diotima．She was wise about this and many other things．On one occasion，she enabled the Athenians to delay the plague for ten years by telling them what sacrifices to make．She is also the one who taught me the ways of Love．I'll report what she said，using as a basis the conclusions I reached with Agathon，but doing it on my own，as far as I can．

‘As you stated，Agathon，one should first describe who Love is and what his character is and then describe his effects．I think the easiest thing is to report the content of a discussion I once had with Diotima，in which she put questions to me．I had said to her virtually the same things that Agathon said to me just now：that Love was a great god，and that he was himself beautiful．She used against me the same arguments that I used against him，proving that，according to my reasoning，Love was neither beautiful nor good．

‘I said，“What do you mean，Diotima？Is Love ugly and bad then？”

‘She said，“What blasphemy！Do you think that anything which isn't beautiful must necessarily be ugly？”

‘“I certainly do．”

‘“And must anything that isn't wise be ignorant？Haven't you realized that there's something between wisdom and ignorance？”

‘“What is it？”

‘“It's having right opinions without being able to give reasons for having them．Don't you realize that this isn't knowing，because you don't have knowledge unless you can give reasons；but it isn't ignorance either，because ignorance has no contact with the truth？Right opinion，of course，has this kind of status，falling between understanding and ignorance．”

‘“You're right，” I said．

‘“Then don't think that what isn't beautiful must be ugly，and that what isn't good must be bad．In the same way，when you yourself agree that Love is neither good nor beautiful，don't suppose that he must therefore be ugly and bad，but something in between these two．”

‘“But”，I said，“it's agreed by everyone that Love is a great god．”

‘“Do you mean everyone who doesn't know，” she asked，“or do you also include those who do？”

‘“Absolutely everyone．”

‘She laughed and said，“But Socrates，how could people agree that Love is a great god if they deny he's a god at all？”

‘“Who are these people？” I said．

‘“You're one，” she said，“and I'm another．”

‘At this I demanded，“How can you say this？”

‘“Easily，” she said．“Tell me，do you think that all gods are happy and beautiful？Or would you dare to suggest that any of the gods is not beautiful and happy？”

‘“By Zeus，I wouldn't，” I said．

‘“And you call happy those who are in possession of good and beautiful things？”

‘“Certainly．”

‘“But you've agreed that it's because Love is in need of good and beautiful things that he desires those very things that he needs．”

‘“Yes，I've agreed to that．”

‘“So how could he be a god if he is not in possession of beautiful and good things？”

‘“That's impossible，as it seems．”

‘“Do you see，then，” she said，“that you don't believe Love is a god？”

‘“But what could Love be？” I said．“A mortal？”

‘“Far from it．”

‘“What then？”

‘“Like those examples discussed earlier，” she said，“he's between mortal and immortal．”

‘“What does that make him，Diotima？”

‘“He is a great spirit，Socrates．Everything classed as a spirit falls between god and human．”

‘“What function do they have？” I asked．

‘“They interpret and carry messages from humans to gods and from gods to humans．They convey prayers and sacrifices from humans，and commands and gifts in return for sacrifices from gods．Being intermediate between the other two，they fill the gap between them，and enable the universe to form an interconnected whole．They serve．as the medium for all divination，for priestly expertise in sacrifice，ritual and spells，and for all prophecy and sorcery．Gods do not make direct contact with humans；they communicate and converse with humans（whether awake or asleep）entirely through the medium of spirits．Someone whose wisdom lies in these areas is a man of the spirit，while wisdom in other areas of expertise and craftmanship makes one merely a mechanic．There are many spirits，of very different types，and one of them is Love．”

‘“Who are his father and mother？” I asked．

‘“That's rather a long story，” she replied，“but I'll tell you anyway．Following the birth of Aphrodite，the other gods were having a feast，including Resource，the son of Invention．When they'd had dinner，Poverty came to beg，as people do at feasts，and so she was by the gate．Resource was drunk with nectar（this was before wine was discovered），went into the garden of Zeus，and fell into drunken sleep．Poverty formed the plan of relieving her lack of resources by having a child by Resource；she slept with him and became pregnant with Love．So the reason Love became a follower and attendant of Aphrodite is because he was conceived on the day of her birth；also he is naturally a lover of beauty and Aphrodite is beautiful．

‘“Because he is the son of Resource and Poverty，Love's situation is like this．First of all，he's always poor；far from being sensitive and beautiful，as is commonly supposed，he's tough，with hardened skin，without shoes or home．He always sleeps rough，on the ground，with no bed，lying in doorways and by roads in the open air；sharing his mother's nature，he always lives in a state of need．On the other hand，taking after his father，he schemes to get hold of beautiful and good things．He's brave，impetutous and intense；a formidable hunter，always weaving tricks；he desires knowledge and is resourceful in getting it；a lifelong lover of wisdom；clever at using magic，drugs and sophistry．

‘“By nature he is neither immortal nor mortal．Sometimes on a single day he shoots into life，when he's successful，and then dies，and then（taking after his father）comes back to life again．The resources he obtains keep on draining away，so that Love is neither wholly without resources nor rich．He is also in between wisdom and ignorance．The position is this．None of the gods loves wisdom or has the desire to become wise – because they already are；nor does anyone else who is already wise love wisdom．Nor do the ignorant love wisdom or have the desire to become wise．The problem with the ignorant person is precisely that，despite not being good or intelligent，he regards himself as satisfactory．If someone doesn't think he's in need of something，he can't desire what he doesn't think he needs．”

‘“Who are the lovers of wisdom，Diotima，” I asked，“if they are neither the wise nor the ignorant？”

‘“Even a child”，she said，“would realize by now that it is those who fall between these two，and that Love is one of them．Wisdom is one of the most beautiful things，and Love is love of beauty．So Love must necessarily be a lover of wisdom；and as a lover of wisdom he falls between wisdom and ignorance．Again the reason for this is his origin：his father is wise and resourceful while his mother has neither quality．So this is the nature of the spirit of Love，my dear Socrates．But it's not at all surprising that you took the view of Love you did．To judge from what you said，I think you saw Love as the object of love instead of the lover：that's why you imagined that Love is totally beautiful．But in fact beauty，elegance，perfection and blessedness are characteristic of the object that deserves to be loved，while the lover has a quite different character，which I have described．”

‘“Well，Diotima，” I said，“I'm sure you're right about this．But if Love is like that，what use is he to human beings？”

‘“That's the next thing，Socrates，” she said；“I'll try to teach you．So far we've dealt with Love's nature and birth；also，according to you，love is of beautiful things．But then，supposing someone asked us，‘Why
is Love of beautiful things？’，or，to put it more clearly，‘The lover of beautiful things has a desire – what is it that he desires？’”

‘“That they become his own，” I said．

‘“But this answer raises another question，” she said．“What will he get when beautiful things become his own？”

‘I said that I didn't have a ready answer to that question．

‘“But suppose”，she said，“someone changed the question，using the word ‘good’instead of ‘beautiful’，and asked：‘Now then，Socrates，the lover of good things has a desire – what is it that he desires？’”

‘“That they become his own，” I said．

‘“And what will he get when good things become his own？”

‘“That's easier for me to answer，” I said；“he'll be happy．”

‘“So it's the ownership of good things that makes happy people happy；and you don't need to ask the further question，‘Why does someone want to be happy？’This answer seems to mark the end of the enquiry．”

‘“That's true，” I said．

‘“Do you think that this wish and this form of love are common to all human beings，and that everyone wants good things to be his own forever，or what is your view？”

‘“Just that，” I said；“it's common to everyone．”

‘“In that case，Socrates，” she said，“why don't we say that everyone is a lover，if everyone always loves the same things；why do we call some people lovers and not others？”

‘“That's something I've wondered about too，” I said．

‘“It's nothing to wonder about，” she said．“What we're doing is picking out one kind of love and applying to it the name（‘love’）that belongs to the whole class，while we use different names for other kinds of love．”

‘“Can you give me another example？” I asked．

‘“Yes，this one．You know that composition forms a general class．When anything comes into being which did not exist before，the cause of this is always composition．So the products of all the crafts are compositions and the craftsmen who make them are all composers？”

‘“That's right，” I said．

‘“But you know that they aren't called composers but have different names．Out of the whole class of composition we pick out one part，the one related to music and verse，and call that by the name of the class as a whole．It's only this that's called composition and those who have this subdivision of the skill are called composers．”

‘“That's right，” I said．

‘“The same goes for love．In essence，every type of desire for good things or happiness is what constitutes，in all cases，‘powerful and treacherous love’．But this can be approached by many routes，and those who do so by other means，such as making money or athletics or philosophy，aren't described as ‘loving’or ‘lovers’．It's only those whose enthusiasm is directed at one specific type who are described by the terminology that belongs to the whole class，that of love，loving and lovers．”

‘“I suppose that's right，” I said．

‘“The idea has been put forward”，she said，“that lovers are people who are looking for their own other halves．But my view is that love is directed neither at their half nor their whole unless，my friend，that turns out to be good．After all，people are even prepared to have their own feet or hands amputated if they think that those parts of themselves are diseased．I don't think that each of us is attached to his own characteristics，unless you're going to describe the good as ‘his own’and as ‘what belongs to him’，and the bad as ‘what does not belong to him’．The point is that the only object of people's love is the good – don't you agree？”

‘“By Zeus，I do！” I said．

‘“Well then，” she said，“can we quite simply say that people love the good？”

