The Lovers

"And if, being an ox, he is ignorant of the wicked and the good, is he not also ignorant of what kind of creature he is?" "Yes," he said. "Is it not thus also if he were a dog?" He agreed. "What, then, when a man is ignorant of good and wicked men? Does he not also remain ignorant of himself, whether he is good or wicked, since he himself is a man?" He conceded. "Is it sophrosyne temperance/moderation to be ignorant of oneself, or is it not?" "It is not sophrosyne." "Is to know oneself, therefore, sophrosyne?" "I agree," he said. "This, then, as it seems, is what the inscription at Delphi exhorts: to practice sophrosyne and dikaiosyne justice?" "It seems so." "And by this same art do we know how to discipline correctly?" "I agree." "Therefore, that by which we know how to discipline correctly is dikaiosyne; but that by which we distinguish both oneself and another is sophrosyne?" "It seems so," he said. "Are dikaiosyne and sophrosyne, therefore, the same?" "It appears so." "And indeed, in this way cities are governed well when those who act unjustly pay the penalty." "You speak the truth," he said. "This, then, is politike the art of politics/statesmanship." He agreed. "What then, when one man governs a city correctly—is not the name for this person a tyrant and a king?" "I agree." "Does he not govern by the royal and tyrannical art?" "So it is." "Are these, therefore, the same arts as those?" "They appear so." "What then, when one man governs a household correctly—what is the name for this person, if not a manager and master?" "Yes." "Does he, then, govern the household well with dikaiosyne, or some other art?" "With dikaiosyne." "It is the same, then, as it seems: king, tyrant, statesman, household manager, master, temperate, and just. And there is one art: royal, tyrannical, political, masterful, economic, dikaiosyne, and sophrosyne." "It appears so."