[266a]
just as the body, which is one, is naturally divisible into two, right and left, with parts called by the same names, so our two discourses conceived of madness as naturally one principle within us, and one discourse, cutting off the left-hand part, continued to divide this until it found among its parts a sort of left-handed love, which it very justly reviled, but the other discourse, leading us to the right-hand part of madness, found a love having the same name as the first,
[266b]
but divine, which it held up to view and praised as the author of our greatest blessings.Phaedrus
Very true.Socrates
Now I myself, Phaedrus, am a lover of these processes of division and bringing together, as aids to speech and thought; and if I think any other man is able to see things that can naturally be collected into one and divided into many, him I follow after and
They are royal men, but not trained in the matters about which you ask. I think you give this method the right name when you call it dialectic; [266d] but it seems to me that rhetoric still escapes us.Socrates
What do you mean? Can there be anything of importance, which is not included in these processes and yet comes under the head of art? Certainly you and I must not neglect it, but must say what it is that remains of rhetoric.Phaedrus
A great many things remain, Socrates, the things that are written in the books on rhetoric.Socrates
Thank you for reminding me. You mean that there must be an introduction first, at the beginning of the discourse; these are the things you mean, are they not?—the niceties of the art. [266e] Phaedrus
Yes.Socrates
And the narrative must come second with the testimony after it, and third the proofs, and fourth the probabilities; and confirmation and further confirmation are mentioned, I believe, by the man from Byzantium, that most excellent artist in words.Phaedrus
You mean the worthy Theodorus?
Very true.Socrates
Now I myself, Phaedrus, am a lover of these processes of division and bringing together, as aids to speech and thought; and if I think any other man is able to see things that can naturally be collected into one and divided into many, him I follow after and
ὃ δ᾽ ἔπειτα μετ᾽ ἴχνια βαῖνε θεοῖο, and he walked in the footsteps of the god. And whether the name I give to those who can do this is right or wrong, God knows, [266c] but I have called them hitherto dialecticians. But tell me now what name to give to those who are taught by you and Lysias, or is this that art of speech by means of which Thrasymachus and the rest have become able speakers themselves, and make others so, if they are willing to pay them royal tribute?Phaedrus“walk in his footsteps as if he were a god.
”Home. Od. 5.193
They are royal men, but not trained in the matters about which you ask. I think you give this method the right name when you call it dialectic; [266d] but it seems to me that rhetoric still escapes us.Socrates
What do you mean? Can there be anything of importance, which is not included in these processes and yet comes under the head of art? Certainly you and I must not neglect it, but must say what it is that remains of rhetoric.Phaedrus
A great many things remain, Socrates, the things that are written in the books on rhetoric.Socrates
Thank you for reminding me. You mean that there must be an introduction first, at the beginning of the discourse; these are the things you mean, are they not?—the niceties of the art. [266e] Phaedrus
Yes.Socrates
And the narrative must come second with the testimony after it, and third the proofs, and fourth the probabilities; and confirmation and further confirmation are mentioned, I believe, by the man from Byzantium, that most excellent artist in words.Phaedrus
You mean the worthy Theodorus?
