philebus-第5章
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!
infinite is in a certain sense many; and the finite may be hereafter
discussed。
Pro。 I agree。
Soc。 And now consider well; for the question to which I invite
your attention is difficult and controverted。 When you speak of hotter
and colder; can you conceive any limit in those qualities? Does not
the more and less; which dwells in their very nature; prevent their
having any end? for if they had an end; the more and less would
themselves have an end。
Pro。 That is most true。
Soc。 Ever; as we say; into the hotter and the colder there enters
a more and a less。
Pro。 Yes。
Soc。 Then; says the argument; there is never any end of them; and
being endless they must also be infinite。
Pro。 Yes; Socrates; that is exceedingly true。
Soc。 Yes; my dear Protarchus; and your answer reminds me that such
an expression as 〃exceedingly;〃 which you have just uttered; and
also the term 〃gently;〃 have the same significance as more or less;
for whenever they occur they do not allow of the existence of
quantity…they are always introducing degrees into actions; instituting
a comparison of a more or a less excessive or a more or a less gentle;
and at each creation of more or less; quantity disappears。 For; as I
was just now saying; if quantity and measure did not disappear; but
were allowed to intrude in the sphere of more and less and the other
comparatives; these last would be driven out of their own domain。 When
definite quantity is once admitted; there can be no longer a
〃hotter〃 or a 〃colder〃 (for these are always progressing; and are
never in one stay); but definite quantity is at rest; and has ceased
to progress。 Which proves that comparatives; such as the hotter; and
the colder; are to be ranked in the class of the infinite。
Pro。 Your remark certainly; has the look of truth; Socrates; but
these subjects; as you were saying; are difficult to follow at
first。 I think however; that if I could hear the argument repeated
by you once or twice; there would be a substantial agreement between
us。
Soc。 Yes; and I will try to meet your wish; but; as I would rather
not waste time in the enumeration of endless particulars; let me
know whether I may not assume as a note of the infinite…
Pro。 What?
Soc。 I want to know whether such things as appear to us to admit
of more or less; or are denoted by the words 〃exceedingly;〃
〃gently;〃 〃extremely;〃 and the like; may not be referred to the
class of the infinite; which is their unity; for; as was asserted in
the previous argument; all things that were divided and dispersed
should be brought together; and have the mark or seal of some one
nature; if possible; set upon them…do you remember?
Pro。 Yes。
Soc。 And all things which do not admit of more or less; but admit
their opposites; that is to say; first of all; equality; and the
equal; or again; the double; or any other ratio of number and
measure…all these may; I think; be rightly reckoned by us in the class
of the limited or finite; what do you say?
Pro。 Excellent; Socrates。
Soc。 And now what nature shall we ascribe to the third or compound
kind?
Pro。 You; I think; will have to tell me that。
Soc。 Rather God will tell you; if there be any God who will listen
to my prayers。
Pro。 Offer up a prayer; then; and think。
Soc。 I am thinking; Protarchus; and I believe that some God has
befriended us。
Pro。 What do you mean; and what proof have you to offer of what
you are saying?
Soc。 I will tell you; and do you listen to my words。
Pro。 Proceed。
Soc。 Were we not speaking just now of hotter and colder?
Pro。 True。
Soc。 Add to them drier; wetter; more; less; swifter; slower;
greater; smaller; and all that in the preceding argument we placed
under the unity of more and less。
Pro。 In the class of the infinite; you mean?
Soc。 Yes; and now mingle this with the other。
Pro。 What is the other。
Soc。 The class of the finite which we ought to have brought together
as we did the infinite; but; perhaps; it will come to the same thing
if we do so now;…when the two are combined; a third will appear。
Pro。 What do you mean by the class of the finite?
Soc。 The class of the equal and the double; and any class which puts
an end to difference and opposition; and by introducing number creates
harmony and proportion among the different elements。
Pro。 I understand; you seem to me to mean that the various
opposites; when you mingle with them the class of the finite; takes
certain forms。
Soc。 Yes; that is my meaning。
Pro。 Proceed。
Soc。 Does not the right participation in the finite give health…in
disease; for instance?
Pro。 Certainly。
Soc。 And whereas the high and low; the swift and the slow are
infinite or unlimited; does not the addition of the principles
aforesaid introduce a limit; and perfect the whole frame of music?
Pro。 Yes; certainly。
Soc。 Or; again; when cold and heat prevail; does not the
introduction of them take away excess and indefiniteness; and infuse
moderation and harmony?
Pro。 Certainly。
Soc。 And from a like admixture of the finite and infinite come the
seasons; and all the delights of life?
Pro。 Most true。
Soc。 I omit ten thousand other things; such as beauty and health and
strength; and the many beauties and high perfections of the soul: O my
beautiful Philebus; the goddess; methinks; seeing the universal
wantonness and wickedness of all things; and that there was in them no
limit to pleasures and self…indulgence; devised the limit of law and
order; whereby; as you say; Philebus; she torments; or as I
maintain; delivers the soul…What think you; Protarchus?
Pro。 Her ways are much to my mind; Socrates。
Soc。 You will observe that I have spoken of three classes?
Pro。 Yes; I think that I understand you: you mean to say that the
infinite is one class; and that the finite is a second class of
existences; but what you would make the third I am not so certain。
Soc。 That is because the amazing variety of the third class is too
much for you; my dear friend; but there was not this difficulty with
the infinite; which also comprehended many classes; for all of them
were sealed with the note of more and less; and therefore appeared
one。
Pro。 True。
Soc。 And the finite or limit had not many divisions; and we ready
acknowledged it to be by nature one?
Pro。 Yes。
Soc。 Yes; indeed; and when I speak of the third class; understand me
to mean any offspring of these; being a birth into true being;
effected by the measure which the limit introduces。
Pro。 I understand。
Soc。 Still there was; as we said; a fourth class to be investigated;
and you must assist in the investigation; for does not everything
which comes into being; of necessity come into being through a cause?
Pro。 Yes; certainly; for how can there be anything which has no
cause?
Soc。 And is not the agent the same as the cause in all except
name; the agent and the cause may be rightly called one?
Pro。 Very true。
Soc。 And the same may be said of the patient; or effect; we shall
find that they too differ; as I was saying; only in name…shall we not?
Pro。 We shall。
Soc。 The agent or cause always naturally leads; and the patient or
effect naturally follows it?
Pro。 Certainly。
Soc。 Then the cause and what is subordinate to it in generation
are not the same; but different?
Pro。 True。
Soc。 Did not the things which were generated; and the things out
of which they were generated; furnish all the three classes?
Pro。 Yes。
Soc。 And the creator or cause of them has been satisfactorily proven
to be distinct from them…and may therefo