Str. By this example: If anyone, though himself in private station, is able to advise one of the public physicians, must not his art be called by the same name as that of the man whom he advises?
Y. Soc. Yes.
Str. Well, then, if a man who is himself in private station is wise enough to advise him who is king of a country, shall we not say that he has the science which the ruler himself ought to possess?
Y. Soc. We shall.
Str. But certainly the science of a true king is kingly science?
Y. Soc. Yes.
Str. And will not he who possesses this science, whether he happen to be a ruler or a private citizen, rightly be called kingly,
when considered purely with reference to his art?
Y. Soc. At least he has a right to be.
Str. And surely the householder and the master of a family are the same.
Y. Soc. Yes, of course.
Str. Well, so far as government is concerned, is there any difference between the grandeur of a large house and the majesty of a small state?
Y. Soc. No.
Str. Then as for the point we were just discussing, it is clear that all these are the objects of one science, and whether a man calls this the art of kingship or statesmanship or householding, let us not quarrel with him.
Y. Soc. By no means.
Str. But this is plain, that any king can do little with his hands or his whole body toward holding his position, compared with what he can do with the sagacity and strength of his soul.
Y. Soc. Yes, that is plain.
Str. Shall we say, then, that the king is more akin to the intellectual than to the manual or the practical in general?
Y. Soc. Certainly.
Str. Shall we, therefore, put all these together as one—the political art and the statesman, the royal art and the king?
Y. Soc. Obviously.
Str. Then we should be proceeding in due order if we should next divide intellectual science?
Y. Soc. Certainly.
Str. Now pay attention to see if we can perceive any natural line of cleavage in it.
Y. Soc. Tell us of what sort it is.
Str. Of this sort. We recognized a sort of art of calculation.
Y. Soc. Yes.
Str. It is, I suppose, most certainly one of the intellectual arts.
Y. Soc. Of course.
Str. And shall we grant to the art of calculation, when it has found out the difference between numbers, any further function than that of passing judgement on them when found out?
Y. Soc. No, certainly not.
Str. Every architect, too, is a ruler of workmen, not a workman himself.
Y. Soc. Yes.
Str. As supplying knowledge, not manual labor.
Y. Soc. True.