Part 179

“The like, then, is not a friend to the like: but will the good be a friend to the good, so far as he is good, and not so far as he is like?”

“Perhaps so.”

27. “But what? Will not the good man, so far as he is good, be sufficient for himself?”

“Yes.”

“But he who is sufficient stands in need of nothing, so far as sufficiency is concerned?”

“How can it be otherwise?”

“And he who stands in need of nothing will not regard any thing?”

“He will not.”

“But he who does not feel a regard cannot love?”

“Surely not.”

“How, then, will the good be in any respect friends to the good, who neither when absent regret each other, for they are sufficient for themselves when apart, nor when present stand in need of each other? By what contrivance can such persons value each other very highly?”

“By none at all,” said he.

“But they will not be friends who do not value each other very highly?”

“True.”

“Observe then, Lysis, how we are deceived. Are we, then, deceived in the whole?”

“How so?” said he.

“I once heard a person say, and I just now call it to mind, that like is most hostile to like, and the good to the good. And moreover, he adduced Hesiod as a witness, saying that ‘potter is angry with potter, bard with bard, and beggar with beggar.’ And so, he said, with regard to all other things, that as a matter of absolute necessity, things most like each other are most full of envy, strife, and hatred; but such as are most unlike, of friendship; 28. for that the poor man is compelled to be a friend to the rich, and the weak to the strong, for the sake of assistance, and the sick man to the physician; and that every one who is ignorant must regard and love him that has knowledge. Moreover, he carried on the subject in a more lofty style, saying that the like is so far from being friendly to the like, that the very contrary to this takes place. For that the most contrary is in the highest degree friendly to the most contrary; for every thing desires its contrary, and not its like. Thus the dry desires the moist, the cold heat, the bitter sweet, the sharp blunt, the empty fulness, and the full emptiness; and all other things in the same way. For the contrary is food to the contrary, but the like can derive no enjoyment from the like. And indeed, my friend, he who said this seemed to be an accomplished man, for he spoke well. But how does he seem to you to speak?” I asked.

-----

Footnote 174:

Op. et Di., v. 25.

-----

29. “Well,” replied Menexenus, “as it seems on first hearing.”

“Shall we say, then, that the contrary is most friendly to the contrary?”

“Certainly.”

“Be it so,” said I, “but is it not monstrous, Menexenus, and will not those perfectly wise men, the disputants, immediately spring upon us exultingly, and ask, if friendship is not most contrary to enmity? What answer shall we give them? Must we not of necessity admit that they say truly?”

“Of necessity.”

“‘Well then,’ they will ask, ‘is an enemy a friend to a friend, or is a friend a friend to an enemy?’”.

“Neither the one nor the other,” he replied.