The Republic, Plato - Book 1 Part 1 (Audiobook)

the Republic by Plato translated by Benjamin Jowett this is a librivox recording all librivox recordings are in the public domain for more information or to volunteer please visit librivox.org read by Bob Neufeld persons of the dialogue Socrates who is the narrator Glaucon Ida Montes Paula Marcus Calais for Symmachus and plight of Fon and others who are moved auditors the scene is laid in the house of carefulness at the Piraeus and the whole dialogue is narrated by Socrates the day after it actually took place to Timaeus hermocrates krytus and a nameless person who are introduced in the Timaeus book one I went down yesterday to the Piraeus with Glock on the son of Ariston that I might offer up my prayers to the goddess and also because I wanted to see in what manner they would celebrate the festival which was a new thing I was delighted with a procession of the inhabitants but that of the Thracians was equally if not more beautiful when we had finished our prayers and viewed the spectacle we turned in the direction of the city and at that instant Paula Marcus the son of catalyst chanced to catch sight of us from a distance as we were starting on our way home and told his servant to run and bid us wait for him the servant took hold of me by the cloak behind and said Paula Marcus desires you to wait I turned around and asked him where his master was there he is said the youth coming after you if you will only wait certainly we will said Glaucon and in a few minutes Paula Marcus appeared and with him at a montes glaucon's brother Nicholas the son of Nikes and several others who had been at the procession Paula Marcus said to me I perceive Socrates that you and your companion are already on your way to the city you are not far wrong I said but do you see he rejoined how many we are of course and are you stronger than all these four if not he will have to remain where you are may there not be an alternative I said that we may persuade you to let us go but can you persuade us if we refuse to listen to you he said certainly not replied Glaucon then we are not going to listen of that you may be assured now - montes added has no place told you of a torch race on horseback in honor of the goddess which will take place in the evening with horses I replied that is a novelty will horsemen carry torches and pass them one to another during the race yes said polemarchus and not only so but a festival will be celebrated at night which you certainly ought to see let us rise soon after supper and see this festival there will be a gathering of young men and we will have a good talk stay then and do not be perverse Glaucon said I suppose since you insist that we must very good I replied accordingly we went with para Marcos to his house and there we found his brothers Lyceus and epidemis and with them trousseau MCUs the cows Adomian commanded ease the pion and clyde afar the son of Ariston amis there too was careful Asst the father of Paula Marcus whom I had not seen for a long time and I thought him very much aged he was seated on a cushioned chair and had a garland on his head for he had been sacrificing in the court and there were some other chairs in the room arranged in a semi-circle upon which we sat down by him he saluted me eagerly and then he said you don't come to see me Socrates as often as you ought if I were still able to go and see you I would not ask you to come to me but at my age I can hardly get to the city and therefore you should come oftener to the Piraeus for let me tell you that the more the pleasures of the body fade away the greater to me is the pleasure and charm of conversation do not then deny my request but make our house your resorts and keep company with these young men we are old friends and you will be quite at home with I replied there is nothing which for my part I like better catalyst than conversing with aged men but I regard them as travellers who have gone on the journey which I too may have to go and of whom I ought to inquire whether the way is smooth and easy or rugged and difficult and this is a question which I should like to ask of you who have arrived at that time which the poet's call the threshold of old age his life harder towards the end or what report do you give of it I will tell you Socrates he said what my own feeling is men of my age flock together we are birds of a feather as the old proverb says and at our meetings the tale of my acquaintance commonly is I cannot eat I cannot drink the pleasures of youth and love are fled away there was a good time once but now that is gone and life is no longer life some complain of the slights which are put upon them by relations and they will tell you sadly of how many evils their old age is the cause but to me Socrates these complainers seem to blame that which is not really in fault for if old age were the cause I to being old and every other old man would have felt as they do but this is not by own experience nor that of others whom I have known how well I remember the aged poet Sophocles when in answer to the question how does love suit with age Sophocles are you still the man you were peace he replied most gladly have I escaped the thing of which you speak now I feel as if I had escaped from a mad and furious master his words have often occurred to my mind since and they seem as good to me now as at the time when he uttered them for certainly old age has a great sense of calm and freedom when the passions relax their hold then as Sophocles says we are freed from the grasp of one mad master only but of many the truth is Socrates that these regrets and also the complaints about relations are to be attributed to the same cause which is not old age but men's characters and tempers for he who is of a calm and happy nature will hardly feel