Once more, then, tell me what you and Pindar mean by natural justice : Do you not mean that the superior should take the property of the inferior by force ; that the better should rule the worse, the noble have more than the mean ? Am I not right in my recollection ?
Cal. Yes ; that is what I was saying, and so I still aver.
Soc. And do you mean by the better the same as the superior ? for I could not make out what you were saying at the time — whether you meant by the superior the stronger, and that the weaker must obey the stronger, as you seemed to imply when you said that great cities attack small ones in accordance with natural right, because they are superior and stronger, as though the superior and stronger and better were the same ; or whether the better may be also the inferior and weaker, and the superior the worse, or whether better is to be defined in the same way as superior : this is the point which I want to have cleared up. Are the superior and better and stronger the same or different ?
Cal. I say unequivocally that they are the same.
Soc. Then the many are by nature to the one, against whom, as you were saying, they make the laws ?
Cal. Certainly.
Soc. Then the laws of the many are the laws of the superior ?
Cal. Very true.
Soc. Then they are the laws of the better ; for the superior class are far better, as you were saying ?
Cal. Yes.
Soc. And since they are superior, the laws which are made by them are by nature good ?
Cal. Yes.
Soc. And are not the many of opinion, as you were lately saying, that justice is equality, and that to do is more disgraceful than to suffer injustice ? — is that so or not ? Answer, Callicles, and let no modesty be : found to come in the way ; do the many think, or do they not think thus ? — I must beg of you to answer, in order that if you agree with me I may fortify myself by the assent of so competent an authority.
Cal. Yes ; the opinion of the many is what you say.
Soc. Then not only custom but nature also affirms that to do is more disgraceful than to suffer injustice, and that justice is equality ; so that you seem to have been wrong in your former assertion, when accusing me you said that nature and custom are opposed, and that I, knowing this, was dishonestly playing between them, appealing to custom when the argument is about nature, and to nature when the argument is about custom ?
Cal. This man will never cease talking nonsense. At your age, Socrates, are you not ashamed to be catching at words and chuckling over some verbal slip ? do you not see — have I not told you already, that by superior I mean better : do you imagine me to say, that if a rabble of slaves and nondescripts, who are of no use except perhaps for their physical strength, get together their ipsissima verba are laws ?
Soc. Ho ! my philosopher, is that your line ?
Cal. Certainly.
Soc. I was thinking, Callicles, that something of the kind must have been in your mind, and that is why I repeated the question — What is the superior ? I wanted to know clearly what you meant ; for you surely do not think that two men are better than one, or that your slaves are better than you because they are stronger ? Then please to begin again, and tell me who the better are, if they are not the stronger ; and I will ask you, great Sir, to be a little milder in your instructions, or I shall have to run away from you.
Cal. You are ironiCal.
Soc. No, by the hero Zethus, Callicles, by whose aid you were just now saying many ironical things against me, I am not : — tell me, then, whom you mean, by the better ?
Cal. I mean the more excellent.
Soc. Do you not see that you are yourself using words which have no meaning and that you are explaining nothing ? — will you tell me whether you mean by the better and superior the wiser, or if not, whom ?
Cal. Most assuredly, I do mean the wiser.
Soc. Then according to you, one wise man may often be superior to ten thousand fools, and he ought them, and they ought to be his subjects, and he ought to have more than they should. This is what I believe that you mean (and you must not suppose that I am word-catching), if you allow that the one is superior to the ten thousand ?
Cal. Yes ; that is what I mean, and that is what I conceive to be natural justice — that the better and wiser should rule have more than the inferior.
Soc. Stop there, and let me ask you what you would say in this case : Let us suppose that we are all together as we are now ; there are several of us, and we have a large common store of meats and drinks, and there are all sorts of persons in our company having various degrees of strength and weakness, and one of us, being physician, is wiser in the matter of food than all the rest, and he is probably stronger than some and not so strong as others of us — will he not, being wiser, be also better than we are, and our superior in this matter of food ?
Cal. Certainly.
Soc. Either, then, he will have a larger share of the meats and drinks, because he is better, or he will have the distribution of all of them by reason of his authority, but he will not expend or make use of a larger share of them on his own person, or if he does, he will be punished — his share will exceed that of some, and be less than that of others, and if he be the weakest of all, he being the best of all will have the smallest share of all, Callicles : — am I not right, my friend ?
Cal. You talk about meats and drinks and physicians and other nonsense ; I am not speaking of them.
Soc. Well, but do you admit that the wiser is the better ? Answer “Yes” or “No.”
Cal. Yes.
Soc. And ought not the better to have a larger share ?
Cal. Not of meats and drinks.
Soc. I understand : then, perhaps, of coats — the skilfullest weaver ought to have the largest coat, and the greatest number of them, and go about clothed in the best and finest of them ?
Cal. Fudge about coats !
Soc. Then the skilfullest and best in making shoes ought to have the advantage in shoes ; the shoemaker, clearly, should walk about in the largest shoes, and have the greatest number of them ?
Cal. Fudge about shoes ! What nonsense are you talking ?
Soc. Or, if this is not your meaning, perhaps you would say that the wise and good and true husbandman should actually have a larger share of seeds, and have as much seed as possible for his own land ?
Cal. How you go on, always talking in the same way, Socrates !
Soc. Yes, Callicles, and also about the same things.
Cal. Yes, by the Gods, you are literally always talking of cobblers and fullers and cooks and doctors, as if this had to do with our argument.
Soc. But why will you not tell me in what a man must be superior and wiser in order to claim a larger share ; will you neither accept a suggestion, nor offer one ?
Cal. I have already told you. In the first place, I mean by superiors not cobblers or cooks, but wise politicians who understand the administration of a state, and who are not only wise, but also valiant and able to carry. out their designs, and not the men to faint from want of soul.
Soc. See now, most excellent Callicles, how different my charge against you is from that which you bring against me, for you reproach me with always saying the same ; but I reproach you with never saying the same about the same things, for at one time you were defining the better and the superior to be the stronger, then again as the wiser, and now you bring forward a new notion ; the superior and the better are now declared by you to be the more courageous : I wish, my good friend, that you would tell me once for all, whom you affirm to be the better and superior, and in what they are better ?
Cal. I have already told you that I mean those who are wise and courageous in the administration of a state — they ought to be the rulers of their states, and justice consists in their having more than their subjects.