laches-第1部分

快捷操作: 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! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！











Laches







by　Plato







Translated　by　Benjamin　Jowett

















INTRODUCTION。







Lysimachus；　the　son　of　Aristides　the　Just；　and　Melesias；　the　son　of　the



elder　Thucydides；　two　aged　men　who　live　together；　are　desirous　of　educating



their　sons　in　the　best　manner。　　Their　own　education；　as　often　happens　with



the　sons　of　great　men；　has　been　neglected；　and　they　are　resolved　that　their



children　shall　have　more　care　taken　of　them；　than　they　received　themselves



at　the　hands　of　their　fathers。







At　their　request；　Nicias　and　Laches　have　accompanied　them　to　see　a　man



named　Stesilaus　fighting　in　heavy　armour。　　The　two　fathers　ask　the　two



generals　what　they　think　of　this　exhibition；　and　whether　they　would　advise



that　their　sons　should　acquire　the　accomplishment。　　Nicias　and　Laches　are



quite　willing　to　give　their　opinion；　but　they　suggest　that　Socrates　should



be　invited　to　take　part　in　the　consultation。　　He　is　a　stranger　to



Lysimachus；　but　is　afterwards　recognised　as　the　son　of　his　old　friend



Sophroniscus；　with　whom　he　never　had　a　difference　to　the　hour　of　his　death。



Socrates　is　also　known　to　Nicias；　to　whom　he　had　introduced　the　excellent



Damon；　musician　and　sophist；　as　a　tutor　for　his　son；　and　to　Laches；　who　had



witnessed　his　heroic　behaviour　at　the　battle　of　Delium　（compare　Symp。）。







Socrates；　as　he　is　younger　than　either　Nicias　or　Laches；　prefers　to　wait



until　they　have　delivered　their　opinions；　which　they　give　in　a



characteristic　manner。　　Nicias；　the　tactician；　is　very　much　in　favour　of



the　new　art；　which　he　describes　as　the　gymnastics　of　waruseful　when　the



ranks　are　formed；　and　still　more　useful　when　they　are　broken；　creating　a



general　interest　in　military　studies；　and　greatly　adding　to　the　appearance



of　the　soldier　in　the　field。　　Laches；　the　blunt　warrior；　is　of　opinion　that



such　an　art　is　not　knowledge；　and　cannot　be　of　any　value；　because　the



Lacedaemonians；　those　great　masters　of　arms；　neglect　it。　　His　own



experience　in　actual　service　has　taught　him　that　these　pretenders　are



useless　and　ridiculous。　　This　man　Stesilaus　has　been　seen　by　him　on　board



ship　making　a　very　sorry　exhibition　of　himself。　　The　possession　of　the　art



will　make　the　coward　rash；　and　subject　the　courageous；　if　he　chance　to　make



a　slip；　to　invidious　remarks。　　And　now　let　Socrates　be　taken　into　counsel。



As　they　differ　he　must　decide。







Socrates　would　rather　not　decide　the　question　by　a　plurality　of　votes：　　in



such　a　serious　matter　as　the　education　of　a　friend's　children；　he　would



consult　the　one　skilled　person　who　has　had　masters；　and　has　works　to　show



as　evidences　of　his　skill。　　This　is　not　himself；　for　he　has　never　been　able



to　pay　the　sophists　for　instructing　him；　and　has　never　had　the　wit　to　do　or



discover　anything。　　But　Nicias　and　Laches　are　older　and　richer　than　he　is：　



they　have　had　teachers；　and　perhaps　have　made　discoveries；　and　he　would



have　trusted　them　entirely；　if　they　had　not　been　diametrically　opposed。







Lysimachus　here　proposes　to　resign　the　argument　into　the　hands　of　the



younger　part　of　the　company；　as　he　is　old；　and　has　a　bad　memory。　　He



earnestly　requests　Socrates　to　remain；in　this　showing；　as　Nicias　says；



how　little　he　knows　the　man；　who　will　certainly　not　go　away　until　he　has



cross…examined　the　company　about　their　past　lives。　　Nicias　has　often



submitted　to　this　process；　and　Laches　is　quite　willing　to　learn　from



Socrates；　because　his　actions；　in　the　true　Dorian　mode；　correspond　to　his



words。







Socrates　proceeds：　　We　might　ask　who　are　our　teachers？　　But　a　better　and



more　thorough　way　of　examining　the　question　will　be　to　ask；　'What　is



Virtue？'or　rather；　to　restrict　the　enquiry　to　that　part　of　virtue　which



is　concerned　with　the　use　of　weapons'What　is　Courage？'　　Laches　thinks



that　he　knows　this：　　（1）　'He　is　courageous　who　remains　at　his　post。'　　But



some　nations　fight　flying；　after　the　manner　of　Aeneas　in　Homer；　or　as　the



heavy…armed　Spartans　also　did　at　the　battle　of　Plataea。　　（2）　Socrates　wants



a　more　general　definition；　not　only　of　military　courage；　but　of　courage　of



all　sorts；　tried　both　amid　pleasures　and　pains。　　Laches　replies　that　this



universal　courage　is　endurance。　　But　courage　is　a　good　thing；　and　mere



endurance　may　be　hurtful　and　injurious。　　Therefore　（3）　the　element　of



intelligence　must　be　added。　　But　then　again　unintelligent　endurance　may



often　be　more　courageous　than　the　intelligent；　the　bad　than　the　good。　　How



is　this　contradiction　to　be　solved？　　Socrates　and　Laches　are　not　set　'to



the　Dorian　mode'　of　words　and　actions；　for　their　words　are　all　confusion；



although　their　actions　are　courageous。　　Still　they　must　'endure'　in　an



argument　about　endurance。　　Laches　is　very　willing；　and　is　quite　sure　that



he　knows　what　courage　is；　if　he　could　only　tell。







Nicias　is　now　appealed　to；　and　in　reply　he　offers　a　definition　which　he　has



heard　from　Socrates　himself；　to　the　effect　that　（1）　'Courage　is



intelligence。'　　Laches　derides　this；　and　Socrates　enquires；　'What　sort　of



intelligence？'　to　which　Nicias　replies；　'Intelligence　of　things　terrible。'　