the pressure of age but to him who is of that opposite disposition youth and age are equally a burden I listened in admiration and wanting to draw him out that he might go on desk a phallus I said but I rather suspect that people in general are not convinced by you when you speak thus they think that old age sits lightly upon you not because of your happy disposition but because you are rich and wealth is well known to be a great comforter you all right he replied they are not convinced and there is something in what they say not however so much as they imagine I might answer them as Themistocles answered the serife e'en who was abusing him and saying that he was famous not for his own merits but because he was an athenian if you had been a native of my country or i of yours neither of us would have been famous and to those who are not rich and are impatient of old age the same reply may be made for to the good poor man the old age cannot be a light burden nor can a bad rich man ever have peace with himself may I ask calles whether your fortune was for the most part inherited or acquired by you acquired Socrates do you want to know how much I acquired in the art of making money I have been midway between my father and grandfather for my grandfather whose name I bear doubled and troubled the value of his patrimony that which he inherited being much what I possess now but my fatherless aureus reduced the property below what it is at present and I shall be satisfied if I leave to the my son's not less but a little more than I received what was why I asked you the question I replied because I see that you are indifferent about money which is a characteristic rather of those who have inherited their fortunes then of those who have acquired them the makers of fortunes have a second love of money as a creation of their own resembling the affection of authors for their own poems or of parents for their children besides that natural love of it for the sake of use and profit which is common to them and old men and hence they are very bad company for they can talk about nothing but the praises of wealth and it's true he said yes that is very true but may I ask you another question what do you consider to be the greatest blessing which you have reaped from your wealth one he said of which I could not expect easily to convince others for let me tell you Socrates that when a man thinks himself to be near death fears and cares into into his mind which he never had before the tales of a world below and the punishment which is exactly thereof deeds done here were once a laughing matter to him but now he is tormented with the thought that they may be true either from the weakness of age or because he is now drawing near to that other place he has a clearer view of these things suspicions and alarms crowd thickly upon him and he begins to reflect and consider what bronze he has done to others and when he finds that the sum of his transgressions is great he will many a time like a child start up in his sleep for fear and he is filled with dark forebodings but to him who is conscious of no sin sweet hope as Pindar charmingly says is the kind nurse of his age hope he says cherishes the soul of him who lives in justice and holiness and is the nurse of his age and the companion of his journey Hope which is mightiest to sway the restless soul of how admirable are his words and the great blessing of riches I do not say to every man but to a good man is that he has had no occasion to deceive or to defraud others either intentionally or unintentionally than when he departs to the world below he is not in any apprehension about offerings due to the gods or debts which he owes to men now to this peace of mind the possession of wealth greatly contributes and therefore I say that setting one thing against another of the many advantages which wealth has to give to a man of sense this is in my opinion the greatest well said catalyst I replied but as concerning justice what is it to speak the truth and to pay your debts no more than this and even to this are there not exceptions suppose that a friend went in his right mind has deposited arms with me and he asks for them when he is not in his right mind ought I to give them back to him no one would say that I ought or that I should be right in doing so any more than they would say that I are always to speak the truth to one who was in his condition you are quite right he replied but then I said speaking the truth and paying your debts is not a correct definition of justice quite correct Socrates if some an ADIZ is to be believed said polemarchus interposing I fear said carefulness that I must go now for I have to look after the sacrifices and I hand over the argument to Paulo Marcos and the company is not Paulo Marcos your heir I said to be sure he answered and went away laughing to the sacrifices tell me then Oh thou heir of the arguments what did semana d say and according to you truly say about justice he said that the repayment of a debt is just and in saying so he appears to me to be right I should be sorry to doubt the word of such a wise and inspired me but his meaning though probably clear to you is the reverse of clear to me for he certainly does not mean as we were just now saying that I ought to return a deposit of arms or of anything else to one who asks for it's when he is not in his right senses and yet a deposit cannot be denied to be a death true then when the person who asks me is not in his right mind I am by no means to make the return certainly not when Simona D said that the repayment of a debt was justice he did not mean to include that case or certainly not for he thinks that a friend are always to do good to a friend and never evil you mean that the return of a deposit of gold which is to the injury of the receiver if the