‘“Yes，” I said．

‘“But shouldn't we add，” she said，“that the object of their love is that they should have the good？”

‘“Yes，we should add that．”

‘“Not only that，” she said，“but that they should have the good forever．”

‘“We must add that too．”

‘“To sum up then，” she said，“love is the desire to have the good forever．”

‘“What you say is absolutely right，” I said．

‘“Given that love always has this overall goal，” she said，“we should also ask this．In what way and in what type of action must people pursue this goal，if the enthusiasm and intensity they show in this pursuit is to be called love？What function does love really have：can you tell me？”

‘“If I could，Diotima，” I said，“I wouldn't be so amazed at your wisdom，and wouldn't keep coming to you as your student to learn these very things．”

‘“Then I shall tell you，” she said．“Love's function is giving birth in beauty both in body and in mind．”

‘“One would need to be a prophet to interpret what you're saying，” I said．“I don't understand it．”

‘“Well，” she said，“I'll explain it more clearly．All human beings are pregnant in body and in mind，and when we reach a degree of adulthood we naturally desire to give birth．We cannot give birth in what is ugly，only in what is beautiful．Yes，sexual intercourse between men and women is a kind of birth．There is something divine in this process；this is how mortal creatures achieve immortality，in pregnancy and giving birth．This cannot occur in a condition of disharmony．The ugly is out of harmony with everything divine，while the beautiful fits in with it．So Beauty is the goddess who，as Fate or Eileithyia，presides over childbirth．That's why，when a pregnant creature comes close to something beautiful，it becomes gentle and joyfully relaxed，and gives birth and reproduces．But when it comes close to something ugly，it frowns and contracts in pain；it turns away and shrivels up and does not reproduce；it holds the foetus inside and is in discomfort．That's why those who are pregnant and already swollen get so excited about beauty：the bearer of beauty enables them to gain release from the pains of childbirth．You see，Socrates，” she said，“the object of love is not beauty，as you suppose．”

‘“What is it then？”

‘“Reproduction and birth in beauty．”

‘“That may well be so，” I said．

‘“It certainly is，” she said．“And why is reproduction the object of love？Because reproduction is the closest mortals can come to being permanently alive and immortal．If what we agreed earlier is right，that the object of love is to have the good always
，it follows that we must desire immortality along with the good．It follows from this argument that the object of love must be immortality as well．”

‘Diotima taught me all this in her talks with me about the ways of love．One day she asked，“What do you think，Socrates，is the cause of this love and desire？Haven't you noticed what a terrible state animals of all kinds（footed beasts as well as winged birds）get into when they feel the desire to reproduce．They are all sick with the excitement of love，that makes them first want to have sex with each other and then to rear what they have brought into being．Even the weakest of animals are ready to fight with the strongest and die for the sake of their young；they are prepared to be racked with hunger themselves in order to provide food for their young，and to do anything else for them．Humans，you might think，do this because they understand the reason for it；but，in the case of animals，what causes this excitement of love – can you tell me？”

‘I said again that I didn't know．

‘She said，“Do you think you'll ever become an expert in the ways of love if you don't understand this？”

‘“But that's why I come to study with you，Diotima，as I said before，because I realize I need teachers．So tell me the reason for this，and for everything else connected with the ways of love．”

‘“Well then，” she said，“if you believe that the natural object of love is what we've often agreed，you shouldn't be surprised at this．The point made about humans applies also to animals；mortal nature does all it can to live forever and to be immortal．It can only do this by reproduction：it always leaves behind another，new generation to replace the old．This point applies even in the period in which each living creature is described as alive and as the same – for instance，someone is said to be the same person from childhood till old age．Although he is called the same person，he never has the same constituents，but is always being renewed in some respects and experiencing loss in others，for instance，his hair，skin，bone，blood and his whole body．This applies not only to the body but also to the mind：attributes，charactertraits，beliefs，desires，pleasures，pains，fears – none of these ever remain the same in each of us，but some are emerging while others are being lost．Still more remarkable is the fact that our knowledge changes too，some items emerging，while others are lost，so we are not the same person as regards our knowledge；indeed，each individual item of knowledge goes through the same process．What is called studying exists because knowledge goes from us．Forgetting is the departure of knowledge，while study puts back new information in our memory to replace what is lost，and so maintains knowledge so that it seems to be the same．

‘“This is the way that every mortal thing is maintained in existence，not by being completely the same，as divine things are，but because everything that grows old and goes away leaves behind another new thing of the same type．This is the way，Socrates，that mortal things have a share in immortality，physically and in all other ways；but immortal things do so in a different way．So you shouldn't be surprised if everything naturally values its own offspring．It's to achieve immortality that everything shows this enthusiasm，which is what love is．”

‘But in fact，when I heard her speech，I was surprised and said，“Well，Diotima，you're very wise，but are things really as you say？”

‘Like a perfect sophist，she said，“You can be sure about this．You can see the same principle at work if you look at the way people love honour．You'd be amazed at your own stupidity if you failed to see the point of what I've said，after considering how terribly they are affected by love of becoming famous ‘and storing up immortal fame for eternity’．They are readier even to risk every danger for this than for their children's sake，and to spend money，suffer any kind of ordeal，and die for honour．Do you think”，she said，“that Alcestis would have died for Admetus，or that Achilles would have added his death to that of Patroclus，or that your Athenian hero Codrus would have died to defend his sons’kingdom，if they had not thought that the memory of their courage（which we still hold in respect）would last forever？They certainly wouldn't，” she said．“I think it is undying virtue and glorious fame of this sort that motivates everyone in all they do，and the better they are，the more true this is；it's immortality they are in love with．

‘“Men who are pregnant in body，” she said，“are drawn more towards women；they express their love in trying to obtain for themselves immortality and remembrance and what they take to be happiness forever by producing children．Men who are pregnant in mind – there are some，” she said，“who are even more pregnant in their minds than in their bodies，and are pregnant with what it is suitable for a mind to bear and bring to birth．So what is suitable？Wisdom and other kinds of virtue：these are brought to birth by all the poets and by those craftsmen who are said to be innovative．Much the most important and finest type of wisdom”，she said，“is that connected with the organization of cities and households，which is called moderation and justice．Take also the case of someone who's been pregnant in mind with these virtues from a young age．When he's still without a partner and reaches adulthood，he feels the desire to give birth and reproduce．He too，I think，goes around looking for beauty in which to reproduce；he will never do so in ugliness．Because he's pregnant，he's attracted to beautiful bodies rather than ugly ones；and if he's also lucky enough to find a mind that is beautiful，noble and naturally gifted，he is strongly drawn to this combination．With someone like this，he immediately finds he has the resources to talk about virtue and about what a good man should be like and should do，and tries to educate him．

‘“It is，I think，when someone has made contact and formed a relationship with beauty of this sort that he gives birth to，and reproduces，the child with which he has long been pregnant．He thinks about the other's beauty，whether they are in each other's company or not，and together with him he shares in bringing up the child reproduced in this way．People like that have a much closer partnership with each other and a stronger bond of friendship than parents have，because the children of their partnership are more beautiful and more immortal．Everyone would prefer to have children like that rather than human ones．People look enviously at Homer and Hesiod and other good poets，because of the kind of children they have left behind them，which provide them with immortal fame and remembrance by being immortal themselves．Or take，” she said，“the children that Lycurgus left in Sparta to provide security to Sparta and，you might say，to Greece as a whole．Solon is also respected by you Athenians for the laws he fathered；and other men，in very different places，in Greece and other countries，have exhibited many fine achievements and generated virtue of every type．Many cults have been set up to honour these men as a result of children of that kind，but this has never happened as a result of human children．

‘“Even you，Socrates，could perhaps be initiated in the rites of love I've described so far．But the purpose of these rites，if they are performed correctly，is to reach the final vision of the mysteries；and I'm not sure you could manage this．But I'll tell you about them，” she said，“and make every effort in doing so；try to follow，as far as you can．

‘“The correct why”，she said，“for someone to approach this business is to begin when he's young by being drawn towards beautiful bodies．At first，if his guide leads him correctly，he should love just one body and in that relationship produce beautiful discourses．Next he should realize that the beauty of any one body is closely related to that of another，and that，if he is to pursue beauty of form，it's very foolish not to regard the beauty of all bodies as one and the same．Once he's seen this，he'll become a lover of all beautiful bodies，and will relax his intense passion for just one body，despising this passion and regarding it as petty．After this，he should regard the beauty of minds as more valuable than that of the body，so that，if someone has goodness of mind even if he has little of the bloom of beauty，he will be content with him，and will love and care for him，and give birth to the kinds of discourse that help young men to become better．As a result，he will be forced to observe the beauty in practices and laws and to see that every type of beauty is closely related to every other，so that he will regard beauty of body as something petty．After practices，the guide must lead him towards forms of knowledge，so that he sees their beauty too．Looking now at beauty in general and not just at individual instances，he will no longer be slavishly attached to the beauty of a boy，or of any particular person at all，or of a specific practice．Instead of this low and small-minded slavery，he will be turned towards the great sea of beauty and gazing on it he'll give birth，through a boundless love of knowledge，to many beautiful and magnificent discourses and ideas．At last，when he has been developed and strengthened in this way，he catches sight of one special type of knowledge，whose object is the kind of beauty I shall now describe．

