republic (books 1 - 5)   

to be impossible; and hence we must infer that to be a good
guardian is impossible.

I am afraid that what you say is true, he replied.

Here feeling perplexed I began to think over what had pre-
ceded. My friend, I said, no wonder that we are in a perplex-
ity; for we have lost sight of the image which we had before
us.

What do you mean? he said.

I mean to say that there do exist natures gifted with those
opposite qualities.

And where do you find them?

Many animals, I replied, furnish examples of them; our
friend the dog is a very good one: you know that well-bred dogs
are perfectly gentle to their familiars and acquaintances, and
the reverse to strangers.

Yes, I know.

Then there is nothing impossible or out of the order of
nature in our finding a guardian who has a similar combination
of qualities?

Certainly not.

Would not he who is fitted to be a guardian, besides the spir-
ited nature, need to have the qualities of a philosopher?

I do not apprehend your meaning.

The trait of which I am speaking, I replied, may be also seen
in the dog, and is remarkable in the animal.

What trait?

Why, a dog, whenever he sees a stranger, is angry; when an
acquaintance, he welcomes him, although the one has never
done him any harm, nor the other any good. Did this never
strike you as curious?

The matter never struck me before; but I quite recognize the
truth of your remark.

And surely this instinct of the dog is very charming; your
dog is a true philosopher.

Why?

Why, because he distinguishes the face of a friend and of
an enemy only by the criterion of knowing and not knowing.
And must not an animal be a lover of learning who determines
what he likes and dislikes by the test of knowledge and ignor-
ance?

Most assuredly.

And is not the love of learning the love of wisdom, which
is philosophy?