two parties are friends is not the repayment of a debt that is what you would imagine him to say yes and our enemies also to receive what we owe to them to be sure they said they are to receive what we owe them and an enemy as I take it owes to an enemy that which is due or proper to him that is to say evil semana DS then after the manner of poets would seem to have spoken darkly of the nature of justice for he really meant to say that justice is the giving to each man what is profits of him and this he termed a debt that must have been his meaning he said by heaven I replied and if we asked him what do or proper thing is given by medicine and to whom what answer do you think that he would make to us he would surely reply that medicine gives drugs and meat and drink to human bodies and what do our proper thing is given by cookery and to what seasoning to food and what is that which justice gives and to whom if Socrates we are to be guided at all by the analogy of the preceding instances then justice is the art which gives good to friends and evil to enemies that is his meaning then I think so and who is best able to do good to his friends and evil to his enemies in time of sickness the physician or when they are on a voyage amid the perils of the sea the pilot and in what sort of passions or with a view to what results is the just man most able to do harm to his enemy and good to his friend in going to war against the one and in making alliances with the other but when a man is well my dear Paulo Marcus there is no need of a physician no and he who is not on a voyage as no need of a pilot no then in time of peace justice will be of no use I am very far from thinking so you think that justice may be abuse in peace as well as in war yet like husbandry for the acquisition of corn yes or like shoemaking for the acquisition of shoes that is what you mean yes and what similar use or power of acquisition as justice in time of peace in contracts socrates justices of views and by contracts you mean partnerships exactly but is the just man or the skillful player are more useful and better partner at the game of drafts a skillful player and in the laying of bricks and stones is the just man a more useful or better partner than the builder or quite the reverse then in what sort of partnership is the just man a better partner than the harp player as in playing the harp the harp player is certainly a better partner than the just man in a money partnership yes Paulo Marcos but surely not in the use of money for you do not want a just man to be your counsellor in the purchase or sale of a horse a man who is knowing about horses would be better for that would he not certainly and when you want to buy a ship the ship ride with a pilot would be better true then what is that joint use of silver or gold in which the just man is to be preferred when you wanted posit to be kept safely you mean when money is not wanted but allowed to lie precisely that is to say justice is useful when money is useless that is the inference when when you want to keep a pruning hook safe then justice is useful to the individual and to the state but when do you want to use it then the art of the vine dresser clearly and when you want to keep a shield or a liar and not to use them you would say that justice is useful but when you want to use them then the art of the soldier or of the musician certainly and so of all other things justice is useful when they are useless and useless when they are useful that is the inference then justice is not good for much but let us consider this further point it's not he who can best strike a blow in a boxing match or in any kind of fighting best able to ward off a blow suddenly and he who is most skillful in preventing or escaping from a disease is best able to create one true and he is the best guard of a camp who is best able to steal a march upon the enemy or certainly then he who is a good keeper of anything is also a good thief that I suppose is to be inferred then if the just man is good at keeping money he is good at stealing it that is implied in the argument then after all the just man has turned out to be a thief and this is a lesson which I suspect you must have learned out of Homer for he speaking of Autolycus the maternal grandfather of Odysseus who is a favorite of his affirms that he was excellent above all men in theft and perjury and so you and Homer and Simon ADIZ are agreed that justice is an art of theft to be practiced however for the good of friends and for the harm of enemies that was what you were saying no certainly not that though I do not know now what I did say but I still stand by the latter words well there is another question by friends and enemies do we mean those who are so really or only in seeming surely he said a man may be expected to love those whom he thinks good and to hate those whom he thinks evil yes but do not persons often earn about good and evil many who are not good seem to be so and conversely well that is true then to them the good will be enemies and the evil will be their friends true and in that case they will be right in doing good to the evil and evil to the good clearly but the good are just and would not do an injustice true then according to your argument it is just to injure those who do no wrong nay Socrates the doctrine is immoral then I suppose that we ought to do good to the just and harm to the unjust I like that better but see the consequence many a man who was ignorant of human nature has friends who are bad friends and in that case he ought to do harm to them and he has good enemies whom we ought to benefit but if so we shall be saying the very opposite of that which we affirmed to be the meaning of semana DS very true he said and I think that we had better correct an error into which we seem to have