commanded his passions, and that his reasonings were so persuasive that
he drew all men to which side he pleased. Reflecting on this, and being
of the temper we mentioned, can it be thought that they desired the
acquaintance of Socrates, because they were in love with his way of life,
and with his temperance, or because they believed that by conversing with
him they should render themselves capable of reasoning aright, and of
well-managing the public affairs? For my part, I believe that if the
gods had proposed to them to live always like him, or to die immediately,
they would rather have chosen a sudden death. And it is easy to judge
this from their actions; for as soon as they thought themselves more
capable than their companions, they forsook Socrates, whom they had
frequented, only for the purpose I mentioned, and threw themselves wholly
into business.

It may, perhaps, be objected that he ought not to have discoursed to his
friends of things relating to the government of the State, till after he
had taught them to live virtuously. I have nothing to say to this; but I
observe that all who profess teaching do generally two things: they work
in presence of their scholars, to show them how they ought to do, and
they instruct them likewise by word of mouth. Now, in either of these
two ways, no man ever taught to live well, like Socrates; for, in his
whole life, he was an example of untainted probity; and in his discourses
he spoke of virtue and of all the duties of man in a manner that made him
admired of all his hearers. And I know too very well that Critias and
Alcibiades lived very virtuously as long as they frequented him; not that
they were afraid of him, but because they thought it most conducive to
their designs to live so at that time.

Many who pretend to philosophy will here object, that a virtuous person
is always virtuous, and that when a man has once come to be good and