‘“Now try”，she said，“to concentrate as hard as you can．Anyone who has been educated this far in the ways of love，viewing beautiful things in the right order and way，will now reach the goal of love's ways．He will suddenly catch sight of something amazingly beautiful in its nature；this，Socrates，is the ultimate objective of all the previous efforts．First，this beauty always is，and doesn't come into being or cease；it doesn't increase or diminish．Second，it's not beautiful in one respect but ugly in another，or beautiful at one time but not at another，or beautiful in relation to this but ugly in relation to that；nor beautiful here and ugly there because it is beautiful for some people but ugly for others．Nor will beauty appear to him in the form of a face or hands or any part of the body；or as a specific account or piece of knowledge；or as being anywhere in something else，for instance in a living creature or earth or heaven or anything else．It will appear as in itself and by itself，always single in form；all other beautiful things share its character，but do so in such a way that，when other things come to be or cease，it is not increased or decreased in any way nor does it undergo any change．

‘“When someone goes up by these stages，through loving boys in the correct way，and begins to catch sight of that beauty，he has come close to reaching the goal．This is the right method of approaching the ways of love or being led by someone else：beginning from these beautiful things always to go up with the aim of reaching that beauty．Like someone using a staircase，he should go from one to two and from two to all beautiful bodies，and from beautiful bodies to beautiful practices，and from practices to beautiful forms of learning．From forms of learning，he should end up at that form of learning which is of nothing other than that beauty itself，so that he can complete the process of learning what beauty really is．

‘“In that form of life，my dear Socrates，” said the Mantinean stranger，“if in any，human life should be lived，gazing on beauty itself．If you ever saw that，it would seem to be on a different level from gold and clothes and beautiful boys and young men．At present you're so overwhelmed when you see these that you're ready，together with many others，to look at your boyfriends and be with them forever，if that was somehow possible，doing without food and drink and doing nothing but gazing at them and being with them．So what should we imagine it would be like”，she said，“if someone could see beauty itself，absolute，pure，unmixed，not cluttered up with human flesh and colours and a great mass of mortal rubbish，but if he could catch sight of divine beauty itself，in its single form？Do you think”，she said，“that would be a poor life for a human being，looking in that direction and gazing at that object with the right part of himself and sharing its company？Don't you realize，” she said，“that it's only in that kind of life，when someone sees beauty with the part that can see it，that he'll be able to give birth not just to images of virtue（since it's not images he's in touch with），but to true virtue（since it's true beauty he's in touch with）．It's someone who's given birth to true virtue and brought it up who has the chance of becoming loved by the gods，and immortal – if any human being can be immortal．”

‘Well，Phaedrus and the rest of you，this is what Diotima said，and I was convinced．Because I was convinced，I try to convince others that，to acquire this possession，you couldn't easily find a better partner for human nature than Love．That's the basis for my claiming that every man should hold Love in respect，and I myself respect the ways of love and practise them with exceptional care．That's why I urge others to do the same，and on this and every other occasion I do all I can to praise the power and courage of Love．So this is my speech，Phaedrus．If you like，you can think of it as a eulogy of Love or if you prefer，you can give it whatever name you like to give it．’

After Socrates'speech，Aristodemus said，while the others congratulated him，Aristophanes was trying to make a point，because Socrates had referred to his speech at some stage．Suddenly，there was a loud noise of knocking at the front door，which sounded like revellers，and they heard the voice of a flute-girl．

‘Slaves，go and see who it is，’Agathon said．‘If it's any of my friends，invite them in；if not，tell them the symposium's over and we're just now going to bed．’

Not long after，they heard the voice of Alcibiades in the courtyard；he was very drunk and was shouting loudly，asking where Agathon was and demanding to be brought to him．He was brought in，supported by the flute-girl and some of the other people in his group．He stood by the door，wearing a thick garland of ivy and violets，with masses of ribbons trailing over his head，and said：

‘Good evening，gentlemen．Will you let someone who's drunk – very drunk – join your symposium？Or should we just put a garland on Agathon，which is why we've come，and go away？I couldn't come to your celebration yesterday，’he said．‘But I've come now with the ribbons on my head，so that I can transfer them directly from my head to that of the man who is- I'd like to announce – the wisest and most beautiful．I suppose you'll laugh at me because I'm drunk．But even if you laugh at me，I know quite well I'm telling the truth．But tell me right away whether I can come in on these terms or not．Can I join you for a drink，or not？’

Everyone shouted out，telling him to come in and take a place on a couch，and Agathon invited him too．So he came in，supported by his friends．He was untying the ribbons to tie them on Agathon，and they fell over his eyes．So he didn't notice Socrates，but sat down next to Agathon，between him and Socrates，who moved over when he saw him．When he'd sat down，he embraced Agathon and tied the garland round his head．

Agathon said，‘Take off his sandals，slaves，so that he can lie down and be the third on this couch．’

‘Fine，'said Alcibiades；‘but who's this third person drinking with us？’As he said this，he turned round and saw Socrates．When he saw him，he jumped up and said，‘Oh Heracles，what's going on here？Is this Socrates？You've been lying here in wait for me again，so that you can play your usual trick of turning up suddenly wherever I least expect you．Why have you come here？And why did you choose this couch？I see you didn't pick Aristophanes or anyone else who's prepared to make a fool of himself，but you made sure you'd be lying beside the most attractive man in the room．’

Socrates said，‘Agathon，please protect me．What a nuisance my love for this man has become！Ever since I started loving him，I haven't been able to look at or talk to a single attractive man without his getting so jealous and resentful that he goes crazy and shouts at me and almost beats me up．So make sure that he doesn't do anything to me now and make peace between us；or if he starts to get violent，protect me from him．I'm quite terrifi ed by his mad attachment to his lovers．’

‘There can be no peace between me and you，’Alcibiades said．‘I'll get my own back on you for this another time．But for now，Agathon，’he said，‘give me back some of those ribbons，so that I can tie them on this amazing head of his．Otherwise，he'll criticize me for tying them on your head，not his，even though he always
beats off all comers in verbal contest – and you've just done it once，two days ago．’

As he spoke，he took some of the ribbons，and tied them on Socrates，and lay down again．When he settled down，he said，‘Well，gentlemen，you look sober to me．This can't be allowed；you have to drink．This was what we agreed．For our master of ceremonies，to take charge of the drinking，until you're drunk enough，I elect – myself！Have a big goblet brought in，Agathon，if you've got one．Or rather，there's no need；bring me，boy，that wine-cooler，’he said，seeing one that held more than four pints．He had this filled up，and drank it down himself，and then he told the slave to fill it up for Socrates．As he did so，he said，‘Not that my trick will have any effect on Socrates，gentlemen．However much you tell him to drink，he drinks without ever getting more drunk．’

The slave filled it for Socrates and，while he was drinking it，Eryximachus said，‘What sort of behaviour is this，Alcibiades？Aren't we going to have any conversation or songs as we pass round the cup，but do nothing but drink as though we were thirsty？’

Alcibiades said，‘Hello，Eryximachus，best of sons of the best – and most temperate – of fathers．’

‘Hello to you too，’Eryximachus said；‘but what should we do？’

‘Whatever you tell us．We should obey you，because “a doctor is equal in worth to many other men”；so tell us to do whatever you want．’

‘Listen to me then，’Eryximachus said．‘Before you arrived，we'd decided to take turns，going round from left to right，making the finest speech each of us could，in praise of Love．All the rest of us have given our speeches．You haven't taken your turn at speaking，though you've done well at drinking，so it's right for you to make a speech．Once you've spoken，you can order Socrates to do whatever you want，and he can do the same to the person on his right and so on．’

‘That's a good idea，Eryximachus，’Alcibiades said．‘But I don't think it's fair to make someone who's drunk compete against speeches made by people when they were sober．Also，my dear friend，I hope you don't believe any of what Socrates just said．Don't you realize that the truth is quite the opposite of what he said？If I praise anyone else，whether god or human，while he's around，it's he who'll beat me
up．’

‘What blasphemy！’Socrates said．

‘By Poseidon！’Alcibiades said，‘don't contradict me on this point．I'm never going to praise anyone else while you're around．’

‘Well then，do just that，if you want，’Eryximachus said．‘Give a eulogy of Socrates．’

‘What do you mean？'said Alcibiades．‘Do you think I should，Eryximachus？Should I attack him and punish him in front of you all？’

‘Hang on，'said Socrates．‘What are you planning – to give a eulogy that makes fun of me，or what？’

‘I'll tell the truth – will you let me do that？’

‘But of course I'll let you tell the truth；indeed，I order you to．’

‘Here I go then，’Alcibiades said．‘But this is what you can do．If I say anything that isn't true，interrupt，if you like，and point out that what I'm saying is false．I don't want to say anything that's false．But if I don't remember things in the right order，don't be surprised．It isn't easy for someone in my condition to list all the aspects of your peculiarity in a fluent and orderly sequence．

‘The way I'll try to praise Socrates，gentlemen，is through images．Perhaps he'll think this is to make fun of him；but the image will be designed to bring out the truth not to make fun．My claim is that he's just like those statues of Silenus you see sitting in sculptors'shops．The figures are produced holding shepherd's pipes or flutes；when they're opened up，you find they've got statues of the gods inside．I also claim he's like Marsyas the satyr．Not even you，Socrates，could deny that you resemble these in appearance；but you're going to hear next how you're like them in other ways too．