fallen in the use of the words friend and enemy what was the error Paulo Marcos I asked we assumed that he is a friend who seems to be or who is thought good and how is the error to be corrected we should rather say that he is a friend who is as well as seems good and that he who seems only and is not good only seems to be and is not a friend and of an enemy the same may be said you would argue that the good are our friends and the bad our enemies yes and instead of saying simply as we did at first that it is just to do good to our friends and harm to our enemies we should further say it is just to do good to our friends when they are good and harm to our enemies when they are evil yes that appears to me to be the truth but artha just to injure anyone at all undoubtedly he ought to enter those who are both wicked and his enemies when horses are injured are they improved or deteriorated the latter deteriorated that is to say in the good qualities of horses not of dogs gasps of horses and dogs are deteriorated in the good qualities of dogs and not of horses of course and will not men who are injured be deteriorated in that which is the proper virtue of man certainly and that human virtue is justice to be sure then men who are injured are of necessity made unjust that is the result but kind of musician by his art make men unmusical or certainly not or the horseman by his art make them bad horsemen impossible and can adjust by Justice make men unjust or speaking generally can the good by virtue make them bad assuredly not any more than heat can produce cold it cannot or drought moisture clearly not nor can the good harm an a.1 impossible and the just is the good certainly then to injure a friend or anyone else is not the act of a just man but of the opposite who is the unjust I think that what you say is quite true Socrates that if a man says that justice consists in the repayment of debts and that good is the debt which are just man owes to his friends and evil the debt which he owes to his enemies to say this is not wise for it is not true if as has been clearly shown the injuring of another can be in no case just I agree with you said Paulo Marcus then you and I are prepared to take up arms against anyone who our tributes such as saying to Samana DS or bias or Pittacus or any other wise man or seer I am quite ready to do battle at your side he said shall I tell you whose I believe is saying to be whose I believe that periander or pentakus or exact sees or as many of the Theban or some other rich and mighty man who had a great opinion of his own power was the first to say that justice is doing good to your friends and harm to your enemies most true he said yes I said but if this definition of justice also breaks down what other can be offered several times in the course of the discussion Thrasymachus had made an attempt to get the argument into his own hands and had been put down by the rest of the company who wanted to hear the end but when Paulo Marcus and I had done speaking and there was a pause he could no longer hold his peace and gathering himself off he came at us like a wild beast seeking to devour us we were quite panic-stricken at the side of him he roared out of the whole company what folly Socrates has taken possession of you all and why silly Billy's do you knock under to one another I say that if you want really to know what justice is you should not only ask but answer and you should not seek honor to yourself from the refutation of an opponent but have your own answer for there is many a one who can ask and cannot answer and now I will not have you say that justice is duty or advantage or profit or gain or interest for this sort of nonsense will not do for me I must have clearness and accuracy I was panic-stricken at his words and could not look at him without trembling indeed I believe that if I had not fixed my eye upon him I should have been struck dumb but when I saw his fury arising I looked at him first and was therefore able to reply to him Thrasymachus I said with a quiver don't be hard upon us Paulo Marcos and I may have been guilty of a little mistake in the argument but I can assure you that the error was not intentional if we were seeking for a piece of gold you would not imagine that we were knocking under to one another and so loosing our chance of finding it and why when we are seeking for justice a thing more precious than many pieces of gold do you say that we are weakly yielding to one another and not doing our utmost to get at the truth nay my good friend we are most willing and anxious to do so but the fact is that we cannot and if so you people who know all things should pity us and not be angry with us how characteristic of Socrates he replied with a bitter laugh that's your ironical style did I not foresee have I not already told you that whatever he was asked he would refuse to answer and try irony or any other shuffle in order that he might avoid answering you are a philosopher Thrasymachus I replied and well know that if you ask a person what numbers may twelve taking care to prohibit him whom you ask from answering twice six or three times four or six times 2 or 4 times 3 for this sort of nonsense will not do for me then obviously if that is your way of putting the question no one can answer you but suppose that he were to retort for silicon SWAT do you mean if one of these numbers which you interdict be the true answer to the question am i falsely to say some other number which is not the right one is that your meaning how would you answer him just as if the two cases were at all alike he said but why should they not be I replied and even if they are not but only appeared to be so to the person who is asked ought he not to say what he thinks whether you and I forbid him or not I presume then that you are going to