This text is part of:
Search the Perseus Catalog for:
View text chunked by:
- bekker page : bekker line
- book : chapter : section
but it would not seem to make any difference whether these laws are
written or unwritten, or whether they are to regulate the education of a single person or
of a number of people, any more than in the case of music or athletics or any other form
of training. Paternal exhortations and family habits have authority in the household, just
as legal enactments and national customs have authority in the state, and the more so on
account of the ties of relationship and of benefits conferred that unite the head of the
household to its other members: he can count on their natural affection and obedience at
the outset.
[15]
Moreover individual treatment is better than
a common system, in education as in medicine. As a general rule rest and fasting are good
for a fever, but they may not be best for a particular case; and presumably a professor of
boxing does not impose the same style of fighting on all his pupils. It would appear then
that private attention gives more accurate results in particular cases, for the particular
subject is more likely to get the treatment that suits him. But a physician or trainer or
any other director can best treat a particular person if he has a general knowledge of
what is good for everybody, or for other people of the same kind: for the sciences deal
with what is universal, as their names1 imply.
[16]
Not but what
it is possible no doubt for a particular individual to be successfully treated by someone
who is not a scientific expert, but has an empirical knowledge based on careful
observation of the effects of various forms of treatment upon the person in question; just
as some people appear to be their own best doctors, though they could not do any good
to someone else. But nevertheless it would
doubtless be agreed that anyone who wishes to make himself a professional and a man of
science must advance to general principles, and acquaint himself with these by the proper
method: for science, as we said, deals with the universal.
[17]
So presumably a man who wishes to make other people better
(whether few or many) by discipline, must endeavor to acquire the
science of legislation—assuming that it is possible to make us good by laws. For
to mold aright the character of any and every person that presents himself is not a task
that can be done by anybody, but only (if at all) by the man with
scientific knowledge, just as is the case in medicine and the other professions involving
a system of treatment and the exercise of prudence.
[18]
Is not then the next question to consider from whom or how the science of legislation can
be learnt? Perhaps, like other subjects, from the experts, namely the politicians; for we
saw2 that legislation who is a
branch of political science. But possibly it may seem that political science is unlike the
other sciences and faculties. In these the persons who impart a knowledge of the faculty
are the same as those who practice it, for instance physicians and painters; but in
politics the sophists, who profess to teach the science,