第 10 节
作者:阎王      更新:2021-12-07 09:36      字数:9322
  Then now; I said; I will endeavour to explain to you my opinion
  about this poem of Simonides。 There is a very ancient philosophy which
  is more cultivated in Crete and Lacedaemon than in any other part of
  Hellas; and there are more philosophers in those countries than
  anywhere else in the world。 This; however; is a secret which the
  Lacedaemonians deny; and they pretend to be ignorant; just because
  they do not wish to have it thought that they rule the world by
  wisdom; like the Sophists of whom Protagoras was speaking; and not
  by valour of arms; considering that if the reason of their superiority
  were disclosed; all men would be practising their wisdom。 And this
  secret of theirs has never been discovered by the imitators of
  Lacedaemonian fashions in other cities; who go about with their ears
  bruised in imitation of them; and have the caestus bound on their
  arms; and are always in training; and wear short cloaks; for they
  imagine that these are the practices which have enabled the
  Lacedaemonians to conquer the other Hellenes。 Now when the
  Lacedaemonians want to unbend and hold free conversation with their
  wise men; and are no longer satisfied with mere secret intercourse;
  they drive out all these laconizers; and any other foreigners who
  may happen to be in their country; and they hold a philosophical
  seance unknown to strangers; and they themselves forbid their young
  men to go out into other cities…in this they are like the Cretans…in
  order that they may not unlearn the lessons which they have taught
  them。 And in Lacedaemon and Crete not only men but also women have a
  pride in their high cultivation。 And hereby you may know that I am
  right in attributing to the Lacedaemonians this excellence in
  philosophy and speculation: If a man converses with the most
  ordinary Lacedaemonian; he will find him seldom good for much in
  general conversation; but at any point in the discourse he will be
  darting out some notable saying; terse and full of meaning; with
  unerring aim; and the person with whom he is talking seems to be
  like a child in his hands。 And many of our own age and of former
  ages have noted that the true Lacedaemonian type of character has
  the love of philosophy even stronger than the love of gymnastics; they
  are conscious that only a perfectly educated man is capable of
  uttering such expressions。 Such were Thales of Miletus; and Pittacus
  of Mitylene; and Bias of Priene; and our own Solon; and Cleobulus
  the Lindian; and Myson the Chenian; and seventh in the catalogue of
  wise men was the Lacedaemonian Chilo。 All these were lovers and
  emulators and disciples of the culture of the Lacedaemonians; and
  any one may perceive that their wisdom was of this character;
  consisting of short memorable sentences; which they severally uttered。
  And they met together and dedicated in the temple of Apollo at Delphi;
  as the first…fruits of their wisdom; the far…famed inscriptions; which
  are in all men's mouths…〃Know thyself;〃 and 〃Nothing too much。〃
  Why do I say all this? I am explaining that this Lacedaemonian
  brevity was the style of primitive philosophy。 Now there was a
  saying of Pittacus which was privately circulated and received the
  approbation of the wise; 〃Hard is it to be good。〃 And Simonides; who
  was ambitious of the fame of wisdom; was aware that if he could
  overthrow this saying; then; as if he had won a victory over some
  famous athlete; he would carry off the palm among his
  contemporaries。 And if I am not mistaken; he composed the entire
  poem with the secret intention of damaging Pittacus and his saying。
  Let us all unite in examining his words; and see whether I am
  speaking the truth。 Simonides must have been a lunatic; if; in the
  very first words of the poem; wanting to say only that to become
  good is hard; he inserted (men) 〃on the one hand〃 '〃on the one hand to
  become good is hard〃'; there would be no reason for the introduction
  of (men); unless you suppose him to speak with a hostile reference
  to the words of Pittacus。 Pittacus is saying 〃Hard is it to be
  good;〃 and he; in refutation of this thesis; rejoins that the truly
  hard thing; Pittacus; is to become good; not joining 〃truly〃 with
  〃good;〃 but with 〃hard。〃 Not; that the hard thing is to be truly good;
  as though there were some truly good men; and there were others who