make one of the interdicted answers I dare say that I may notwithstanding the danger if upon reflection I approve of any of them but what if I give you an answer about justice other and better he said than any of these what do you deserve to have done to you done to me as becomes the ignorant I must learn from the wise that is what I deserve to have done to me what and no payment a pleasant notion I will pay when I have the money I replied but you have Socrates said Glaucon and you threesome ACCA's need to be under no anxiety about money for we will all make a contribution for Socrates yes he replied and then Socrates will do as he always does refuse to answer himself but take and pull two pieces the answer of someone else why my good friend I said how can anyone answer who knows and says that he knows just nothing and who even if he has some fate notions of his own is told by a man of authority not to utter them the natural thing is that the speaker should be someone like yourself who professes to know and can tell what he knows will you then kindly answer for the edification of the company and of myself Glaucon and the rest of the company joined in my request and Freesat Mekas as anyone might see was in reality eager to speak for he thought that he had an excellent answer and would distinguish himself but at first he affected to insist on my answering at length he consented to begin behold he said the wisdom of Socrates it refuses to teach himself and goes about learning of others to whom he never even says thank you that I learn of others I replied is quite true but that I am ungrateful I wholly deny money I have none and therefore I pay in praise which is all I have and how ready I am to praise anyone who appears to me to speak well you will very soon find out when you answer for I expect that you will answer well listen then he said I proclaim that justice is nothing else than the interest of the stronger and now why do you not praise me but of course you want let me first understand you I replied justice as you say is the interest of the stronger what thrusts amicus is the meaning of this you cannot mean to say that because pali Damas the pancreas is stronger than we are and finds the eating of beef conducive to his bodily strength that to eat beef is therefore equally for our good who are weaker than he is and right and just for us that's a Bominable of you Socrates you take the words in the sense which is most damaging to the argument not at all my good sir I said I am trying to understand them and I wish that you would be a little clearer well he said have you never heard that forms of government differ there are tyrannies and there are democracies and there are aristocracies yes I know and the government is a ruling power in each state certainly and the different forms of government make laws democratical aristocracy tyrannical with a view to their several interests and these laws which are made by them for their own interests are the justice which they deliver to their subjects and him who transgresses them they punish as a breaker of the law and unjust and that is what I mean when I say that in all states there is the same principle of Justice which is the interest of the government and as the government must be supposed to have power the only reasonable conclusion is that everywhere there is one principle of Justice which is the interest of the stronger now I understand you I said and whether you are right or not I will try to discover but let me remark that in defining justice you have yourself used the word interest which you forbad me to use it is true however that in your definition the words of the stronger are added a small addition you must allow he said great or small never mind about that we must first enquire whether what you are saying is the truth now we are both agreed that justice is interest of some sort but you go on to say of the stronger about this addition I am not so sure and must therefore consider further proceed I will and first tell me do you admit that it is just for subjects to obey their rulers I do but are the rulers of States absolutely infallible or are they sometimes liable to err to be sure they replied they are likely to her then in making their laws they may sometimes make them rightly and sometimes not true when they make them rightly they make them agreeable to their interest when they are mistaken contrary to their interest you admit that yes and the laws which they make must be obeyed by their subjects and that is what you call justice doubtless then justice according to your argument is not only obedience to the interest of the stronger but the reverse what is that you are saying he I am only repeating what you are saying I believe but let us consider have we not admitted that the rulers may be mistaken about their own interest in what they command and also that to obey them is justice has not that been admitted yes then you must also have acknowledged justice not to be for the interest of the stronger when the rulers intentionally command things to be done which are to their own injury for if as you say justice is the obedience which the subject renders to their commands in that case o wisest of men is there any escape from the conclusion that the weaker are commanded to do not what is for the interest but what is for the injury of the stronger nothing can be clearer Socrates said polemarchus yes said quite a fun interposing if you are allowed to be his witness but there is no need of any witness said polemarchus for fresh impetus himself acknowledges that brewer's may sometimes command what is not for their own interest and that for subjects to obey them is justice yes Paulo Marcos Thrasymachus said that for subjects to do what was commanded by their rulers is just yes quite a fun but he also said that justice