Platonismo

This page is read only. You can view the source, but not change it. Ask your administrator if you think this is wrong.
===== JOWETT: CRITO 46B-49E — A RECUSA DE SÓCRATES DE FUGIR =====
Veja também: Coletânea de excertos da obra completa de Platão, na tradução de Jowett, indexados por termos relevantes

Soc. Dear Crito, your zeal is invaluable, if a right one ; but if wrong, the greater the zeal the greater the evil ; and therefore we ought to consider whether these things shall be done or not. For I am and always have been one of those natures who must be guided by reason, whatever the reason may be which upon reflection appears to me to be the best ; and now that this fortune has come upon me, I cannot put away the reasons which I have before given : the principles which I have hitherto honored and revered I still honor, and unless we can find other and better principles on the instant, I am certain not to agree with you ; no, not even if the power of the multitude could inflict many more imprisonments, confiscations, deaths, frightening us like children with hobgoblin terrors. But what will be the fairest way of considering the question ? Shall I return to your old argument about the opinions of men ? some of which are to be regarded, and others, as we were saying, are not to be regarded. Now were we right in maintaining this before I was condemned ? And has the argument which was once good now proved to be talk for the sake of talking ; in fact an amusement only, and altogether vanity ? That is what I want to consider with your help, Crito : whether, under my present circumstances, the argument appears to be in any way different or not ; and is to be allowed by me or disallowed. That argument, which, as I believe, is maintained by many who assume to be authorities, was to the effect, as I was saying, that the opinions of some men are to be regarded, and of other men not to be regarded. Now you, Crito, are a disinterested person who are not going to die to-morrow — at least, there is no human probability of this, and you are therefore not liable to be deceived by the circumstances in which you are placed. Tell me, then, whether I am right in saying that some opinions, and the opinions of some men only, are to be valued, and other opinions, and the opinions of other men, are not to be valued. I ask you whether I was right in maintaining this ?

Cr. Certainly.

Soc. The good are to be regarded, and not the bad ?

Cr. Yes.

Soc. And the opinions of the wise are good, and the opinions of the unwise are evil ?

Cr. Certainly.

Soc. And what was said about another matter ? Was the disciple in gymnastics supposed to attend to the praise and blame and opinion of every man, or of one man only — his physician or trainer, whoever that was ?

Cr. Of one man only.

Soc. And he ought to fear the censure and welcome the praise of that one only, and not of the many ?

Cr. That is clear.

Soc. And he ought to live and train, and eat and drink in the way which seems good to his single master who has understanding, rather than according to the opinion of all other men put together ?

Cr. True.

Soc. And if he disobeys and disregards the opinion and approval of the one, and regards the opinion of the many who have no understanding, will he not suffer evil ?

Cr. Certainly he will.

Soc. And what will the evil be, whither tending and what affecting, in the disobedient person ?

Cr. Clearly, affecting the body ; that is what is destroyed by the evil.

Soc. Very good ; and is not this true, Crito, of other things which we need not separately enumerate ? In the matter of just and unjust, fair and foul, good and evil, which are the subjects of our present consultation, ought we to follow the opinion of the many and to fear them ; or the opinion of the one man who has understanding, and whom we ought to fear and reverence more than all the rest of the world : and whom deserting we shall destroy and injure that principle in us which may be assumed to be improved by justice and deteriorated by injustice ; is there not such a principle ?

Cr. Certainly there is, Socrates.

Soc. Take a parallel instance : if, acting under the advice of men who have no understanding, we destroy that which is improvable by health and deteriorated by disease — when that has been destroyed, I say, would life be worth having ? And that is — the body ?

Cr. Yes.

Soc. Could we live, having an evil and corrupted body ?

Cr. Certainly not.

Soc. And will life be worth having, if that higher part of man be depraved, which is improved by justice and deteriorated by injustice ? Do we suppose that principle, whatever it may be in man, which has to do with justice and injustice, to be inferior to the body ? Cr. Certainly not.

Soc. More honored, then ?

Cr. Far more honored.

Soc. Then, my friend, we must not regard what the many say of us : but what he, the one man who has understanding of just and unjust, will say, and what the truth will say. And therefore you begin in error when you suggest that we should regard the opinion of the many about just and unjust, good and evil, honorable and dishonorable. Well, someone will say, “But the many can kill us.”

Cr. Yes, Socrates ; that will clearly be the answer.

Soc. That is true : but still I find with surprise that the old argument is, as I conceive, unshaken as ever. And I should like to know whether I may say the same of another proposition — that not life, but a good life, is to be chiefly valued ?

Cr. Yes, that also remains.

Soc. And a good life is equivalent to a just and honorable one — that holds also ?

Cr. Yes, that holds.

Soc. From these premises I proceed to argue the question whether I ought or ought not to try to escape without the consent of the Athenians : and if I am clearly right in escaping, then I will make the attempt ; but if not, I will abstain. The other considerations which you mention, of money and loss of character, and the duty of educating children, are, as I hear, only the doctrines of the multitude, who would be as ready to call people to life, if they were able, as they are to put them to death — and with as little reason. But now, since the argument has thus far prevailed, the only question which remains to be considered is, whether we shall do rightly either in escaping or in suffering others to aid in our escape and paying them in money and thanks, or whether we shall not do rightly ; and if the latter, then death or any other calamity which may ensue on my remaining here must not be allowed to enter into the calculation.

Cr. I think that you are right, Socrates ; how then shall we proceed ?

Soc. Let us consider the matter together, and do you either refute me if you can, and I will be convinced ; or else cease, my dear friend, from repeating to me that I ought to escape against the wishes of the Athenians : for I am extremely desirous to be persuaded by you, but not against my own better judgment. And now please to consider my first position, and do your best to answer me.

Cr. I will do my best.

Soc. Are we to say that we are never intentionally to do wrong, or that in one way we ought and in another way we ought not to do wrong, or is doing wrong always evil and dishonorable, as I was just now saying, and as has been already acknowledged by us ? Are all our former admissions which were made within a few days to be thrown away ? And have we, at our age, been earnestly discoursing with one another all our life long only to discover that we are no better than children ? Or are we to rest assured, in spite of the opinion of the many, and in spite of consequences whether better or worse, of the truth of what was then said, that injustice is always an evil and dishonor to him who acts unjustly ? Shall we affirm that ?

Cr. Yes.

Soc. Then we must do no wrong ?

Cr. Certainly not.

Soc. Nor when injured injure in return, as the many imagine ; for we must injure no one at all ?

Cr. Clearly not.

Soc. Again, Crito, may we do evil ?

Cr. Surely not, Socrates.

Soc. And what of doing evil in return for evil, which is the morality of the many — is that just or not ?

Cr. Not just.

Soc. For doing evil to another is the same as injuring him ?

Cr. Very true.

Soc. Then we ought not to retaliate or render evil for evil to anyone, whatever evil we may have suffered from him. But I would have you consider, Crito, whether you really mean what you are saying. For this opinion has never been held, and never will be held, by any considerable number of persons ; and those who are agreed and those who are not agreed upon this point have no common ground, and can only despise one another when they see how widely they differ. Tell me, then, whether you agree with and assent to my first principle, that neither injury nor retaliation nor warding off evil by evil is ever right. And shall that be the premise of our argument ? Or do you decline and dissent from this ? For this has been of old and is still my opinion ; but, if you are of another opinion, let me hear what you have to say. If, however, you remain of the same mind as formerly, I will proceed to the next step.

Cr. You may proceed, for I have not changed my mind.

{{indexmenu>.#1|skipns=/^playground|^wiki/ nsonly}}