Paradox

THE MEGARIAN IDENTITY CRISIS 73Plato casts Euclides as the reconstructor of the dialoguebecause of Euclides’ interests. Euclides was a strong believerin Socrates’ thesis that all virtues are one thing: knowledge.This thesis stems from a principle of continence: people neverwittingly pick an inferior alternative. If you are offered achoice between two figs and one fig, you choose two figs. Sincewe always aim for the best, people choose evil only when itis in the guise of the good.Socrates acknowledges that the principle of continenceprecludes weakness of will. Those who drink wine to excesswill sometimes sheepishly concede (between sips) that theyknow they would be better off abstaining. However, theycontinue drinking. Socrates takes the same attitude towardoverimbibers as most present-day economists: Actions speaklouder than words! We should not be misled by the drinker’slip service to the precepts of others. The drinker’s realpreference is revealed by his behavior. People imbibe becausethat is what they most want to do.Socrates concedes that people sometimes choose a smallergood that can be immediately obtained over a larger good thatwould require a wait. He thinks this is due to illusions ofperspective. In the late afternoon, your giant shadow appearsto have a tiny head. But the head only looks ill proportionedbecause you are looking at it from the giant’s feet.Socrates suggests that there are also foreshortening illusionswith respect to time. A child might prefer one fig todayover two figs tomorrow because one fig now seems like thegreater good. As people mature, their knowledge of thisillusion weakens its effect. They thereby acquire the virtueof patience. Education reduces other vices. We become lesscowardly with respect to snakes after learning that most ofthem are harmless. As we become more knowledgeable, our