protagoras-第9节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！




desire。　If　Protagoras　is　not　disposed　to　answer；　let　him　ask　and　I



will　answer；　and　I　will　endeavour　to　show　at　the　same　time　how；　as　I



maintain；　he　ought　to　answer：　and　when　I　have　answered　as　many



questions　as　he　likes　to　ask；　let　him　in　like　manner　answer　me；　and　if



he　seems　to　be　not　very　ready　at　answering　the　precise　question



asked　of　him；　you　and　I　will　unite　in　entreating　him；　as　you　entreated



me；　not　to　spoil　the　discussion。　And　this　will　require　no　special



arbiter…all　of　you　shall　be　arbiters。



　　This　was　generally　approved；　and　Protagoras；　though　very　much



against　his　will；　was　obliged　to　agree　that　he　would　ask　questions；



and　when　he　had　put　a　sufficient　number　of　them；　that　he　would



answer　in　his　turn　those　which　he　was　asked　in　short　replies。　He　began



to　put　his　questions　as　follows：…



　　I　am　of　opinion；　Socrates；　he　said；　that　skill　in　poetry　is　the



principal　part　of　education；　and　this　I　conceive　to　be　the　power　of



knowing　what　compositions　of　the　poets　are　correct；　and　what　are



not；　and　how　they　are　to　be　distinguished；　and　of　explaining　when



asked　the　reason　of　the　difference。　And　I　propose　to　transfer　the



question　which　you　and　I　have　been　discussing　to　the　domain　of　poetry；



we　will　speak　as　before　of　virtue；　but　in　reference　to　a　passage　of



a　poet。　Now　Simonides　says　to　Scopas　the　son　of　Creon　the　Thessalian：







　　Hardly　on　the　one　hand　can　a　man　become　truly　good；　built



four…square　in　hands　and　feet　and　mind；　a　work　without　a　flaw。







Do　you　know　the　poem？　or　shall　I　repeat　the　whole？



　　There　is　no　need；　I　said；　for　I　am　perfectly　well　acquainted　with



the　ode…I　have　made　a　careful　study　of　it。



　　Very　well；　he　said。　And　do　you　think　that　the　ode　is　a　good



composition；　and　true？



　　Yes；　I　said；　both　good　and　true。



　　But　if　there　is　a　contradiction；　can　the　composition　be　good　or



true？



　　No；　not　in　that　case；　I　replied。



　　And　is　there　not　a　contradiction？　he　asked。　Reflect。



　　Well；　my　friend；　I　have　reflected。



　　And　does　not　the　poet　proceed　to　say；　〃I　do　not　agree　with　the



word　of　Pittacus；　albeit　the　utterance　of　a　wise　man：　Hardly　can　a　man



be　good〃？　Now　you　will　observe　that　this　is　said　by　the　same　poet。



　　I　know　it。



　　And　do　you　think；　he　said；　that　the　two　sayings　are　consistent？



　　Yes；　I　said；　I　think　so　（at　the　same　time　I　could　not　help　fearing



that　there　might　be　something　in　what　he　said）。　And　you　think



otherwise？



　　Why；　he　said；　how　can　he　be　consistent　in　both？　First　of　all；



premising　as　his　own　thought；　〃Hardly　can　a　man　become　truly　good〃；



and　then　a　little　further　on　in　the　poem；　forgetting；　and　blaming



Pittacus　and　refusing　to　agree　with　him；　when　he　says；　〃Hardly　can　a



man　be　good；〃　which　is　the　very　same　thing。　And　yet　when　he　blames　him



who　says　the　same　with　himself；　he　blames　himself；　so　that　he　must



be　wrong　either　in　his　first　or　his　second　assertion。



　　Many　of　the　audience　cheered　and　applauded　this。　And　I　felt　at　first



giddy　and　faint；　as　if　I　had　received　a　blow　from　the　hand　of　an



expert　boxer；　when　I　heard　his　words　and　the　sound　of　the　cheering；



and　to　confess　the　truth；　I　wanted　to　get　time　to　think　what　the



meaning　of　the　poet　really　was。　So　I　turned　to　Prodicus　and　called



him。　Prodicus；　I　said；　Simonides　is　a　countryman　of　yours；　and　you



ought　to　come　to　his　aid。　I　must　appeal　to　you；　like　the　river



Scamander　in　Homer；　who；　when　beleaguered　by　Achilles；　summons　the



Simois　to　aid　him；　saying：







　　Brother　dear；　let　us　both　together　stay　the　force　of　the　hero。







And　I　summon　you；　for　I　am　afraid　that　Protagoras　will　make　an　end



of　Simonides。　Now　is　the　time　to　rehabilitate　Simonides；　by　the



application　of　your　philosophy　of　synonyms；　which　enables　you　to



distinguish　〃will〃　and　〃wish；〃　and　make　other　charming　distinctions



like　those　which　you　drew　just　now。　And　I　should　like　to　know



whether　you　would　agree　with　me；　for　I　am　of　opinion　that　there　is



no　contradiction　in　the　words　of　Simonides。　And　first　of　all　I　wish



that　you　would　say　whether；　in　your　opinion；　Prodicus；　〃being〃　is



the　same　as　〃becoming。〃



　　Not　the　same；　certainly；　replied　Prodicus。



　　Did　not　Simonides　first　set　forth；　as　his　own　view；　that　〃Hardly　can



a　man　become　truly　good〃？



　　Quite　right；　said　Prodicus。



　　And　then　he　blames　Pittacus；　not；　as　Protagoras　imagines；　for



