gorgias   

themselves, nor do other men know what to make of them. For if the

body presided over itself, and were not under the guidance of the

soul, and the soul did not discern and discriminate between cookery

and medicine, but the body was made the judge of them, and the rule of

judgment was the bodily delight which was given by them, then the word

of Anaxagoras, that word with which you, friend Polus, are so well

acquainted, would prevail far and wide: "Chaos" would come again,

and cookery, health, and medicine would mingle in an indiscriminate

mass. And now I have told you my notion of rhetoric, which is, in

relation to the soul, what cookery is to the body. I may have been

inconsistent in making a long speech, when I would not allow you to

discourse at length. But I think that I may be excused, because you

did not understand me, and could make no use of my answer when I spoke

shortly, and therefore I had to enter into explanation. And if I

show an equal inability to make use of yours, I hope that you will

speak at equal length; but if I am able to understand you, let me have

the benefit of your brevity, as is only fair: And now you may do

what you please with my answer.

Pol. What do you mean? do you think that rhetoric is flattery?

Soc. Nay, I said a part of flattery-if at your age, Polus, you

cannot remember, what will you do by-and-by, when you get older?

Pol. And are the good rhetoricians meanly regarded in states,

under the idea that they are flatterers?

Soc. Is that a question or the beginning of a speech?

Pol. I am asking a question.

Soc. Then my answer is, that they are not regarded at all.

Pol. How not regarded? Have they not very great power in states?

Soc. Not if you mean to say that power is a good to the possessor.

Pol. And that is what I do mean to say.

Soc. Then, if so, I think that they have the least power of all

the citizens.

Pol. What! Are they not like tyrants? They kill and despoil and