54
Soc. Quite right. Now which of these shall we say is for the sake of the other, generation for the sake of being, or being for the sake of generation?
54
Pro. You are now asking whether that which is called being is what it is for the sake of generation?
54
Soc. Yes, plainly.
54
Pro. For Heaven’s sake, is this the kind of question you keep asking me, Tell me, Protarchus, whether you think shipbuilding is for the sake of ships, or ships for the sake of shipbuilding, and all that sort of thing?
54
Soc. Yes; that is just what I mean, Protarchus.
54
Pro. Then why did you not answer it yourself, Socrates?
54
Soc. There is no reason why I should not; but I want you to take part in the discussion.
54
Pro. Certainly.
54
Soc. I say that drugs and all sorts of instruments and materials are always employed for the sake of production or generation, but that every instance of generation is for the sake of some being or other, and generation in general is for the sake of being in general.
54
Pro. That is very clear.
54
Soc. Then pleasure, if it is a form of generation, would be generated for the sake of some form of being.
54
Pro. Of course.
54
Soc. Now surely that for the sake of which anything is generated is in the class of the good, and that which is generated for the sake of something else, my friend, must be placed in another class.
54
Pro. Most undeniably.
54
Soc. Then if pleasure is a form of generation, we shall be right in placing it in a class other than that of the good, shall we not?
54
Pro. Quite right.
54
Soc. Then, as I said when we began to discuss this point, we ought to be grateful to him who pointed out that there is only a generation, but no existence, of pleasure; for he is clearly making a laughing-stock of those who assert that pleasure is a good.
54
Pro. Yes, most emphatically.
54
Soc. And he will also surely make a laughing-stock of all those who find their highest end in forms of generation.
54
Pro. How is that, and to whom do you refer?
