Plato, Republic, ed. John Burnet, 7.517

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

← Previous Next →

[517]
τὰς δὲ δὴ σκιὰς ἐκείνας πάλιν εἰ δέοι αὐτὸν γνωματεύοντα διαμιλλᾶσθαι τοῖς ἀεὶ δεσμώταις ἐκείνοις, ἐν ᾧ ἀμβλυώττει, 517a πρὶν καταστῆναι τὰ ὄμματα, οὗτος δʼ ὁ χρόνος μὴ πάνυ ὀλίγος εἴη τῆς συνηθείας, ἆρʼ οὐ γέλωτʼ ἂν παράσχοι, καὶ λέγοιτο ἂν περὶ αὐτοῦ ὡς ἀναβὰς ἄνω διεφθαρμένος ἥκει τὰ ὄμματα, καὶ ὅτι οὐκ ἄξιον οὐδὲ πειρᾶσθαι ἄνω ἰέναι; καὶ τὸν ἐπιχειροῦντα λύειν τε καὶ ἀνάγειν, εἴ πως ἐν ταῖς χερσὶ δύναιντο λαβεῖν καὶ ἀποκτείνειν, ἀποκτεινύναι ἄν;
σφόδρα γʼ, ἔφη.
ταύτην τοίνυν, ἦν δʼ ἐγώ, τὴν εἰκόνα, ὦ φίλε Γλαύκων, 517b προσαπτέον ἅπασαν τοῖς ἔμπροσθεν λεγομένοις, τὴν μὲν διʼ ὄψεως φαινομένην ἕδραν τῇ τοῦ δεσμωτηρίου οἰκήσει ἀφομοιοῦντα, τὸ δὲ τοῦ πυρὸς ἐν αὐτῇ φῶς τῇ τοῦ ἡλίου δυνάμει· τὴν δὲ ἄνω ἀνάβασιν καὶ θέαν τῶν ἄνω τὴν εἰς τὸν νοητὸν τόπον τῆς ψυχῆς ἄνοδον τιθεὶς οὐχ ἁμαρτήσῃ τῆς γʼ ἐμῆς ἐλπίδος, ἐπειδὴ ταύτης ἐπιθυμεῖς ἀκούειν. θεὸς δέ που οἶδεν εἰ ἀληθὴς οὖσα τυγχάνει. τὰ δʼ οὖν ἐμοὶ φαινόμενα οὕτω φαίνεται, ἐν τῷ γνωστῷ τελευταία ἡ τοῦ 517c ἀγαθοῦ ἰδέα καὶ μόγις ὁρᾶσθαι, ὀφθεῖσα δὲ συλλογιστέα εἶναι ὡς ἄρα πᾶσι πάντων αὕτη ὀρθῶν τε καὶ καλῶν αἰτία, ἔν τε ὁρατῷ φῶς καὶ τὸν τούτου κύριον τεκοῦσα, ἔν τε νοητῷ αὐτὴ κυρία ἀλήθειαν καὶ νοῦν παρασχομένη, καὶ ὅτι δεῖ ταύτην ἰδεῖν τὸν μέλλοντα ἐμφρόνως πράξειν ἢ ἰδίᾳ ἢ δημοσίᾳ.
συνοίομαι, ἔφη, καὶ ἐγώ, ὅν γε δὴ τρόπον δύναμαι.
ἴθι τοίνυν, ἦν δʼ ἐγώ, καὶ τόδε συνοιήθητι καὶ μὴ θαυμάσῃς ὅτι οἱ ἐνταῦθα ἐλθόντες οὐκ ἐθέλουσιν τὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων πράττειν, ἀλλʼ ἄνω ἀεὶ ἐπείγονται αὐτῶν αἱ ψυχαὶ διατρίβειν· 517d εἰκὸς γάρ που οὕτως, εἴπερ αὖ κατὰ τὴν προειρημένην εἰκόνα τοῦτʼ ἔχει.
εἰκὸς μέντοι, ἔφη.
τί δέ; τόδε οἴει τι θαυμαστόν, εἰ ἀπὸ θείων, ἦν δʼ ἐγώ, θεωριῶν ἐπὶ τὰ ἀνθρώπειά τις ἐλθὼν κακὰ ἀσχημονεῖ τε καὶ φαίνεται σφόδρα γελοῖος ἔτι ἀμβλυώττων καὶ πρὶν ἱκανῶς συνήθης γενέσθαι τῷ παρόντι σκότῳ ἀναγκαζόμενος ἐν δικαστηρίοις ἢ ἄλλοθί που ἀγωνίζεσθαι περὶ τῶν τοῦ δικαίου σκιῶν ἢ ἀγαλμάτων ὧν αἱ σκιαί, καὶ διαμιλλᾶσθαι 517e περὶ τούτου, ὅπῃ ποτὲ ὑπολαμβάνεται ταῦτα ὑπὸ τῶν αὐτὴν δικαιοσύνην μὴ πώποτε ἰδόντων;
οὐδʼ ὁπωστιοῦν θαυμαστόν, ἔφη.