‘You're insulting and abusive，aren't you？If you don't admit this，I'll provide witnesses．And aren't you a flute-player？In fact，you're a much more amazing one than Marsyas．He used instruments to bewitch people with the power of his mouth，and so does anyone who plays his flute-music today．（I'm counting the tunes of Olympus as really Marsyas’，because Marsyas was Olympus'teacher．）Whether these tunes are played by an expert player or a poor flute-gift，they're the only ones which，because of their divine origin，can cast a spell over people and so show which ones are ready for the gods and initiation into the mysteries．The only difference between you and Marsyas is that you produce this same effect without the use of instruments，by words alone．Whenever we hear someone else making speeches，even if he's a very good orator，this has virtually no impact on any of us．But whenever anyone hears you speak or hears your words reported by someone else（even if he's a very poor speaker），whoever we are – woman，man or boy – we're overwhelmed and spellbound．

‘If it weren't for the fact that you'd think I was completely drunk，gentlemen，I'd take an oath on the truth of what I'm saying about the effect his words have had on me – an effect they still have now．Whenever I listen to him，my frenzy is greater than that of the Corybantes．My heart pounds and tears flood out when he speaks，and I see that many other people are affected in the same way．I've heard Pericles and other good orators，and I thought they spoke well．But they haven't produced this kind of effect on me；they haven't disturbed my whole personality and made me dissatisfied with the slavish quality of my life．But this Marsyas here has often had this effect on me，and made me think that the life I'm leading isn't worth living．You can't say this isn't true，Socrates．Even now I'm well aware that if I allowed myself to listen to him I couldn't resist but would have the same experience again．He makes me admit that，in spite of my great defects，I neglect myself and instead get involved in Athenian politics．So I force myself to block my ears and go away，like someone escaping from the Sirens，to prevent myself sitting there beside him till I grow old．

‘He's the only person in whose company I've had an experience you might think me incapable of – feeling shame with someone；I only feel shame in his company．I'm well aware that I can't argue against him and that I should do what he tells me；but when I leave him，I'm carried away by the people's admiration．So I act like a runaway slave and escape from him；and whenever I see him，I'm ashamed because of what he's made me agree to．Often I've felt I'd be glad to see him removed from the human race；but if this did happen，I know well I'd be much more upset．I just don't know how to deal with this person．

‘This is the effect this satyr has had on me and many other people with his flute-playing．Listen to other ways that he's like these creatures I'm comparing him with and what amazing power he has．You should realize that none of you really knows him．But I'll show what he's like，now that I've made a start．You see that Socrates is erotically attracted to beautiful boys，and is always hanging around them in a state of excitement．Also he's completely ignorant and knows nothing．In giving this impression，isn't he like Silenus？Very much so．This behaviour is just his outer covering，like that of the statues of Silenus．But if you could open him up and look inside，you can't imagine，my fellow-drinkers，how full of moderation he is！You should know that he doesn't care at all if someone is beautiful – he regards this with unbelievable contempt – or is rich or has any of the other advantages prized by ordinary people．He regards all these possessions as worthless and regards us as worth nothing too（believe me！）．He spends his whole life pretending and playing with people．

‘I don't know if any of you have seen the statues inside Socrates when he's serious and is opened up．But I saw them once，and they seemed to me so divine，golden，so utterly beautiful and amazing，that – to put it briefly – I had to do whatever Socrates told me to．I thought he was seriously interested in my looks and that this was a godsend and an amazing piece of good luck，because，if I gratified him，I'd be able to hear everything he knew．You see，I was incredibly proud of my good looks．Before this，I had never been alone with him without an attendant；but once I'd got this idea I sent the attendant away and was with him on my own．Yes，I must tell you the whole truth；so pay careful attention，and，if I say anything that's not right，Socrates，you must contradict me．

‘Well，there we were，gentlemen，the two of us on our own．I thought he would immediately have the kind of conversation with me that lovers have with their boyfriends when they're on their own，and I was pleased by that thought．But nothing like that happened at all．He had his usual kind of conversation with me and went away after spending the day with me．After that I invited him to come to the gymnasium with me and we exercised together；I thought I would get somewhere that way．So we exercised together and wrestled on many occasions with no one around – and what can I tell you？I got nowhere．

‘Since I was getting nowhere by these means，I decided to make a direct assault on the man，and not to give up now that I'd made a start．I felt I had to know how things stood．I invited him to dinner，just as though I were the lover and he the boy I had designs on．He wasn't quick to accept my invitation，but eventually agreed to come．The first time he came，he wanted to go after dinner，and on that occasion I was ashamed and let him go．But I continued my plan another time，and when we'd had dinner I kept the conversation going far into the night．Then，when he wanted to go，I made the excuse that it was too late to go，and made him stay．So he settled down to sleep on the couch next to mine，where he'd had dinner，and there was no one else sleeping in the room but us．

‘Up to this point，it would have been all right for anyone to hear what I've said．But from now on there are things you wouldn't have heard me say except that，as the saying goes，“there's truth in wine when the slaves have left”，and when they haven't！Also，I think it would be wrong of me to let Socrates’proud action pass into oblivion now that I've embarked on his eulogy．Besides，my experience is that of someone bitten by a snake．They say that someone who's had this experience is only prepared to say what it's like to those who've been bitten themselves，because they're the only ones who'll understand and make allowances if the pain drives you to do and say shocking things．I've been bitten by something more painful still，and in the place where a bite is most painful – the heart or mind，or whatever you should call it．I've been struck and bitten by the words of philosophy，which cling on more fiercely than a snake when they take hold of a young and talented mind，and make someone do and say all sorts of things．Also I can see here people like Phaedrus，Agathon，Eryximachus，Pausanias，Aristodemus and Aristophanes – I don't need to mention Socrates himself – and the rest of you．You've all shared the madness and Bacchic frenzy of philosophy，and so you will all hear what I have to say．You will all make allowances for what I did then and what I'm saying now．But you，house-slaves，and any other crude uninitiates，put big doors on your ears！

‘So，gentlemen，when the lamp was out and the slaves had left the room，I decided I shouldn't beat about the bush but tell him openly what I had in mind．I gave him a push and said，“Socrates，are you asleep？”

‘“Not at all，” he said．

‘“Do you know what I've been thinking？”

‘“What exactly？” he said．

‘“I think”，I said，“you're the only lover I've ever had who's good enough for me，but you seem to be too shy to talk about it to me．I'll tell you how I feel about this．I think I'd be very foolish not to gratify you in this or in anything else you need from my property or my friends．Nothing is more important to me than becoming as good a person as possible，and I don't think anyone can help me more effectively than you can in reaching this aim．I'd be far more ashamed of what sensible people would think if I failed to gratify someone like you than of what ordinary，foolish people would think if I did．”

‘He listened to what I said，and then he said this，in a highly ironic manner and one that was entirely typical of him：“My dear Alcibiades，it looks as though you're really no fool，if what you say about me is true and I somehow do have the capacity to make you a better person．You must be seeing in me a beauty beyond comparison and one that's far superior to your own good looks．If you've seen this and are trying to strike a deal with me in which we exchange one type of beauty for another，you're planning to make a good profit from me．You're trying to get true beauty in return for its appearance，and so to make an exchange that is really ‘gold for bronze’．But look more closely，my good friend，and make sure you're not making a mistake in thinking I'm of value to you．The mind's sight begins to see sharply when eyesight declines，and you're a long way from that point．”

‘When I heard this，I said，“As far as I'm concerned，this is the position，and my plans are exactly as I've said．It's now up to you to consider what you think is best for you and for me．”

‘“Well，” he said，“you're right about that at least．In the future we'll consider and do whatever seems best to us，both in this and in other things too．”

‘When he made this reply to what I'd said，now that I'd fired my shots，I thought he'd been wounded．I got up from my couch，and without letting him say anything more I wrapped him in my thick outdoor cloak（it was winter then）and lay down under his short cloak．Then I threw my arms round this really god-like and amazing man，and lay there with him all night long．And you can't say this is a lie，Socrates．After I'd done all this，he completely triumphed over my good looks – and despised，scorned and insulted them – although I placed a very high value on these looks，gentlemen of the jury．I'm calling you that because you've become the jury in the case of Socrates’arrogance！I swear to you by the gods，and by the goddesses，that when I got up next morning I had no more slept with
Socrates than if I'd been sleeping with my father or elder brother．

‘After that，what state of mind do you think I was in？Although I felt I'd been humiliated，I admired his character，his self-control and courage．Here was someone with a degree of understanding and tough-mindedness I'd never expected to find．So，although I couldn't be angry with him or do without his company，I didn't know how to win him over．I knew well that he was more completely invulnerable to the power of money than Ajax was to weapons；and what I'd seen as the only means of catching him had proved a failure．I was baffled；and I went around more completely enslaved to this person than anyone else has ever been to anyone．

‘It was after these events had occurred that we served together in the Athenian campaign against Potidaea and shared the same mess there．The first thing to note is that he put up with the rigours of warfare better than me – better than everyone else，in fact．When we were cut off，and forced to do without food，as sometimes happens on campaign，no one came near him in putting up with this．But on the other hand when we had a feast，he was best able to enjoy it．For instance，though reluctant to drink，when he was forced to，he beat us all at it．The most amazing thing of all is that no one has ever seen Socrates drunk．I think you'll see proof of this shortly．

