Well, I said, as you appear to have a difficulty about this, let us take another of the examples which you mentioned instead. Do you admit the existence of folly ?
I do.
And is not wisdom the. very opposite of folly ?
That is true, he said.
And when men act rightly and advantageously they seem to you to be temperate ?
Yes, he said.
And temperance makes them temperate ?
Certainly.
And they who do not act rightly act foolishly, and in acting thus are not temperate ?
I agree, he said.
Then to act foolishly is the opposite of acting temperately ?
He assented.
And foolish actions are done by folly, and temperate actions by temperance ?
He agreed.
And that is done strongly which is done by strength, and that which is weakly done, by weakness ?
He assented.
And that which is done with swiftness is done swiftly, and that which is done with slowness, slowly ?
He assented again.
And that which is done in the same manner, is done by the same ; and that which is done in an opposite manner by the opposite ?
He agreed.
Once more, I said, is there anything beautiful ?
Yes.
To which the only opposite is the ugly ?
There is no other.
And is there anything good ?
There is.
To which the only opposite is the evil ?
There is no other.
And there is the acute in sound ?
True.
To which the only opposite is the grave ?
There is no other, he said, but that.
Then every opposite has one opposite only and no more ?
He assented.
Then now, I said, let us recapitulate our admissions. First of all we admitted that everything has one opposite and not more than one ?
We did so.
And we admitted also that what was done in opposite ways was done by opposites ?
Yes.
And that which was done foolishly, as we further admitted, was done in the opposite way to that which was done temperately ?
Yes.
And that which was done temperately was done by temperance, and that which was done foolishly by folly ?
He agreed.
And that which is done in opposite ways is done by opposites ?
Yes.
And one thing is done by temperance, and quite another thing by folly ?
Yes.
And in opposite ways ?
Certainly.
And therefore by opposites : — then folly is the opposite of temperance ?
Clearly.
And do you remember that folly has already been acknowledged by us to be the opposite of wisdom ?
He assented.
And we said that everything has only one opposite ?
Yes.
Then, Protagoras, which of the two assertions shall we renounce ? One says that everything has but one opposite ; the other that wisdom is distinct from temperance, and that both of them are parts of virtue ; and that they are not only distinct, but dissimilar, both in themselves and in their functions, like the parts of a face. Which of these two assertions shall we renounce ? For both of them together are certainly not in harmony ; they do not accord or agree : for how can they be said to agree if everything is assumed to have only one opposite and not more than one, and yet folly, which is one, has clearly the two opposites wisdom and temperance ? Is not that true, Protagoras ? What else would you say ?
He assented, but with great reluctance.
Then temperance and wisdom are the same, as before justice and holiness appeared to us to be nearly the same. And now, Protagoras, I said, we must finish the enquiry, and not faint.