repeating　that　which　he　says　himself；　but　for　saying　something



different　from　himself。　Pittacus　does　not　say　as　Simonides　says；



that　hardly　can　a　man　become　good；　but　hardly　can　a　man　be　good：　and



our　friend　Prodicus　would　maintain　that　being；　Protagoras；　is　not



the　same　as　becoming；　and　if　they　are　not　the　same；　then　Simonides



is　not　inconsistent　with　himself。　I　dare　say　that　Prodicus　and　many



others　would　say；　as　Hesiod　says；







　　　On　the　one　hand；　hardly　can　a　man　become　good；



　　　For　the　gods　have　made　virtue　the　reward　of　toil；



　　　But　on　the　other　hand；　when　you　have　climbed　the　height；



　　　Then；　to　retain　virtue；　however　difficult　the　acquisition；　is　easy。







　　Prodicus　heard　and　approved；　but　Protagoras　said：　Your　correction；



Socrates；　involves　a　greater　error　than　is　contained　in　the　sentence



which　you　are　correcting。



　　Alas！　I　said；　Protagoras；　then　I　am　a　sorry　physician；　and　do　but



aggravate　a　disorder　which　I　am　seeking　to　cure。



　　Such　is　the　fact；　he　said。



　　How　so？　I　asked。



　　The　poet；　he　replied；　could　never　have　made　such　a　mistake　as　to　say



that　virtue；　which　in　the　opinion　of　all　men　is　the　hardest　of　all



things；　can　be　easily　retained。



　　Well；　I　said；　and　how　fortunate　are　we　in　having　Prodicus　among



us；　at　the　right　moment；　for　he　has　a　wisdom；　Protagoras；　which；　as



I　imagine；　is　more　than　human　and　of　very　ancient　date；　and　may　be



as　old　as　Simonides　or　even　older。　Learned　as　you　are　in　many



things；　you　appear　to　know　nothing　of　this；　but　I　know；　for　I　am　a



disciple　of　his。　And　now；　if　I　am　not　mistaken；　you　do　not



understand　the　word　〃hard〃　（chalepon）　in　the　sense　which　Simonides



intended；　and　I　must　correct　you；　as　Prodicus　corrects　me　when　I　use



the　word　〃awful〃　（deinon）　as　a　term　of　praise。　If　I　say　that



Protagoras　or　any　one　else　is　an　〃awfully〃　wise　man；　he　asks　me　if　I



am　not　ashamed　of　calling　that　which　is　good　〃awful〃；　and　then　he



explains　to　me　that　the　term　〃awful〃　is　always　taken　in　a　bad　sense；



and　that　no　one　speaks　of　being　〃awfully〃　healthy　or　wealthy；　or



〃awful〃　peace；　but　of　〃awful〃　disease；　〃awful〃　war；　〃awful〃　poverty；



meaning　by　the　term　〃awful；〃　evil。　And　I　think　that　Simonides　and



his　countrymen　the　Ceans；　when　they　spoke　of　〃hard〃　meant　〃evil；〃　or



something　which　you　do　not　understand。　Let　us　ask　Prodicus；　for　he



ought　to　be　able　to　answer　questions　about　the　dialect　of　Simonides。



What　did　he　mean；　Prodicus；　by　the　term　〃hard？〃



　　Evil；　said　Prodicus。



　　And　therefore；　I　said；　Prodicus；　he　blames　Pittacus　for　saying；



〃Hard　is　the　good；〃　just　as　if　that　were　equivalent　to　saying；　Evil　is



the　good。



　　Yes；　he　said；　that　was　certainly　his　meaning；　and　he　is　twitting



Pittacus　with　ignorance　of　the　use　of　terms；　which　in　a　Lesbian；　who



has　been　accustomed　to　speak　a　barbarous　language；　is　natural。



　　Do　you　hear；　Protagoras；　I　asked；　what　our　friend　Prodicus　is



saying？　And　have　you　an　answer　for　him？



　　You　are　entirely　mistaken；　Prodicus；　said　Protagoras；　and　I　know



very　well　that　Simonides　in　using　the　word　〃hard〃　meant　what　all　of　us



mean；　not　evil；　but　that　which　is　not　easy…that　which　takes　a　great



deal　of　trouble：　of　this　I　am　positive。



　　I　said：　I　also　incline　to　believe；　Protagoras；　that　this　was　the



meaning　of　Simonides；　of　which　our　friend　Prodicus　was　very　well



aware；　but　he　thought　that　he　would　make　fun；　and　try　if　you　could



maintain　your　thesis；　for　that　Simonides　could　never　have　meant　the



other　is　clearly　proved　by　the　context；　in　which　he　says　that　God　only



has　this　gift。　Now　he　cannot　surely　mean　to　say　that　to　be　good　is



evil；　when　he　afterwards　proceeds　to　say　that　God　only　has　this



gift；　and　that　this　is　the　attribute　of　him　and　of　no　other。　For　if



this　be　his　meaning；　Prodicus　would　impute　to　Simonides　a　character　of



recklessness　which　is　very　unlike　his　countrymen。　And　I　should　like　to



tell　you；　I　said；　what　I　imagine　to　be　the　real　meaning　of　Simonides



in　this　poem；　if　you　will　test　what；　in　your　way　of　speaking；　would　be



called　my　skill　in　poetry；　or　if　you　would　rather；　I　will　be　the



listener。



　　To　this　proposal　Protagoras　replied：　As　you　please；…and　Hippias；



Prodicus；　and　the　others　told　me　by　all　means　to　do　as　I　proposed。



　　Then　now；　I　said；　I　will　endeavour　to　explain　to　you　my　opinion



about　this　poem　of　Simonides。　There　is　a　very　ancient　philosophy　which



is　more　cultivate