‘Also when it came to putting up with winter（the winters there are terrible），his endurance was remarkable．On one occasion there was such a bitter frost that no one went outside，or if they did，they wrapped themselves up with clothes in the most amazing way and tied on extra pieces of felt or sheepskin over their boots．But Socrates went out in this weather wearing the same outdoor cloak he'd usually worn before，and he made better progress over the ice in his bare feet than the rest of us did in boots．The soldiers regarded him with suspicion，thinking that he was looking down on them．

‘So much for that incident；but “what the stout-hearted man did and endured next” on campaign there is well worth hearing．One morning he started thinking about a problem and stood there considering it，and when he didn't make progress with it he didn't give up but kept standing there examining it．When it got to midday，people noticed him and said to each other in amazement that Socrates had been standing there thinking about something since dawn．In the end，when it was evening，some of the Ionians，after they'd had dinner，brought their bedding outside（it was summer then），partly to sleep in the cool，and partly to keep an eye on Socrates to see if he would go on standing there through the night too．He stood there till it was dawn and the sun came up；then he greeted the sun with a prayer and went away．

‘If you'd like to know what he was like in battle – here it's right for me to repay a debt to him．During the battle after which the generals awarded me the prize for bravery，it was Socrates，no one else，who rescued me．He wasn't prepared to leave me when I was wounded and so he saved my life as well as my armour and weapons．I actually told the generals to award the prize for bravery on that occasion to you，Socrates．This is a point on which you can't criticize me or say that I'm lying．But when the generals wanted to award the prize to me，influenced by my social status，you yourself were keener than the generals that I should receive it．

‘Here's another thing，gentlemen．Socrates was a sight worth seeing when the army made a disorderly retreat from Delium．It turned out that I was serving in the cavalry there while he was a hoplite．People had scattered by then in all directions，and he was retreating together with Laches．As it happened，I was near by，and when I saw them I encouraged them at once，and told them I wouldn't leave them behind．I was better able to watch Socrates there than at Potidaea（because I was on horseback I was less worried about my safety），and the first thing that struck me was how much more self-possessed he was than Laches．Next，I noticed that he was walking along there，just as he does here in Athens – to use your phrase，Aristophanes – “swaggering and looking from side to side”．He was calmly looking out both for friends and enemies，and it was obvious to everyone even from a long distance that if anyone tackled this man，he would put up a tough resistance．That was how he and his companion got safely away．Generally，people don't tackle those who show this kind of attitude in combat；they prefer to chase those who are in headlong flight．

‘There are many other remarkable things which you could say in praise of Socrates．Some of these distinctive features could perhaps also be attributed to other people too．But what is most amazing about him is that he is like no other human being，either of the past or the present．If you wanted to say what Achilles was like，you could compare him with Brasidas or others，and in Pericles’case you could compare him with Nestor or Antenor（and there are other possibilities），and you could draw other comparisons in the same way．But this person is so peculiar，and so is the way he talks，that however hard you look you'll never find anyone close to him either from the present or the past．The best you can do is what I did，in fact，when I compared him，and his way of talking，not with human beings but with Sileni and satyrs．

‘This is something I forgot to say at the beginning：his discussions are also very like those Sileni that you open up．If you're prepared to listen to Socrates'discussions，they seem absolutely ridiculous at first．This is because of the words and phrases he uses，which are like the rough skin of an insulting satyr．He talks about packasses，blacksmiths，shoemakers and tanners，and seems to be always using the same words to make the same points；and so anyone unused to him or unintelligent would find his arguments ridiculous．But if you can open them up and see inside，you'll find they're the only ones that make any sense．You'll also find they're the most divine and contain the most images of virtue．They range over most – or rather all – of the subjects that you must examine if you're going to become a good person．

‘This is what I have to say，gentlemen，in praise of Socrates．I've also mixed in some blame as well，and told you how he insulted me．I'm not the only one he's done this to；there's also Charmides the son of Glaucon，Euthydemus the son of Diocles and many others．He deceives them into thinking he's their lover and then turns out to be the loved one instead of the lover．I'm warning you，Agathon，not to be deceived by him，but to learn from what we've suffered and be cautious，and don't，as the proverb puts it，be the fool who only learns by his own suffering．’

This speech of Alcibiades created much amusement at his frankness，because he seemed to be still in love with Socrates．Socrates said，‘I think you're sober after all，Alcibiades．Otherwise you wouldn't have been able to conceal the motive of your entire speech by ingeniously disguising it in this way．You slipped it in at the end as though it was an afterthought – as though the point of the whole speech hadn't been to make trouble between myself and Agathon．You did this because you think that I should love you and no one else，and that Agathon should be loved by you and no one else．But you haven't got away with it；we've seen the purpose of this satyr-play – and Silenus-play – of yours．But，my dear Agathon，don't let him succeed in this；make sure that no one comes between me and you．’

Then Agathon said，‘You know，Socrates，I think you must be right．It's significant that he lay down in the middle，between me and you，to keep us apart．But he won't succeed in doing this．I'll come round and lie down beside you．’

‘Please do，'said Socrates；‘come here and lie down on the other side．’

‘Oh Zeus！'said Alcibiades，‘what I suffer from this person！He thinks he always has to get the better of me．But if nothing else – you amazing man – let Agathon lie down between us．’

‘But that's impossible，’Socrates said．‘You've praised me，and now it's my turn to praise the one on my right．If Agathon lies down between us，won't he too have to praise me，instead of being praised by me？For goodness'sake，don't stop the young man from being praised by me；I feel a strong desire to give his eulogy．’

‘Hurrah！'said Agathon．‘Alcibiades，there's no way I'm going to stay here now．I simply must change positions and be praised by Socrates．’

‘Here we go again，'said Alcibiades；‘it's always the same．When Socrates is around，no one else can get a look-in with the attractive men．Now，too，see how resourcefully he's found a plausible reason why this one should lie down beside him．’

So Agathon got up to go and lie down beside Socrates．Suddenly，a large group of revellers came to the front door．They found it open because someone was just going out；so they marched straight in to join them，and settled themselves down on the couches．There was noise everywhere，and all order was abandoned；everyone was forced to drink vast amounts of wine．Aristodemus said that Eryximachus and Phaedrus and some of the others went off then，while he fell asleep for a very long time，because the nights were long at that time of year．He woke up when it was nearly dawn and the cocks were already crowing．Once he'd woken up，he saw that the others were either asleep or had left，and that Agathon，Aristophanes and Socrates were the only ones still awake，drinking from a large bowl that they passed from left to right．Socrates was engaged in dialogue with them．Aristodemus said he couldn't remember most of the argument，because he'd missed the start and was half-asleep anyway．But the key point，he said，was that Socrates was pressing them to agree that the same man should be capable of writing both comedy and tragedy，and that anyone who is an expert in writing tragedy must also be an expert in writing comedy．He was getting them to agree this，though they were sleepy and not following very well；Aristophanes fell asleep first，and Agathon fell asleep when day was already breaking．

After getting them off to sleep，Socrates got up and went off．Aristodemus followed him as usual．Socrates went to the Lyceum，had a wash，spent the rest of the day as he did at other times，and only then in the evening went home to bed．

The Allegory of the Cave

1．
Socrates begins with a reminder of the qualities of character which the philosopher must have，and goes on to emphasize that those qualities must be based on knowledge，ultimately on knowledge of the good，which for him means，as this passage makes clear，the form of the good．After dismissing briefly the views of those who believe the good is pleasure or knowledge，Socrates refuses to give a direct statement of his own view of it，and instead offers to describe it in a simile．

‘Well，then，that part of our job is done – and it's not been easy；we must now go on to the next，and ask about the studies and pursuits which will produce these saviours of our society．What are they to learn and at what age are they to learn it？’

‘Yes，that's our next question．’

‘I didn't really gain anything，’I said，‘by being clever and putting off the difficulties about the possession of women，the production of children and the establishment of Rulers till later．I knew that my true society would give offence and be difficult to realize；but I have had to describe it all the same．I've dealt with the business about women and children，and now I've got to start again on the Rulers．You will remember that we said they must love their country，and be tested both in pleasure and pain，to ensure that their loyalty remained unshaken by pain or fear or any other vicissitude；those who failed the test were to be rejected，but those who emerged unscathed，like gold tried in the fire，were to be established as rulers and given honours and rewards both in life and after death．This is roughly what we said，but we were afraid of stirring up the problems we are now facing，and our argument evaded the issue and tried to get by without being seen．’

‘Yes，I remember，’he said．

‘You know，I hesitated before to say the rash things I've said，’I replied；‘but now let me be brave and say that our Guardians，in the fullest sense，must be philosophers．’

‘So be it．’

‘Think how few of them there are likely to be．The elements in the character which we said they must have don't usually combine into a whole，but are normally found separately．’

‘What do you mean？’

‘Readiness to learn and remember，quickness and keenness of mind and the qualities that go with them，and enterprise and breadth of vision，aren't usually combined with readiness to live an orderly，quiet and steady life；their keenness makes such temperaments very unpredictable and quite devoid of steadiness．’

‘True．’

‘And again，steady，consistent characters on whom you can rely，and who are unmoved by fear in war，are equally unmoved by instruction．Their immobility amounts indeed to numbness and，faced with anything that demands intellectual effort，they yawn and sink into slumber．’

‘That's all quite true．’

‘But we demand a full and fair share of both sets of qualities from anyone who is to be given the highest form of education and any share of office or authority．’

‘And rightly．’

‘So the character we want will be a rare occurrence．’

‘It will．’

