STATESMAN [Electronic resources] نسخه متنی

any longer be allowed to exercise absolute control either over freemen
or over slaves, but that we will summon an assembly either of all
the people, or of the rich only, that anybody who likes, whatever
may be his calling, or even if he have no calling, may offer an
opinion either about seamanship or about diseases-whether as to the
manner in which physic or surgical instruments are to be applied to
the patient, or again about the vessels and the nautical implements
which are required in navigation, and how to meet the dangers of winds
and waves which are incidental to the voyage, how to behave when
encountering pirates, and what is to be done with the old fashioned
galleys, if they have to fight with others of a similar build-and
that, whatever shall be decreed by the multitude on these points, upon
the advice of persons skilled or unskilled, shall be written down on
triangular tablets and columns, or enacted although unwritten to be
national customs; and that in all future time vessels shall be
navigated and remedies administered to the patient after this fashion.

Y. Soc.

What a strange notion!
Str.

Suppose further, that the pilots and physicians are appointed
annually, either out of the rich, or out of the whole people, and that
they are elected by lot; and that after their election they navigate
vessels and heal the sick according to the written rules.

Y. Soc.

Worse and worse.

Str.

But hear what follows:-When the year of office has expired, the
pilot or physician has to come before a court of review, in which
the judges are either selected from the wealthy classes or chosen by
lot out of the whole people; and anybody who pleases may be their
accuser, and may lay to their charge, that during the past year they
have not navigated their vessels or healed their patients according to
the letter of the law and the ancient customs of their ancestors;
and if either of them is condemned, some of the judges must fix what
he is to suffer or paY.
Y. Soc.

He who is willing to take a command under such conditions,
deserves to suffer any penaltY.
Str.

Yet once more, we shall have to enact that if any one is
detected enquiring into piloting and navigation, or into health and
the true nature of medicine, or about the winds, or other conditions
of the atmosphere, contrary to the written rules, and has any
ingenious notions about such matters, he is not to be called a pilot
or physician, but a cloudy prating sophist;-further, on the ground
that he is a corrupter of the young, who would persuade them.

to
follow the art of medicine or piloting in an unlawful manner, and to
exercise an arbitrary rule over their patients or ships, any one who
is qualified by law may inform against him, and indict him in some
court, and then if he is found to be persuading any, whether young
or old, to act contrary to the written law, he is to be punished
with the utmost rigour; for no one should presume to be wiser than the
laws; and as touching healing and health and piloting and
navigation, the nature of them is known to all, for anybody may
learn the written laws and the national customs.

If such were the mode
of procedure, Socrates, about these sciences and about generalship,
and any branch of hunting, or about painting or imitation in
general, or carpentry, or any sort of handicraft, or husbandry, or
planting, or if we were to see an art of rearing horses, or tending
herds, or divination, or any ministerial service, or
draught-playing, or any science conversant with number, whether simple
or square or cube, or comprising motion-I say, if all these things
were done in this way according to written regulations, and not
according to art, what would be the result?
Y. Soc.

All the arts would utterly perish, and could never be
recovered, because enquiry would be unlawful.

And human life, which is
bad enough already, would then become utterly unendurable.

Str.

But what, if while compelling all these operations to be
regulated by written law, we were to appoint as the guardian of the
laws some one elected by a show of hands, or by lot, and he caring
nothing about the laws, were to act contrary to them from motives of
interest or favour, and without knowledge-would not this be a still
worse evil than the former?
Y. Soc.

Very true.

Str.

To go against the laws, which are based upon long experience,
and the wisdom of counsellors who have graciously recommended them and
persuaded the multitude to pass them, would be a far greater and
more ruinous error than any adherence to written law?
Y. Soc.

CertainlY.
Str.

Therefore, as there is a danger of this, the next best thing in
legislating is not to allow either the individual or the multitude
to break the law in any respect whatever.

Y. Soc.

True.

Str.

The laws would be copies of the true particulars of action as
far as they admit of being written down from the lips of those who
have knowledge?
Y. Soc.

Certainly they would.

Str.

And, as we were saying, he who has knowledge and is a true
Statesman, will do many things within his own sphere of action by
his art without regard to the laws, when he is of opinion that
something other than that which he has written down and enjoined to be
observed during his absence would be better.

Y. Soc.

Yes, we said so.

Str.

And any individual or any number of men, having fixed laws,
in acting contrary to them with a view to something better, would only
be acting, as far as they are able, like the true Statesman?
Y. Soc.

CertainlY.
Str.

If they had no knowledge of what they were doing, they would
imitate the truth, and they would always imitate ill; but if they
had knowledge, the imitation would be the perfect truth, and an
imitation no longer.

Y. Soc.

Quite true.

Str.

And the principle that no great number of men are able to
acquire a knowledge of any art has been already admitted by us.

Y. Soc.

Yes, it has.

Str.

Then the royal or political art, if there be such an art,
will never be attained either by the wealthy or by the other mob.

Y. Soc.

Impossible.

Str.

Then the nearest approach which these lower forms of government
can ever make to the true government of the one scientific ruler, is
to do nothing contrary to their own written laws and national customs.

Y. Soc.

Very good.

Str.

When the rich imitate the true form, such a government is
called aristocracy; and when they are regardless of the laws,
oligarchY.
Y Soc.

True.

Str.

Or again, when an individual rules according to law in
imitation of him who knows, we call him a king; and if he rules
according to law, we give him the same name, whether he rules with
opinion or with knowledge.

Y. Soc.

To be sure.

Str.

And when an individual truly possessing knowledge rules, his
name will surely be the same-he will be called a king; and thus the
five names of governments, as they are now reckoned, become one.

Y. Soc.

That is true.

Str.

And when an individual ruler governs neither by law nor by
custom, but following in the steps of the true man of science pretends
that he can only act for the best by violating the laws, while in
reality appetite and ignorance are the motives of the imitation, may
not such an one be called a tyrant?
Y. Soc.

CertainlY.
Str.

And this we believe to be the origin of the tyrant and the
king, of oligarchies, and aristocracies, and democracies-because men
are offended at the one monarch, and can never be made to believe that
any one can be worthy of such authority, or is able and willing in the
spirit of virtue and knowledge to act justly and holily to all; they
fancy that he will be a despot who will wrong and harm and slay whom
he pleases of us; for if there could be such a despot as we
describe, they would acknowledge that we ought to be too glad to
have him, and that he alone would be the happy ruler of a true and
perfect State.

Y. Soc.

To be sure.

Str.

But then, as the State is not like a beehive, and has no
natural head who is at once recognized to be the superior both in body
and in mind, mankind are obliged to meet and make laws, and
endeavour to approach as nearly as they can to the true form of
government.

Y. Soc.

True.

Str.

And when the foundation of politics is in the letter only and
in custom, and knowledge is divorced from action, can we wonder
Socrates, at the miseries which there are, and always will be, in
States? Any other art, built on such a foundation and thus
conducted, would ruin all that it touched.

Ought we not rather to
wonder at the natural strength of the political bond? For States
have endured all this, time out of mind, and yet some of them still
remain and are not overthrown, though many of them, like ships at sea,