'But　every　man　knows　the　things　to　be　dreaded　in　his　own　art。'　　'No　they　do



not。　　They　may　predict　results；　but　cannot　tell　whether　they　are　really



terrible；　only　the　courageous　man　can　tell　that。'　　Laches　draws　the



inference　that　the　courageous　man　is　either　a　soothsayer　or　a　god。







Again；　（2）　in　Nicias'　way　of　speaking；　the　term　'courageous'　must　be　denied



to　animals　or　children；　because　they　do　not　know　the　danger。　　Against　this



inversion　of　the　ordinary　use　of　language　Laches　reclaims；　but　is　in　some



degree　mollified　by　a　compliment　to　his　own　courage。　　Still；　he　does　not



like　to　see　an　Athenian　statesman　and　general　descending　to　sophistries　of



this　sort。　　Socrates　resumes　the　argument。　　Courage　has　been　defined　to　be



intelligence　or　knowledge　of　the　terrible；　and　courage　is　not　all　virtue；



but　only　one　of　the　virtues。　　The　terrible　is　in　the　future；　and　therefore



the　knowledge　of　the　terrible　is　a　knowledge　of　the　future。　　But　there　can



be　no　knowledge　of　future　good　or　evil　separated　from　a　knowledge　of　the



good　and　evil　of　the　past　or　present；　that　is　to　say；　of　all　good　and　evil。



Courage；　therefore；　is　the　knowledge　of　good　and　evil　generally。　　But　he



who　has　the　knowledge　of　good　and　evil　generally；　must　not　only　have



courage；　but　also　temperance；　justice；　and　every　other　virtue。　　Thus；　a



single　virtue　would　be　the　same　as　all　virtues　（compare　Protagoras）。　　And



after　all　the　two　generals；　and　Socrates；　the　hero　of　Delium；　are　still　in



ignorance　of　the　nature　of　courage。　　They　must　go　to　school　again；　boys；



old　men　and　all。







Some　points　of　resemblance；　and　some　points　of　difference；　appear　in　the



Laches　when　compared　with　the　Charmides　and　Lysis。　　There　is　less　of



poetical　and　simple　beauty；　and　more　of　dramatic　interest　and　power。　　They



are　richer　in　the　externals　of　the　scene；　the　Laches　has　more　play　and



development　of　character。　　In　the　Lysis　and　Charmides　the　youths　are　the



central　figures；　and　frequent　allusions　are　made　to　the　place　of　meeting；



which　is　a　palaestra。　　Here　the　place　of　meeting；　which　is　also　a



palaestra；　is　quite　forgotten；　and　the　boys　play　a　subordinate　part。　　The



seance　is　of　old　and　elder　men；　of　whom　Socrates　is　the　youngest。







First　is　the　aged　Lysimachus；　who　may　be　compared　with　Cephalus　in　the



Republic；　and；　like　him；　withdraws　from　the　argument。　　Melesias；　who　is



only　his　shadow；　also　subsides　into　silence。　　Both　of　them；　by　their　own



confession；　have　been　ill…educated；　as　is　further　shown　by　the　circumstance



that　Lysimachus；　the　friend　of　Sophroniscus；　has　never　heard　of　the　fame　of



Socrates；　his　son；　they　belong　to　different　circles。　　In　the　Meno　their



want　of　education　in　all　but　the　arts　of　riding　and　wrestling　is　adduced　as



a　proof　that　virtue　cannot　be　taught。　　The　recognition　of　Socrates　by



Lysimachus　is　extremely　graceful；　and　his　military　exploits　naturally



connect　him　with　the　two　generals；　of　whom　one　has　witnessed　them。　　The



characters　of　Nicias　and　Laches　are　indicated　by　their　opinions　on　the



exhibition　of　the　man　fighting　in　heavy　armour。　　The　more　enlightened



Nicias　is　quite　ready　to　accept　the　new　art；　which　Laches　treats　with



ridicule；　seeming　to　think　that　this；　or　any　other　military　question；　may



be　settled　by　asking；　'What　do　the　Lacedaemonians　say？'　　The　one　is　the



thoughtful　general；　willing　to　avail　himself　of　any　discovery　in　the　art　of



war　（Aristoph。　Aves）；　the　other　is　the　practical　man；　who　relies　on　his　own



experience；　and　is　the　enemy　of　innovation；　he　can　act　but　cannot　speak；



and　is　apt　to　lose　his　temper。　　It　is　to　be　noted　that　one　of　them　is



supposed　to　be　a　hearer　of　Socrates；　the　other　is　only　acquainted　with　his



actions。　　Laches　is　the　admirer　of　the　Dorian　mode；　and　into　his　mouth　the



remark　is　put　that　there　are　some　persons　who；　having　never　been　taught；



are　better　than　those　who　have。　　Like　a　novice　in　the　art　of　disputation；



he　is　delighted　with　the　hits　of　Socrates；　and　is　disposed　to　be　angry　with



the　refinements　of　Nicias。







In　the　discussion　of　the　main　thesis　of　the　Dialogue'What　is　Courage？'



the　antagonism　of　the　two　characters　is　still　more　clearly　brought　out；　and



in　this；　as　in　the　preliminary　question；　the　truth　is　parted　between　them。



Gradually；　and　not　without　difficulty；　Laches　is　made　to　pass　on　from　the