‘And we must not only test it in the pains and fears and pleasures we have already described，but also try it out in a series of intellectual studies which we omitted before，to see if it has the endurance to pursue the highest forms of knowledge，without flinching as others flinch in physical trials．’

‘A fair test；but what，’he asked，‘are these highest forms of knowledge？’

‘You remember，’I answered，‘that we distinguished three elements in the mind，and then went on to deal with justice，self-control，courage and wisdom．’

‘If I didn't remember that，’he said，‘I shouldn't have any claim to hear the rest of the argument．’

‘Then do you remember what we said just before we dealt with these subjects？’

‘What？’

‘We said that a really clear view of them could only be got by making a detour for the purpose，though we could give some indication on the basis of our earlier argument．You said that was good enough，and so our subsequent description fell short，in my view，of real precision；whether it was precise enough for you，is for you to say．’

‘I thought you gave us fair measure，and so，I think，did the others．’

‘My dear Adeimantus，in matters like this nothing is fair measure that falls short of the truth in any respect，’I replied．‘You can't use the imperfect as a measure of anything – though people are sometimes content with it，and don't want to look further．’

‘Yes，but it's usually because they're too lazy．’

‘A most undesirable quality in a Guardian of state and laws．’

‘A fair comment．’

‘Then he must take the longer way round，’I said，‘and must work as hard at his intellectual training as at his physical；otherwise，as we've just said，he will never finally reach the highest form of knowledge，which should be peculiarly his own．’

‘The highest？’he asked．‘But is there anything higher than justice and the other qualities we discussed？’

‘There is，’I said．‘And we ought not to be content with the sight of a mere sketch even of these qualities，or fail to complete the picture in detail．For it would be absurd，would it not，to devote all our energies to securing the greatest possible precision and clarity in matters of little consequence，and not to demand the highest precision in the most important things of all？’

‘Quite absurd，’he agreed．‘But you can hardly expect to escape cross-questioning about what you call the highest form of knowledge and its object．’

‘I don't expect to escape from you，’I returned；‘ask your questions．Though you've heard about it often enough，and either don't understand for the moment，or else are deliberately giving me trouble by your persistence – I suspect it's the latter，because you have certainly often been told that the highest form of knowledge is knowledge of the form of the good，from which things that are just and so on derive their usefulness and value．You know pretty well that that's what I have to say，and that I'm going to add that our knowledge of it is inadequate，and that if we are ignorant of it the rest of our knowledge，however perfect，can be of no benefit to us，just as it's no use possessing anything if you can't get any good out of it．Or do you think there's any point in possessing anything if it's no good？Is there any point in having all other forms of knowledge without that of the good，and so lacking knowledge about what is good and valuable？’

‘I certainly don't think there is．’

‘And you know of course that most ordinary people think that pleasure is the good，while the more sophisticated think it is knowledge．’

‘Yes．’

‘But those who hold this latter view can't tell us what knowledge they mean，but are compelled in the end to say they mean knowledge of the good．’

‘Which is quite absurd．’

‘An absurdity they can't avoid，if，after criticizing us for not knowing the good，they then turn round and talk to us as if we did know it；for they say it is “knowledge of the good” as if we understood what they meant when they utter the word “good”．’

‘That's perfectly true．’

‘Then what about those who define good as pleasure？Is their confusion any less？Aren't they compelled to admit that there are bad pleasures？’

‘Of course they are．’

‘And they thus find themselves admitting that the same things are both good and bad，don't they？’

‘Yes．’

‘So it's obvious that the subject is highly controversial．’

‘It is indeed．’

‘Well，then，isn't it obvious too that when it's a matter of justice or value many people prefer the appearance to the reality，whether it's a matter of possession and action or of reputation；but that no one is satisfied to have something that only appears
to be good，but wants something that really
is，and has no use here for appearances？’

‘Absolutely true．’

‘The good，then，is the end of all endeavour，the object on which every heart is set，whose existence it divines，though it finds it difficult to grasp just what it is；and because it can't handle it with the same assurance as other things it misses any value those other things have．Can we possibly agree that the best of our citizens，to whom we are going to entrust everything，should be in the dark about so important a subject？’

‘It's the last thing we can admit．’

‘At any rate a man will not be a very useful Guardian of what is right and valuable if he does not know in what their goodness consists；and I suspect that until he does no one can know them adequately．’

‘Your suspicions are well founded．’

‘So our society will be properly regulated only if it is in the charge of a Guardian who has this knowledge．’

‘That must be so，’he said．‘But what about you，Socrates？Do you think that the good is knowledge or pleasure？Or do you think it's something else？’

‘What a man！’I exclaimed．‘It's been obvious for some time that you wouldn't be satisfied with other people's opinions！’

‘But I don't think it's right，Socrates，’he protested，‘for you to be able to tell us other people's opinions but not your own，when you've given so much time to the subject．’

‘Yes，but do you think it's right for a man to talk as if he knows what he does not？’

‘He has no right to talk as if he knew；but he should be prepared to say what it is that he thinks．’

‘Well，’I said，‘haven't you noticed that opinion without knowledge is always a poor thing？At the best it is blind – isn't anyone who holds a true opinion without understanding like a blind man on the right road？’

‘Yes．’

‘Then do you want a poor，blind，halting display from me，when you can get splendidly clear accounts from other people？’

‘Now，for goodness'sake don't give up when you're just at the finish，Socrates，’begged Glaucon．‘We shall be quite satisfied if you give an account of the good similar to that you gave of justice and self-control and the rest．’

‘And so shall I too，my dear chap，’I replied，‘but I'm afraid it's beyond me，and if I try I shall only make a fool of myself and be laughed at．So please let us give up asking for the present what the good is in itself；I'm afraid that to reach what I think would be a satisfactory answer is beyond the range of our present inquiry．But I will tell you，if you like，about something which seems to me to be a child of the good，and to resemble it very closely – or would you rather I didn't？’

‘Tell us about the child and you can owe us your account of the parent，’he said．

‘It's a debt I wish I could pay back to you in full，instead of only paying interest on the loan，’I replied．‘But for the present you must accept my description of the child of the good as interest．But take care I don't inadvertently cheat you by forging my account of the interest due．’

‘We'll be as careful as we can，’he said．‘Go on．’

2．The Simile of the Sun

［…］

‘I must first get your agreement to，and remind you of，something we have said earlier in our discussion，and indeed on many other occasions．’

‘What is it？’he asked．

I replied，‘We say that there are many particular things that are beautiful，and many that are good，and so on，and distinguish between them in our account．’

‘Yes，we do．’

‘And we go on to speak of beauty-in-itself，and goodness-in-itself，and so on for all the sets of particular things which we have regarded as many；and we proceed to posit by contrast a single form，which is unique，in each case，and call it “what really is” each thing．’

‘That is so．’

‘And we say that the particulars are objects of sight but not of intelligence，while the forms are the objects of intelligence but not of sight．’

‘Certainly．’

‘And with what part of ourselves do we see what we see？’

‘With our sight．’

‘And we hear with our hearing，and so on with the other senses and their objects．’

‘Of course．’

‘Then have you noticed，’I asked，‘how extremely lavish the designer of our senses was when he gave us the faculty of sight and made objects visible？’

‘I can't say I have．’

‘Then look．Do hearing and sound need something of another kind in addition to themselves to enable the ear to hear and the sound to be heard – some third element without which the one cannot hear or the other be heard？’

‘No．’

‘And the same is true of most，I might say all，the other senses．Or can you think of any that needs anything of the kind？’

‘No，I can't．’

‘But haven't you noticed that sight and the visible do need one？’

‘How？’

‘If the eyes have the power of sight，and its possessor tries to use this power，and if objects have colour，yet you know that he will see nothing and the colours will remain invisible unless a third element is present which is specifi cally and naturally adapted for the purpose．’

‘What is that？’he asked．

‘What you call light，’I answered．

‘True．’

‘Then the sense of sight and the visibility of objects are yoked by a yoke a long way more precious than any other – that is，if light is a precious thing．’

‘Which it most certainly is．’

‘Which，then，of the heavenly bodies do you regard as responsible for this？Whose light would you say it is that makes our eyes see and objects be seen most perfectly？’

‘I should say the same as you or anyone else；you mean the sun，of course．’

‘Then is sight related to its divine source as follows？’

‘How？’

‘The sun is not identical with sight，nor with what we call the eye in which sight resides．’

‘No．’

‘Yet of all sense-organs the eye is the most sunlike．’

‘Much the most．’

‘So the eye's power of sight is a kind of infusion dispensed to it by the sun．’

‘Yes．’

‘Then，moreover，though the sun is not itself sight，it is the cause of sight and is seen by the sight it causes．’

‘That is so．’

‘Well，that is what I called the child of the good，’I said．‘The good has begotten it in its own likeness，and it bears the same relation to sight and visible objects in the visible realm that the good bears to intelligence and intelligible objects in the intelligible realm．’

‘Will you explain that a bit further？’he asked．

‘You know that when we turn our eyes to objects whose colours are no longer illuminated by daylight，but only by moonlight or starlight，they see dimly and appear to be almost blind，as if they had no clear vision．’

‘Yes．’

‘But when we turn them on things on which the sun is shining，then they see clearly，and obviously have vision．’

‘Certainly．’

‘Apply the analogy to the mind．When the mind's eye is fixed on objects illuminated by truth and reality，it understands and knows them，and its possession of intelligence is evident；but when it is fixed on the twilight world of change and decay，it can only form opinions，its vision is confused and its opinions shifting，and it seems to lack intelligence．’

