Phaedrus
Plato (428–347 BC)
Plato's Phaedrus in the Greek text edited by John Burnet, with Harold North Fowler's English translation.
Section 227
Section 228
Section 229
Section 230
Section 231
Section 232
Section 233
Section 234
Section 235
Section 236
Section 237
Section 238
Section 239
Section 240
Section 241
Section 242
Section 243
Section 244
Section 245
Section 246
Section 247
Section 248
Section 249
Section 250
Section 251
Section 252
Section 253
Section 254
Section 255
Section 256
Section 257
Section 258
Section 259
Section 260
Section 261
Section 262
Section 263
Section 264
Section 265
Section 266
Section 267
Section 268
Section 269
Section 270
Socrates. All great arts demand discussion and high speculation about nature; for this loftiness of mind and effectiveness in all directions seem somehow to come from such pursuits. This was in Pericles added to his great natural abilities; for it was, I think, his falling in with Anaxagoras, who was just such a man, that filled him with high thoughts and taught him the nature of mind and of lack of mind, subjects about which Anaxagoras used chiefly to discourse, and from these speculations he drew and applied to the art of speaking what is of use to it.
Phaedrus. What do you mean by that?
Socrates. The method of the art of healing is much the same as that of rhetoric.
Phaedrus. How so?
Socrates. In both cases you must analyze a nature, in one that of the body and in the other that of the soul, if you are to proceed in a scientific manner, not merely by practice and routine, to impart health and strength to the body by prescribing medicine and diet, or by proper discourses and training to give to the soul the desired belief and virtue.
Phaedrus. That, Socrates, is probably true.
Socrates. Now do you think one can acquire any appreciable knowledge of the nature of the soul without knowing the nature of the whole man?
Phaedrus. If Hippocrates the Asclepiad is to be trusted, one cannot know the nature of the body, either, except in that way.
Socrates. He is right, my friend; however, we ought not to be content with the authority of Hippocrates, but to see also if our reason agrees with him on examination.
Phaedrus. I assent.
Socrates. Then see what Hippocrates and true reason say about nature. In considering the nature of anything, must we not consider first, whether that in respect to which we wish to be learned ourselves and to make others learned is simple or multiform, and then, if it is simple, enquire what power of acting it possesses, or of being acted upon, and by what, and if it has many forms, number them, and then see in the case of each form, as we did in the case of the simple nature, what its action is and how it is acted upon and by what?
Phaedrus. Very likely, Socrates.
Socrates. At any rate, any other mode of procedure would be like the progress of a blind man. Yet surely he who pursues any study scientifically ought not to be comparable to a blind or a deaf man, but evidently the man whose rhetorical teaching is a real art will explain accurately the nature of that to which his words are to be addressed, and that is the soul, is it not?
Phaedrus. Of course.