Being one day in these assemblies, and seeing a young man who ate his
meat without bread, he took occasion to rally him for it upon a question
that was started touching the imposing of names. "Can we give any
reasons," said he, "why a man is called flesh-eater--that is to say, a
devourer of flesh?--for every man eats flesh when he has it; and I do not
believe it to be upon that account that a man is called so." "Nor I
neither," said one of the company. "But," continued Socrates, "if a man
takes delight to eat his meat without bread, do you not take him to be,
indeed, a flesh-eater?" "I should think it difficult to find another who
better would deserve that name." Upon which somebody else taking the
word said, "What think you of him who, with a little bread only, eats a
great deal of flesh?" "I should," replied Socrates, "judge him, too, to
be a flesh-eater; and whereas others ask of the gods in their prayers to
give them an abundance of fruits, such men in their petitions it is
likely would pray only for abundance of flesh."
The young man whom Socrates had in mind, suspecting that he spoke upon
his account, took some bread, but continued still to eat a great deal of
flesh with it. Socrates perceived him, and showing him with his finger
to those that sat next to him, said to them, "Take notice of your
neighbour, and see whether it be the meat that makes him eat his bread,
or the bread that makes him eat his meat."
In a like occasion, seeing a man sop the same morsel of meat in several
sauces, he said, "Is it possible to make a sauce that will cost more, and
be not so good, as one that is made by taking out of several different
sauces at once? For there being more ingredients than usual, no doubt it
costs more; but then because we mix things together, which the cooks
never used to mingle, because they agree not well with one another, we
certainly spoil the whole; and is it not a jest to be curious in having
good cooks, and at the same time to be so fantastical as to alter the
relish of the dishes they have dressed? Besides, when we have once got a
habit of eating thus of several dishes at once, we are not so well
satisfied when we have no longer that variety. Whereas a man who
contents himself to eat but of one dish at a time finds no great
inconvenience in having but one dish of meat for his dinner."
He made likewise this remark: that to express what the other Greeks
called "to eat a meal," the Athenians said "to make good cheer;" and that
the word "good" shows us that we ought to eat such things only as will
neither disorder the body nor the mind, which are easily had, and
purchased without great expense. From whence he inferred that they alone
who live temperately and soberly can truly be said to make good
cheer--that is to say, to eat well.
BOOK IV.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account