‘That is true．’

‘Then what gives the objects of knowledge their truth and the knower's mind the power of knowing is the form of the good．It is the cause of knowledge and truth，and you will be right to think of it as being itself known，and yet as being something other than，and even more splendid than，knowledge and truth，splendid as they are．And just as it was right to think of light and sight as being like the sun，but wrong to think of them as being the sun itself，so here again it is right to think of knowledge and truth as being like the good，but wrong to think of either of them as being the good，whose position must be ranked still higher．’

‘You are making it something of remarkable splendour if it is the source of knowledge and truth，and yet itself more splendid than they are．For I suppose you
can't mean it to be pleasure？’he asked．

‘A monstrous suggestion，’I replied．‘Let us pursue our analogy further．’

‘Go on．’

‘The sun，I think you will agree，not only makes the things we see visible，but causes the processes of generation，growth and nourishment，without itself being such a process．’

‘True．’

‘The good therefore maybe said to be the source not only of the intelligibility of the objects of knowledge，but also of their being and reality；yet it is not itself that reality，but is beyond it，and superior to it in dignity and power．’

‘It really must be miraculously transcendent，'remarked Glaucon to the general amusement．

‘Now，don't blame me，’I protested；‘it was you who made me say what I thought about it．’

‘Yes，and please go on．At any rate finish off the analogy with the sun，if you haven't fi nished it．’

‘I've not nearly fi nished it．’

‘Then go on and don't leave anything out．’

‘I'm afraid I must leave a lot out，’I said．‘But I'll do my best to get in everything I can in present circumstances．’

‘Yes，please do．’

The Divided Line

The analogy of the Divided Line is，Plato makes clear，a sequel to the Sun simile，its purpose being to illustrate further the relation between the two orders of reality with which the Sun simile dealt．But it does so from a particular point of view，that of the states of mind in which we apprehend these two orders or realms．The purpose of the Line，therefore，is not，primarily，to give a classification of objects．Both of the two states of mind correlated with the intelligible realm deal with the same kind of object（the forms），though each deals with them in a different way；and though in the physical world there is a difference between physical things and their shadows，that difference is used primarily to illustrate degrees of ‘truth’or genuineness in what is apprehended – we know very little about a thing if our knowledge is confined to shadows or images of it or，for that matter，to its superficial appearance

［…］

‘You must suppose，then，’I went on，‘that there are these two powers of which I have spoken，and that one of them is supreme over everything in the intelligible order or region，the other over everything in the visible region – I won't say in the physical universe or you will think I'm playing with words．At any rate you have before your mind these two orders of things，the visible and the intelligible？’

‘Yes，I have．’

‘Well，suppose you have a line divided into two unequal parts，and then divide the two parts again in the same ratio，to represent the visible and intelligible orders．This gives you，in terms of comparative clarity and obscurity，in the visible order one sub-section of images：by “images” I mean first shadows，then reflections in water and other close-grained，polished surfaces，and all that sort of thing，if you understand me．’

‘I understand．’

‘Let the other sub-section stand for the objects which are the originals of the images – the animals around us，and every kind of plant and manufactured object．’

‘Very good．’

‘Would you be prepared to admit that these sections differ in that one is genuine，one not，and that the relation of image to original is the same as that of the realm of opinion to that of knowledge？’

‘I most certainly would．’

‘Then consider next how the intelligible part of the line is to be divided．’

‘How？’

‘In one sub-section the mind uses the originals of the visible order in their turn as images，and has to base its inquiries on assumptions and proceed from them not to a first principle but to a conclusion：in the other it moves from assumption to a first principle which involves no assumption，without the images used in the other sub-section，but pursuing its inquiry solely by and through forms themselves．’

‘I don't quite understand．’

‘I will try again，and what I have just said will help you to understand．I think you know that students of geometry and calculation and the like begin by assuming there are odd and even numbers，geometrical figures and the three forms of angle，and other kindred items in their respective subjects；these they regard as known，having put them forward as basic assumptions which it is quite unnecessary to explain to themselves or anyone else on the grounds that they are obvious to everyone．Starting from them，they proceed through a series of consistent steps to the conclusion which they set out to fi nd．’

‘Yes，I certainly know that．’

‘You know too that they make use of and argue about visible figures，though they are not really thinking about them，but about the originals which they resemble；it is not about the square or diagonal which they have drawn that they are arguing，but about the square itself or diagonal itself，or whatever the figure may be．The actual figures they draw or model，which themselves cast their shadows and reflections in water – these they treat as images only，the real objects of their investigation being invisible except to the eye of reason．’

‘That is quite true．’

‘This type of thing I called intelligible，but said that the mind was forced to use assumptions in investigating it，and did not proceed to a first principle，being unable to depart from and rise above its assumptions；but it used as illustrations the very things which in turn have their images and shadows on the lower level，in comparison with which they are themselves respected and valued for their clarity．’

‘I understand，’he said．‘You are referring to what happens in geometry and kindred sciences．’

‘Then when I speak of the other sub-section of the intelligible part of the line you will understand that I mean that which the very process of argument grasps by the power of dialectic；it treats assumptions not as principles，but as assumptions in the true sense，that is，as starting points and steps in the ascent to something which involves no assumption and is the first principle of everything；when it has grasped that principle it can again descend，by keeping to the consequences that follow from it，to a conclusion．The whole procedure involves nothing in the sensible world，but moves solely through forms to forms，and finishes with forms．’

‘I understand，’he said；‘though not fully，because what you describe sounds like a long job．But you want to distinguish that part of the real and intelligible which is studied by the science of dialectic as having greater clarity than that studied by what are called “sciences”．These sciences treat their assumptions as first principles and，though compelled to use reason and not sense-perception in surveying their subject-matter，because they proceed in their investigations from assumptions and not to a first principle，they do not，you think，exercise intelligence on it，even though with the aid of a first principle it is intelligible．And I think that you call the habit of mind of geometers and the like reason but not intelligence，meaning by reason something midway between opinion and intelligence．’

‘You have understood me very well，’I said．‘So please take it that there are，corresponding to the four sections of the line，these four states of mind；to the top section intelligence，to the second reason，to the third belief，and to the last illusion．And you may arrange them in a scale，and assume that they have degrees of clarity corresponding to the degree of truth possessed by their subject-matter．’

‘I understand，’he replied，‘and agree with your proposed arrangement．’

The Simile of the Cave

This is a more graphic presentation of the truths presented in the analogy of the Line；in particular，it tells us more about the two states of mind called in the Line analogy Belief and Illusion．We are shown the ascent of the mind from illusion to pure philosophy，and the difficulties which accompany its progress．And the philosopher，when he has achieved the supreme vision，is required to return to the cave and serve his fellows，his very unwillingness to do so being his chief qualification

［…］

‘I want you to go on to picture the enlightenment or ignorance of our human condition somewhat as follows．Imagine an underground chamber like a cave，with a long entrance open to the daylight and as wide as the cave．In this chamber are men who have been prisoners there since they were children，their legs and necks being so fastened that they can only look straight ahead of them and cannot turn their heads．Some way off，behind and higher up，a fire is burning，and between the fire and the prisoners and above them runs a road，in front of which a curtain-wall has been built，like the screen at puppet shows between the operators and their audience，above which they show their puppets．’

‘I see．’

‘Imagine further that there are men carrying all sorts of gear along behind the curtain-wall，projecting above it and including figures of men and animals made of wood and stone and all sorts of other materials，and that some of these men，as you would expect，are talking and some not．’

‘An odd picture and an odd sort of prisoner．’

‘They are drawn from life，’I replied．‘For，tell me，do you think our prisoners could see anything of themselves or their fellows except the shadows thrown by the fi re on the wall of the cave opposite them？’

‘How could they see anything else if they were prevented from moving their heads all their lives？’

‘And would they see anything more of the objects carried along the road？’

‘Of course not．’

‘Then if they were able to talk to each other，would they not assume that the shadows they saw were the real things？’

‘Inevitably．’

‘And if the wall of their prison opposite them reflected sound，don't you think that they would suppose，whenever one of the passers-by on the road spoke，that the voice belonged to the shadow passing before them？’

‘They would be bound to think so．’

‘And so in every way they would believe that the shadows of the objects we mentioned were the whole truth．’

‘Yes，inevitably．’

‘Then think what would naturally happen to them if they were released from their bonds and cured of their delusions．Suppose one of them were let loose，and suddenly compelled to stand up and turn his head and look and walk towards the fire；all these actions would be painful and he would be too dazzled to see properly the objects of which he used to see the shadows．What do you think he would say if he was told that what he used to see was so much empty nonsense and that he was now nearer reality and seeing more correctly，because he was turned towards objects that were more real，and if on top of that he were compelled to say what each of the passing objects was when it was pointed out to him？Don't you think he would be at a loss，and think that what he used to see was far truer than the objects now being pointed out to him？’

‘Yes，far truer．’

‘And if he were made to look directly at the light of the fire，it would hurt his eyes and he would turn back and retreat to the things which he could see properly，which he would think really clearer than the things being shown him．’

‘Yes．’

‘And if，’I went on，‘he were forcibly dragged up the steep and rugged ascent and not let go till he had been dragged out into the sunlight，the process would be a painful one，to which he would much object，and when he emerged into the light his eyes would be so dazzled by the glare of it that he wouldn't be able to see a single one of the things he was now told were real．’

