130
Socrates
Soc. Then that cannot be what we are seeking.
Alcibiades
Alc. It seems not.
Socrates
Soc. Well then, does the combination of the two rule the body, so that we are to regard this as man?
Alcibiades
Alc. Perhaps it is.
20
Socrates
Soc. The unlikeliest thing in the world: for if one of the two does not share in the rule, it is quite inconceivable that the combination of the two can be ruling.
Alcibiades
Alc. You are right.
Socrates
Soc. But since neither the body nor the combination of the two is man, we are reduced, I suppose, to this: either man is nothing at all, or if something, he turns out to be nothing else than soul.
Alcibiades
Alc. Precisely so.
Socrates
Soc. Well, do you require some yet clearer proof that the soul is man?
25
Alcibiades
Alc. No, I assure you: I think it is amply proved.
Socrates
Soc. And if it is tolerably, though not exactly, we are content; exact knowledge will be ours later, when we have discovered the thing that we passed over just now because it would involve much consideration.
Alcibiades
Alc. What is that?
Socrates
Soc. The point suggested in that remark a moment ago, Cf. Plat. Alc. 1.129b. that we should first consider the same-in-itself; but so far, instead of the same, we have been considering what each single thing is in itself. And perhaps we shall be satisfied with that: for surely we cannot say that anything has more absolute possession of ourselves than the soul.
Alcibiades
Alc. No, indeed.
30
Socrates
Soc. And it is proper to take the view that you and I are conversing with each other, while we make use of words, by intercourse of soul with soul?
Alcibiades
Alc. Quite so.