is the interest of the stronger and while admitting both these propositions he further acknowledged that the stronger may command the weak who are his subjects to do what is not for his own interest whence follows that justice is the injury quite as much as the interest of the stronger but said Clara fond he meant by the interest of the stronger what the stronger thought to be his interest this is what the weaker had to do and this was affirmed to by him to be justice those were not his words rejoined Paulo Marcos never mind I replied if he now says that they are let us accept his statement tell me through Savickas I said did you mean by justice what the stronger thought to be his interest whether really so or not or certainly not he said do you suppose that I call him who is mistaken the stronger at the time when he is mistaken yes I said my impression was that you did sir when you admitted that the ruler was not infallible that might be sometimes mistaken you argue like an informer Socrates do you mean for example that he who is mistaken about the sick is a physician in that he is mistaken or that he who earns in arithmetic or grammar is an arithmetic or grammarian at the time when he is making the mistake in respect of the mistake true we say that the physician or arithmetic nor grammarian has made a mistake but this is only a way of speaking for the fact is that neither the grammarian or any other person of skill ever makes a mistake insofar as he is what his name implies they none of them earn unless their skill fails them and then they cease to be skilled artists no artist or sage or ruler earns at the time when he is what his name implies though he is commonly said to her and I adopted the common mode of speaking but to be perfectly accurate since you are such a lover of accuracy we should say that the ruler in so far as he is a ruler is unerring and being unerring always commands that which is for his own interest and the subject is required to execute his commands and therefore as I said at first and now repeat justice is the interest of the stronger indeed racemic us anew I really appear to you to argue like an informer certainly he replied and do you suppose that I ask these questions with any design of injuring you in the argument nay he replied suppose is not the word I know it but you will be found out and by sheer force of argument you will never prevail I shall not make the attempt My dear man but to avoid any misunderstanding occurring between us in future that may ask in what sense do you speak of a ruler or stronger whose interest as you were saying he being the superior it is just that the inferior should execute is he a ruler in the popular or in the strict sense of the term in the strictest of all senses he said and now cheat and play the informer if you can I asked no quarter at your hands but you never will be able never and do you imagine I said that I am such a madman as to try and cheat through some bogus I might as well shave a lion why he said you made the attempt a minute ago and you failed enough I said of these civilities it will be better than I should ask you a question is the physician taken in that strict sense of which you were speaking a healer of the sick or a maker of money and remember that I am now speaking of the true physician a healer of the sick he replied and the pilot that is to say the true pilot is he a captain of sailors or a mere sailor a captain of sailors the circumstance that he sails in the ship is not to be taken into account neither is he to be called a sailor the named pilot by which he is distinguished has nothing to do with sailing but his significant of his skill and of his authority over the sailors very true he said now I said every art has an interest certainly for which the art has to consider and provide yes that is the aim of art and the interest of any art is the perfection of it this and 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 what if the body is self-sufficing more has once I should reply certainly the body has once for the body may be ill and required to be cured and has therefore interests to which the art of medicine ministers and this is the origin and intention of medicine as you will acknowledge am i 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 a art to provide for the interests of seeing and hearing has art in itself I say any similar liability to fault or defect and as every art require another supplementary art to provide for its interests and that another and another without end 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 are not impaired take the words in your precise sense and tell me whether I am NOT right yes clearly then medicine 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 enjoys the interest of the stronger or superior but only the interest of the subject and the 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 and what he prescribes but the good of his patient for the true physician is also a brewer having the human body as a subject and he is not a mere moneymaker that has been admitted yes and the pilot likewise in the strict sense of the term is a ruler of sailors and not a mere sailor that has been admitted and such a pilot and ruler will provide and prescribe for the interest of the state who was under him and not for his own or the rulers interest he gave a reluctant yes then I said for semi cos 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 end of part 1

Channel: Inspiration 365

Views: 11,241

Rating: 4.9142857 out of 5

Keywords: Librivox, Inspiring, Audiobook, Free Audiobook, Plato, Republic, Philosophy, Greek, Plato Philosophy, The works of Plato, Beliefs, Academy, Contribution, Plato The Republic, The Republic Plato, Book 1

Id: djza3jflCZw

Length: 44min 8sec (2648 seconds)

Published: Fri Oct 06 2017