Republic. Plato. ed. John Burnet. Oxford. 1905.

Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.

Funding provided by The Annenberg CPB/Project.

Current edition Perseus

Πολιτεία (Greek) (Platonis Opera Tomus IV: Tetralogia VIII. Burnet, John, editor. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1905.)

Translations (1)

Republic Perseus (Plato in Twelve Volumes, Vol. 5-6. Shorey, Paul, translator. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1935-37 (printing).) — 7.517 focus

[517] “Now if he should be required to contend with these perpetual prisoners 517a in evaluating these shadows while his vision was still dim and before his eyes were accustomed to the dark—and this time required for habituation would not be very short—would he not provoke laughter,¹ and would it not be said of him that he had returned from his journey aloft with his eyes ruined and that it was not worth while even to attempt the ascent? And if it were possible to lay hands on and to kill the man who tried to release them and lead them up, would they not kill him²?” “They certainly would,” he said.
“This image then, dear Glaucon, we must apply as a whole to all that has been said, 517b likening the region revealed through sight to the habitation of the prison, and the light of the fire in it to the power of the sun. And if you assume that the ascent and the contemplation of the things above is the soul’s ascension to the intelligible region,³ you will not miss my surmise, since that is what you desire to hear. But God knows⁴ whether it is true. But, at any rate, my dream as it appears to me is that in the region of the known the last thing to be seen and hardly seen is the idea of good, 517c and that when seen it must needs point us to the conclusion that this is indeed the cause for all things of all that is right and beautiful, giving birth⁵ in the visible world to light, and the author of light and itself in the intelligible world being the authentic source of truth and reason, and that anyone who is to act wisely⁶ in private or public must have caught sight of this.” “I concur,” he said, “so far as I am able.” “Come then,” I said, “and join me in this further thought, and do not be surprised that those who have attained to this height are not willing⁷ to occupy themselves with the affairs of men, but their souls ever feel the upward urge and 517d the yearning for that sojourn above. For this, I take it, is likely if in this point too the likeness of our image holds” “Yes, it is likely.” “And again, do you think it at all strange,” said I, “if a man returning from divine contemplations to the petty miseries⁸ of men cuts a sorry figure⁹ and appears most ridiculous, if, while still blinking through the gloom, and before he has become sufficiently accustomed to the environing darkness, he is compelled in courtrooms¹⁰ or elsewhere to contend about the shadows of justice or the images¹¹ that cast the shadows and to wrangle in debate 517e about the notions of these things in the minds of those who have never seen justice itself?” “It would be by no men strange,” he said.

Commentary

Commentary on Plato, Republic (Plato. The Republic, Vol 1-2. Adam, James, editor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1902-1903.) focus

οὗτος δ’ ὁ χρόνος κτλ. is still under the influence of εἰ. With ἆρ’ οὐ γέλωτ’ ἂν κτλ. cf. Phaedr. 249 D ἐξιστάμενος δὲ τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων σπουδασμάτων, καὶ πρὸς τῷ θείῳ γιγνόμενος, νουθετεῖται μὲν ὑπὸ τῶν πολλῶν ὡς παρακινῶν, ἐνθουσιάζων δὲ λέληθε τοὺς πολλούς, Theaet. 172 C , 174 C—175 B, Soph. 216 D and infra 517 D.

οὐκ ἄξιον κτλ. The prisoners are almost relieved to find themselves able to suppress their higher promptings and sink back into indolence and self-complacency.

καὶ τὸν ἐπιχειροῦντα κτλ. is a mani fest and touching allusion to the death of Socrates, whose fate was the most conspicuous example in Greek history of the principle here laid down. See Zeller^{4} II 1, pp. 223—227 and cf. VI 496 C, D notes Read in the light of another and even more momentous sacrifice, the sentence assumes a kind of prophetical import, like the famous passage about the λόγος θεῖος in the Phaedo (85 C, D). See Geddes's Phaedo of Plato pp. 280—283. The text is difficult to determine. If we retain λαβεῖν καὶ ἀποκτείνειν, ἀποκτιννύναι ἄν, we must either a regard ἆρ’ οὐ— λέγοιτ’ ἄν as equivalent to ἆρ’ οὐκ οἴει γέλωτ’ ἂν αὐτὸν παρασχεῖν καὶ λέγεσθαι ἄν, and take λέγεσθαι ἄν as equivalent to ἐκείνους ἂν εἰπεῖν, carrying on ἐκείνους as subject to ἀποκτιννύναι ἄν (Schneider), or b supply οὐκ οἴει, although these words do not occur after 516 C (J. and C.). The second solution is preferable to the first, but either is a tour de force. No satisfactory explanation of the infinitive ἀποκτιννύναι ἄν appears to be possible, and the immediate juxtaposition of the two forms of the infinitive is also in itself suspicious. A few inferior MSS read ἀποκτενεῖν for the ἀποκτείνειν and αὖ for the ἄν of A: but otherwise there is no important variant. The emendations proposed are (1) λαβεῖν, κἂν ἀποκτείνειαν (Ast), (2) λαβεῖν, καὶ ἀποκτείνοιεν ἄν (Stallbaum), (3) λαβεῖν, κἂν ἀποκτιννύοιεν (Cobet), (4) λαβεῖν, καὶ ἀποκτείνειαν ἄν (Baiter). The correction in the text appears to me not only easier, but more in harmony with Plato's fulness of expression. I suppose that the error arose thus. A scribe accidentally omitted ἀποκτιννύναι, and the infinitive was wrongly replaced after, instead of before, ἀποκτείνειαν. This would give λαβεῖν καὶ ἀποκτείνειαν, ἀποκτιννύναι ἄν, from which the change is inevitable to the text of A.