  were good but not truly good (this would be a very simple observation;
  and quite unworthy of Simonides); but you must suppose him to make a
  trajection of the word 〃truly;〃 construing the saying of Pittacus thus
  (and let us imagine Pittacus to be speaking and Simonides answering
  him): 〃O my friends;〃 says Pittacus; 〃hard is it to be good;〃 and
  Simonides answers; 〃In that; Pittacus; you are mistaken; the
  difficulty is not to be good; but on the one hand; to become good;
  four…square in hands and feet and mind; without a flaw…that is hard
  truly。〃 This way of reading the passage accounts for the insertion
  of (men) 〃on the one hand;〃 and for the position at the end of the
  clause of the word 〃truly;〃 and all that follows shows this to be
  the meaning。 A great deal might be said in praise of the details of
  the poem; which is a charming piece of workmanship; and very finished;
  but such minutiae would be tedious。 I should like; however; to point
  out the general intention of the poem; which is certainly designed
  in every part to be a refutation of the saying of Pittacus。 For he
  speaks in what follows a little further on as if he meant to argue
  that although there is a difficulty in becoming good; yet this is
  possible for a time; and only for a time。 But having become good; to
  remain in a good state and be good; as you; Pittacus; affirm; is not
  possible; and is not granted to man; God only has this blessing;
  〃but man cannot help being bad when the force of circumstances
  overpowers him。〃 Now whom does the force of circumstance overpower
  in the command of a vessel?…not the private individual; for he is
  always overpowered; and as one who is already prostrate cannot be
  overthrown; and only he who is standing upright but not he who is
  prostrate can be laid prostrate; so the force of circumstances can
  only overpower him who; at some time or other; has resources; and
  not him who is at all times helpless。 The descent of a great storm may
  make the pilot helpless; or the severity of the season the
  husbandman or the physician; for the good may become bad; as another
  poet witnesses:
  The good are sometimes good and sometimes bad。
  But the bad does not become bad; he is always bad。 So that when the
  force of circumstances overpowers the man of resources and skill and
  virtue; then he cannot help being bad。 And you; Pittacus; are
  saying; 〃Hard is it to be good。〃 Now there is a difficulty in becoming
  good; and yet this is possible: but to be good is an impossibility…
  For he who does well is the good man; and he who does ill is the
  bad。
  But what sort of doing is good in letters? and what sort of doing
  makes a man good in letters? Clearly the knowing of them。 And what
  sort of well…doing makes a man a good physician? Clearly the knowledge
  of the art of healing the sick。 〃But he who does ill is the bad。〃
  Now who becomes a bad physician? Clearly he who is in the first
  place a physician; and in the second place a good physician; for he
  may become a bad one also: but none of us unskilled individuals can by
  any amount of doing ill become physicians; any more than we can become
  carpenters or anything of that sort; and he who by doing ill cannot
  become a physician at all; clearly cannot become a bad physician。 In
  like manner the good may become deteriorated by time; or toil; or
  disease; or other accident (the only real doing ill is to be
  deprived of knowledge); but the bad man will never become bad; for
  he is always bad; and if he were to become bad; he must previously
  have been good。 Thus the words of the poem tend to show that on the
  one hand a man cannot be continuously good; but that he may become
  good and may also become bad; and again that
  They are the best for the longest time whom the gods love。
  All this relates to Pittacus; as is further proved by the sequel。
  For he adds:
  Therefore I will not throw away my span of life to no purpose in
  searching after the impossible; hoping in vain to find a perfectly
  faultless man among those who partake of the fruit of the
  broad…bosomed earth: if I find him; I will send you word。
  (this is the vehement way in which he pursues his attack upon Pittacus
  throughout the whole poem):
  But him who does no evil; voluntarily I praise and love;…not even
  the gods war against necessity。
  All this has a simil