Alcibiades 2

[146] Al. I should call such a state bad, Socrates.

Soc. You certainly would when you saw each of them rivalling the other and esteeming that of the greatest importance in the state, ‘Wherein he himself most excelled.’ —I mean that which was best in any art, while he was entirely ignorant of what was best for himself and for the state, because, as I think, he trusts to opinion which is devoid of intelligence. In such a case should we not be right if we said that the state would be full of anarchy and lawlessness?

Al. Decidedly.

Soc. But ought we not then, think you, either to fancy that we know or really to know, what we confidently propose to do or say?

Al. Yes.

Soc. And if a person does that which he knows or supposes that he knows, and the result is beneficial, he will act advantageously both for himself and for the state?

Al. True.

Soc. And if he do the contrary, both he and the state will suffer?

Al. Yes.

Soc. Well, and are you of the same mind as before?

Al. I am.

Soc. But were you not saying that you would call the many unwise and the few wise?

Al. I was.

Soc. And have we not come back to our old assertion that the many fail to obtain the best because they trust to opinion which is devoid of intelligence?

Al. That is the case.

Soc. It is good, then, for the many, if they particularly desire to do that which they know or suppose that they know, neither to know nor to suppose that they know, in cases where if they carry out their ideas in action they will be losers rather than gainers?

Al. What you say is very true.

Soc. Do you not see that I was really speaking the truth when I affirmed that the possession of any other kind of knowledge was more likely to injure than to benefit the possessor, unless he had also the knowledge of the best?

Al. I do now, if I did not before, Socrates.