ταύτην κτλ. If we interpret the lower section of the line as ὁρατόν and nothing more, the following comparisons are involved:—(1) Fire=Sun: (2) Shadows of ἀνδριάντες and other σκευαστά cast by Fire = Shadows etc. of φυτευτά and σκευαστά cast by the Sun: (3) ἀνδριάντες and other σκευαστά in the Cave= φυτευτά and σκευαστά in the ὁρατόν: (4) the ascent from the Cave into the ὁρατόν=the ascent from the ὁρατόν into the νοητόν. The second comparison is of little or no importance, for the ἀπαίδευτος, of whose condition the Cave is an allegory, does not contemplate exclusively or even principally natural shadows of φυτευτά and σκευαστά (cf. VI 511 E note). Nor do the other comparisons exhaust the significance of the Cave as an allegory of ἀπαιδευσία. In order fully to apprehend its meaning, we must regard the lower section of the line as δοξαστόν in the sense of V 475 E ff. Plato himself does so: see VI 510 A note The shadows and originals within the cave will then symbolise δόξαι which are respectively twice and once removed from the truth which they seek to portray (see on 517 D), and the ascent from the Cave into the ὁρατόν will represent the soul's ascent from the δοξαστόν into the νοητόν—from the πολλά (in the widest sense) to the ἕν. Cf. 514 B and 532 B, C notes

ἐλπίδος : ‘surmise’: cf. II 383 B note The diffidence of tone recals VI 506 E: cf. infr. 523 A.

φαίνεται . For the construction cf. I 334 B note

τελευταία as well as μόγις should be taken predicatively with ὁρᾶσθαι. The sentiment is as in VI 505 A ( ὅτι—ἴσμεν), where see note.

τεκοῦσα κτλ. τεκοῦσα reminds us that the Sun is the ἔκγονος of the Good (VI 506 E). On ἀλήθειαν καὶ νοῦν see VI 508 D note ὅτι δεῖ depends on φαίνεται, not (as D. and V. translate) on συλλογιστέα. Cf. VI 505 A, 506 A notes Plato's guardians are not to rest satisfied with the εἰκών or ἔκγονος of the Good; they must see the Good itself, and infer (not by intuition, but) by means of reasoning ( συλλογιστέα) that it is the cause of all. See the notes on VI 511 B ( αὐτὸς ὁ λόγος and τοῦ ἀνυποθέτου).

ἀσχημονεῖ κτλ. Cf. Theaet. 174 B , C ὅταν ἐν δικαστηρίῳ ἤ που ἄλλοθι ἀναγκασθῇ περὶ τῶν παρὰ πόδας—διαλέγεσθαι, γέλωτα παρέχει—ἡ ἀσχημοσύνη δεινὴ—γελοῖος φαίνεται. The whole of the description of the φιλόσοφος in the Theaetetus should be carefully compared with this passage.

ἔτι ἀμβλυώττων is logically subordinate to ἀναγκαζόμενος.

τῶν τοῦ δικαίου κτλ. treats the Cave as an allegory of δοξαστά (see on VI 510 A, VII 517 A). The expression ‘shadows of the just’ is vague (cf. σκιαμαχούντων in 520 C), and ἢ ἀγαλμάτων ὧν αἱ σκιαί introduces more precision. We may regard ἀγαλμάτων as symbolising the enacted laws of a city, and their shadows as the “representation or misrepresentation of the existing laws (themselves only ‘images’ of justice) by a rhetorician or pleader” (Nettleship Hell. p. 141 note 1). Compare (with Shorey Idea of Good etc. p. 287) Soph. 234 C and Pol. 303 C .

ὅπῃ ποτὲ ‐‐ ἰδόντων . For the real point at issue is not the law, but the judges' interpretation thereof. Plato is doubtless thinking of Socrates and his judges throughout the whole of this passage.

Plato Republic 7.517

ed. John Burnet

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

Current edition Perseus

Commentary

Stable identifiers