View source for Plato/Republic/Jowett

{{:Plato/Republic|transcludesection=top}}

{{:Plato/Republic|transcludesection=1.341d-342e}}
<onlyinclude>{{#ifeq:{{{transcludesection|1.341d-342e}}}|1.341d-342e|
====Jowett====
: [..] Now, I said, every art [''τέχνη''] has an interest [''συμφέρω''] ? 
: Certainly. 
: For which the art has to consider [''φύω''] and provide [''ἐκπορίζω''] ? 
: Yes, that is the aim of art. 
: And the interest of any art is the perfection [''μάλιστα τελέαν''] of it this and [341e] nothing else? 
: What do you mean ? 
: I mean what I may illustrate negatively by the example of the body. Suppose you were to ask me whether the body is self-sufficing or has wants, I should reply: Certainly the body has wants; for the body may be ill and require to be cured, and has therefore interests to which the art of medicine ministers; and this is the origin [''παρασκευάζω''] and intention of medicine, [342a] as you will acknowledge. Am I not right ? 
: Quite right, he replied. 
: But is the art of medicine or any other art faulty or deficient in any quality in the same way that the eye may be deficient in sight or the ear fail of hearing, and therefore requires another art to provide for the interests of seeing and hearing--has art in itself, I say, any similar liability to fault or defect, and does every art require another supplementary art to provide for its interests, and that another and another without end ? [342b] Or have the arts to look only after their own interests ? Or have they no need either of themselves or of another ?--having no faults or defects, they have no need to correct them, either by the exercise of their own art or of any other; they have only to consider the interest of their subject-matter. For every art remains pure and faultless while remaining true--that is to say, while perfect and unimpaired. Take the words in your precise sense, and tell me whether I am not right.
: Yes, clearly. 
: Then medicine [342c] does not consider the interest of medicine, but the interest of the body ?
: True, he said. 
: Nor does the art of horsemanship consider the interests of the art of horsemanship, but the interests of the horse; neither do any other arts care for themselves, for they have no needs; they care only for that which is the subject of their art ? 
: True, he said. 
: But surely, Thrasymachus, the arts are the superiors and rulers of their own subjects? 
: To this he assented with a good deal of reluctance. 
: Then, I said, no science or art considers or enjoins the interest of the stronger or superior, but only the interest [342d] of the subject and weaker ? 
: He made an attempt to contest this proposition also, but finally acquiesced. 
: Then, I continued, no physician, in so far as he is a physician, considers his own good in what he prescribes, but the good of his patient; for the true physician is also a ruler having the human body as a subject, and is not a mere money-maker; that has been admitted ?
: Yes. 
: And the pilot likewise, in the strict sense of the term, is a ruler of sailors [342e] and not a mere sailor ? 
: That has been admitted. 
: And such a pilot and ruler will provide and prescribe for the interest of the sailor who is under him, and not for his own or the ruler's interest ? 
: He gave a reluctant 'Yes.' 
: Then, I said, Thrasymachus, there is no one in any rule who, in so far as he is a ruler, considers or enjoins what is for his own interest, but always what is for the interest of his subject or suitable to his art; to that he looks, and that alone he considers in everything which he says and does. [..] [http://archive.org/stream/a604578400platuoft#page/n261/mode/1up (1888:19-20)]
}}</onlyinclude>

{{:Plato/Republic|transcludesection=1.345e-347a}}
<onlyinclude>{{#ifeq:{{{transcludesection|1.345e-347a}}}|1.345e-347a|
====Jowett====
: [..] Then why in the case of lesser offices do men never take them willingly without payment, unless under the idea that they govern for the advantage not of themselves but of others ? [346a] Let me ask you a question: Are not the several arts different, by reason of their each having a separate function ? And, my dear illustrious friend, do say what you think, that we may make a little progress.
: Yes, that is the difference, he replied.  
: And each art gives us a particular good and not merely a general one--medicine, for example, gives us health; navigation, safety at sea, and so on ? 
: Yes, he said. 
: And the art of payment has the special function of giving pay : but we do not confuse this with other arts, any more than the art of the pilot is to be confused with the art of medicine, because the health of the pilot may be improved by a sea voyage. You would not be inclined to say, would you, that navigation is the art of medicine, at least if we are to adopt your exact use of language ? 
: Certainly not. 
: Or because a man is in good health when he receives pay you would not say that the art of payment is medicine ? 
: I should not. 
: Nor would you say that medicine is the art of receiving pay because a man takes fees when he is engaged in healing ? 
: Certainly not. 
: And we have admitted, I said, that the good of each art is specially confined to the art ? 
: Yes. 
: Then, if there be any good which all artists have in common, that is to be attributed to something of which they all have the common use ? 
: True, he replied. 
: And when the artist is benefited by receiving pay the advantage is gained by an additional use of the art of pay, which is not the art professed by him ? 
: He gave a reluctant assent to this. 
: Then the pay is not derived by the several artists from their respective arts. But the truth is, that while the art of medicine gives health, and the art of the builder builds a house, another art attends them which is the art of pay. The various arts may be doing their own business and benefiting that over which they preside, but would the artist receive any benefit from his art unless he were paid as well ? 
: I suppose not. 
: But does he therefore confer no benefit when he works for nothing ? 
: Certainly, he confers a benefit. 
: Then now, Thrasymachus, there is no longer any doubt that neither arts nor governments provide for their own interests; but, as we were before saying, they rule and provide for the interests of their subjects who are the weaker and not the stronger--to their good they attend and not to the good of the superior. And this is the reason, my dear Thrasymachus, why, as I was just now saying, no one is willing to govern; because no one likes to take in hand the reformation of evils which are not his concern without [347] remuneration. For, in the execution of his work, and in giving his orders to another, the true artist does not regard his own interest, but always that of his subjects; and therefore in order that rulers may be willing to rule, they must be paid in one of three modes of payment, money, or honour, or a penalty for refusing. [..] [http://archive.org/stream/a604578400platuoft#page/n265/mode/1up (1888:23-25)]
}}</onlyinclude>

{{:Plato/Republic|transcludesection=7.533a-c}}
<onlyinclude>{{#ifeq:{{{transcludesection|7.533a-c}}}|7.533a-c|
====Jowett====
: [..] And assuredly no one will argue [533b] that there is any other method of comprehending [other than dialectic] by any regular process all true existence or of ascertaining what each thing is in its own nature; for the arts in general are concerned with the desires or opinions of men, or are cultivated with a view to production and construction, or for the preservation of such productions and constructions; and as to the mathematical sciences which, as we were saying, have some apprehension of true being--geometry and the like--[533c] they only dream about being, but never can they behold the waking reality so long as they leave the hypotheses which they use unexamined, and are unable to give an account of them. For when a man knows not his own first principle, and when the conclusion and intermediate steps are also constructed out of he knows not what, how can he imagine that such a fabric of convention can ever become science ? 
: Impossible, he said. [..] [http://archive.org/stream/a604578400platuoft#page/n479/mode/1up (1888:236-7)]
}}</onlyinclude>

{{:Plato/Republic|transcludesection=bottom}}