‘Certainly not at first，’he agreed．

‘Because，of course，he would need to grow accustomed to the light before he could see things in the upper world outside the cave．First he would find it easiest to look at shadows，next at the reflections of men and other objects in water，and later on at the objects themselves．After that he would find it easier to observe the heavenly bodies and the sky itself at night，and to look at the light of the moon and stars rather than at the sun and its light by day．’

‘Of course．’

‘The thing he would be able to do last would be to look directly at the sun itself，and gaze at it without using reflections in water or any other medium，but as it is in itself．’

‘That must come last．’

‘Later on he would come to the conclusion that it is the sun that produces the changing seasons and years and controls everything in the visible world，and is in a sense responsible for everything that he and his fellow-prisoners used to see．’

‘That is the conclusion which he would obviously reach．’

‘And when he thought of his first home and what passed for wisdom there，and of his fellow-prisoners，don't you think he would congratulate himself on his good fortune and be sorry for them？’

‘Very much so．’

‘There was probably a certain amount of honour and glory to be won among the prisoners，and prizes for keensightedness for those best able to remember the order of sequence among the passing shadows and so be best able to divine their future appearances．Will our released prisoner hanker after these prizes or envy this power or honour？Won't he be more likely to feel，as Homer says，that he would far rather be “a serf in the house of some landless man”，or indeed anything else in the world，than hold the opinions and live the life that they do？’

‘Yes，’he replied，‘he would prefer anything to a life like theirs．’

‘Then what do you think would happen，’I asked，‘if he went back to sit in his old seat in the cave？Wouldn't his eyes be blinded by the darkness，because he had come in suddenly out of the sunlight？’

‘Certainly．’

‘And if he had to discriminate between the shadows，in competition with the other prisoners，while he was still blinded and before his eyes got used to the darkness – a process that would take some time – wouldn't he be likely to make a fool of himself？And they would say that his visit to the upper world had ruined his sight，and that the ascent was not worth even attempting．And if anyone tried to release them and lead them up，they would kill him if they could lay hands on him．’

‘They certainly would．’

‘Now，my dear Glaucon，’I went on，‘this simile must be connected throughout with what preceded it．The realm revealed by sight corresponds to the prison，and the light of the fire in the prison to the power of the sun．And you won't go wrong if you connect the ascent into the upper world and the sight of the objects there with the upward progress of the mind into the intelligible region．That at any rate is my interpretation，which is what you are anxious to hear；the truth of the matter is，after all，known only to god．But in my opinion，for what it is worth，the final thing to be perceived in the intelligible region，and perceived only with difficulty，is the form of the good；once seen，it is inferred to be responsible for whatever is right and valuable in anything，producing in the visible region light and the source of light，and being in the intelligible region itself the controlling source of truth and intelligence．And anyone who is going to act rationally either in public or private life must have sight of it．’

‘I agree，’he said，‘so far as I am able to understand you．’

‘Then you will perhaps also agree with me that it won't be surprising if those who get so far are unwilling to involve themselves in human affairs，and if their minds long to remain in the realm above．That's what we should expect if our simile holds good again．’

‘Yes，that's to be expected．’

‘Nor will you think it strange that anyone who descends from contemplation of the divine to human life and its ills should blunder and make a fool of himself，if，while still blinded and unaccustomed to the surrounding darkness，he's forcibly put on trial in the law-courts or elsewhere about the shadows of justice or the figures of which they are shadows，and made to dispute about the notions of them held by men who have never seen justice itself．’

‘There's nothing strange in that．’

‘But anyone with any sense，’I said，‘will remember that the eyes may be unsighted in two ways，by a transition either from light to darkness or from darkness to light，and will recognize that the same thing applies to the mind．So when he sees a mind confused and unable to see clearly he will not laugh without thinking，but will ask himself whether it has come from a clearer world and is confused by the unaccustomed darkness，or whether it is dazzled by the stronger light of the clearer world to which it has escaped from its previous ignorance．The first condition of life is a reason for congratulation，the second for sympathy，though if one wants to laugh at it one can do so with less absurdity than at the mind that has descended from the daylight of the upper world．’

‘You put it very reasonably．’

‘If this is true，’I continued，‘we must reject the conception of education professed by those who say that they can put into the mind knowledge that was not there before – rather as if they could put sight into blind eyes．’

‘It is a claim that is certainly made，’he said．

‘But our argument indicates that the capacity for knowledge is innate in each man's mind，and that the organ by which he learns is like an eye which cannot be turned from darkness to light unless the whole body is turned；in the same way the mind as a whole must be turned away from the world of change until its eye can bear to look straight at reality，and at the brightest of all realities which is what we call the good．Isn't that so？’

‘Yes．’

‘Then this turning around of the mind itself might be made a subject of professional skill，which would effect the conversion as easily and effectively as possible．It would not be concerned to implant sight，but to ensure that someone who had it already was not either turned in the wrong direction or looking the wrong way．’

‘That may well be so．’

‘The rest，therefore，of what are commonly called excellences of the mind perhaps resemble those of the body，in that they are not in fact innate，but are implanted by subsequent training and practice；but knowledge，it seems，must surely have a diviner quality，something which never loses its power，but whose effects are useful and salutary or again useless and harmful according to the direction in which it is turned．Have you never noticed how shrewd is the glance of the type of men commonly called bad but clever？They have small minds，but their sight is sharp and piercing enough in matters that concern them；it's not that their sight is weak，but that they are forced to serve evil，so that the keener their sight the more effective that evil is．’

‘That's true．’

‘But suppose，’I said，‘that such natures were cut loose，when they were still children，from all the dead weights natural to this world of change and fastened on them by sensual indulgences like gluttony，which twist their minds’vision to lower things，and suppose that when so freed they were turned towards the truth，then this same part of these same individuals would have as keen a vision of truth as it has of the objects on which it is at present turned．’

‘Very likely．’

‘And is it not also likely，and indeed a necessary consequence of what we have said，that society will never be properly governed either by the uneducated，who have no knowledge of the truth，or by those who are allowed to spend all their lives in purely intellectual pursuits？The uneducated have no single aim in life to which all their actions，public and private，are to be directed；the intellectuals will take no practical action of their own accord，fancying themselves to be out of this world in some kind of earthly paradise．’

‘True．’

‘Then our job as lawgivers is to compel the best minds to attain what we have called the highest form of knowledge，and to ascend to the vision of the good as we have described，and when they have achieved this and see well enough，prevent them behaving as they are now allowed to．’

‘What do you mean by that？’

‘Remaining in the upper world，and refusing to return again to the prisoners in the cave below and share their labours and rewards，whether trivial or serious．’

‘But surely，’he protested，‘that will not be fair．We shall be compelling them to live a poorer life than they might live．’

‘The object of our legislation，’I reminded him again，‘is not the special welfare of any particular class in our society，but of the society as a whole；and it uses persuasion or compulsion to unite all citizens and make them share together the benefits which each individually can confer on the community；and its purpose in fostering this attitude is not to leave everyone to please himself，but to make each man a link in the unity of the whole．’

‘You are right；I had forgotten，’he said．

‘You see，then，Glaucon，’I went on，‘we shan't be unfair to our philosophers，but shall be quite fair in what we say when we compel them to have some care and responsibility for others．We shall tell them that philosophers born in other states can reasonably refuse to take part in the hard work of politics；for society produces them quite involuntarily and unintentionally，and it is only just that anything that grows up on its own should feel it has nothing to repay for an upbringing which it owes to no one．“But，” we shall say，“we have bred you both for your own sake and that of the whole community to act as leaders and king-bees in a hive；you are better and more fully educated than the rest and better qualified to combine the practice of philosophy and politics．You must therefore each descend in turn and live with your fellows in the cave and get used to seeing in the dark；once you get used to it you will see a thousand times better than they do and will distinguish the various shadows，and know what they are shadows of，because you have seen the truth about things admirable and just and good．And so our state and yours will be really awake，and not merely dreaming like most societies today，with their shadow battles and their struggles for political power，which they treat as some great prize．The truth is quite different：the state whose prospective rulers come to their duties with least enthusiasm is bound to have the best and most tranquil government，and the state whose rulers are eager to rule the worst．” ’

‘I quite agree．’

‘Then will our pupils，when they hear what we say，dissent and refuse to take their share of the hard work of government，even though spending the greater part of their time together in the pure air above？’

‘They cannot refuse，for we are making a just demand of just men．But of course，unlike present rulers，they will approach the business of government as an unavoidable necessity．’

‘Yes，of course，’I agreed．‘The truth is that if you want a well-governed state to be possible，you must find for your future rulers some way of life they like better than government；for only then will you have government by the truly rich，those，that is，whose riches consist not of gold，but of the true happiness of a good and rational life．If you get，in public affairs，men whose life is impoverished and destitute of personal satisfactions，but who hope to snatch some compensation for their own inadequacy from a political career，there can never be good government．They start fighting for power，and the consequent internal and domestic conflicts ruin both them and society．’

‘True indeed．’

‘Is there any life except that of true philosophy which looks down on positions of political power？’

‘None whatever．’

‘But what we need is that the only men to get power should be men who do not love it，otherwise we shall have rivals’quarrels．’

‘That is certain．’

‘Who else，then，will you compel to undertake the responsibilities of Guardians of our state，if it is not to be those who know most about the principles of good government and who have other rewards and a better life than the politician's？’

‘There is no one else．’