This I say from a sort of notion that what is neither good nor evil is
the friend of the beautiful and the good, and I will tell you why I am
inclined to think so: I assume that there are three principles-the
good, the bad, and that which is neither good nor bad. You would
agree-would you not?
I agree.
And neither is the good the friend of the good, nor the evil of the
good, nor the good of the evil;-these alternatives are excluded by the
previous argument; and therefore, if there be such a thing as
friendship or love at all, we must infer that what is neither good nor
evil must be the friend, either of the good, or of that which is
neither good nor evil, for nothing can be the friend of the bad.
True.
But neither can like be the friend of like, as we were just now
saying.
True.
And if so, that which is neither good nor evil can have no friend
which is neither good nor evil.
Clearly not.
Then the good alone is the friend of that only which is neither good
nor evil.
That may be assumed to be certain.
And does not this seem to put us in the right way? Just remark, that
the body which is in health requires neither medical nor any other
aid, but is well enough; and the healthy man has no love of the
physician, because he is in health.
He has none.
But the sick loves him, because he is sick?
Certainly.
And sickness is an evil, and the art of medicine a good and useful
thing?
Yes.
But the human body, regarded as a body, is neither good nor evil?
True.
And the body is compelled by reason of disease to court and make
friends of the art of medicine?
Yes.
Then that which is neither good nor evil becomes the friend of good,
by reason of the presence of evil?
So we may infer.
And clearly this must have happened before that which was neither good
nor evil had become altogether corrupted with the element of evil-if
itself had become evil it would not still desire and love the good;
for, as we were saying, the evil cannot be the friend of the good.
Impossible.
Further, I must observe that some substances are assimilated when
others are present with them; and there are some which are not
assimilated: take, for example, the case of an ointment or colour
which is put on another substance.
Very good.
In such a case, is the substance which is anointed the same as the
colour or ointment?
What do you mean? he said.
This is what I mean: Suppose that I were to cover your auburn locks
with white lead, would they be really white, or would they only appear
to be white?
They would only appear to be white, he replied.
And yet whiteness would be present in them?
True.
But that would not make them at all the more white, notwithstanding
the presence of white in them-they would not be white any more than
black?
No.
But when old age infuses whiteness into them, then they become