Plutarch's Morals
privately?" Whereupon Socrates replied, "And you too, sir, would it not
have become you to make this remark also privately?" And Pythagoras
having rebuked one of his pupils somewhat harshly before many people,
they say the young fellow went off and hung himself, and from that
moment Pythagoras never again rebuked anyone in another's presence. For,
as in the case of some foul disease, so also in the case of wrong-doing
we ought to make the detection and exposure private, and not
ostentatiously public by bringing witnesses and spectators. For it is
not the part of a friend but a sophist to seek glory by the ill-fame of
another, and to show off in company, like the doctors that perform
wonderful cures in the theatres as an advertisement.[469] And
independently of the insult, which ought not to be an element in any
cure, we must remember that vice is contentious and obstinate. For it is
not merely "love," as Euripides says, that "if checked becomes more
vehement," but an unsparing rebuke before many people makes every
infirmity and vice more impudent. As then Plato[470] urges old men who
want to teach the young reverence to act reverently to them first
themselves, so among friends a gentle rebuke is gently taken, and a
cautious and careful approach and mild censure of the wrong-doer
undermines and destroys vice, and makes its own modesty catching. So
that line is most excellent, "holding his head near, that the others
might not hear."[471] And most especially indecorous is it to expose a
husband in the hearing of his wife, or a father before his children, or
a lover in the presence of the loved one, or a master before his
scholars. For people are beside themselves with pain and rage if
reproached before those with whom they desire to be held in good repute.
And I think it was not so much wine that exasperated Alexander with
Clitus, as his seeming to put him down in the presence of many people.
And Aristomenes, the tutor of Ptolemy,[472] because he went up to the
king and woke him as he was asleep in an audience of some ambassadors,
gave a handle to the king's flatterers who professed to be indignant on
his behalf, and said, "If after your immense state-labours and many
vigils you have been overpowered by sleep, he ought to have rebuked you
privately, and not put his hands upon you before so many people." And
Ptolemy sent for a cup of poison and ordered the poor man to drink it
up. And Aristophanes said Cleon blamed him for "railing against the
state when strangers were present,"[473] and so irritating the
Athenians. We ought therefore to be very much on our guard in relation
to this point too as well as others, if we wish not to make a display
and catch the public ear, but to use our freedom of speech for
beneficial purposes and to cure vice. Moreover, what Thucydides has
represented the Corinthians saying of themselves, that "they had a right
to blame their neighbours,"[474] is not a bad precept for those to
remember who intend to use freedom of speech. Lysander, it seems, on one
occasion said to a Megarian, who was speaking somewhat boldly on behalf
of Greece among the allies, "Your words require a state to back
them":[475] similarly every man's freedom of speech requires character
behind it, and especially true is this in regard to those who censure
and correct others. Thus Plato said that his life was a tacit rebuke to
Speusippus: and doubtless Xenocrates by his mere presence in the
schools, and by his earnest look at Polemo, made a changed man of him.
Whereas a man of levity and bad character, if he ventures to rebuke
anybody, is likely to hear the line,
"He doctors others, all diseased himself."[476]
Sec. XXXIII. Yet since circumstances frequently call on people who are bad
themselves in association with other such to reprove them, the most
convenient mode of reproof will be that which contrives to include the
reprover in the same indictment as the reproved, as in the case of the
line,
"Tydides, how on earth have we forgot
Our old impetuous courage?"[477]
and,
"Now are we all not worth one single Hector."[478]
In this mild way did Socrates rebuke young men, as not himself without
ignorance, but one that needed in common with them to prosecute virtue,
and seek truth. For they gain goodwill and influence, who seem to have
the same faults as their friends, and desire to correct themselves as
well as them. But he who is high and mighty in setting down another, as
if he were himself perfect and without any imperfections, unless he be
of a very advanced age, or has an acknowledged reputation for virtue and
worth, does no good, but is only regarded as a tiresome bore. And so it
was wisely done of Phoenix to relate his own mishaps, how he had meant
killing his father, but quickly repented at the thought "that he would
be called by the Achaeans parricide,"[479] that he might not seem to be
rebuking Achilles, as one that had himself never suffered from excess of
rage. For kindness of this sort has great influence, and people yield
more to those who seem to be sympathetic and not supercilious. And since
we ought not to expose an inflamed eye to a strong light, and a soul a
prey to the passions cannot bear unmixed reproof and rebuke, one of the
most useful remedies will be found to be a slight mixture of praise, as
in the following lines,
"Ye will not sure give up your valiant courage,
The best men in the host! I should not care
If any coward left the fight, not I;
But you to do so cuts me to the heart."[480]
And,
"Where is thy bow, where thy wing'd arrows, Pandarus,
Where thy great fame, which no one here can match?"[481]
Such language again plainly cheers very much those that are down as,
"Where now is Oedipus, and his famous riddles?"[482]
and,
"Does much-enduring Hercules say this?"[483]
For not only does it soften the harsh imperiousness of censure, but
also, by reminding a man of former noble deeds, implants a desire to
emulate his former self in the person who is ashamed of what is low, and
makes himself his own exemplar for better things. But if we make a
comparison between him and other men, as his contemporaries, his
fellow-citizens, or his relations, then the contentious spirit inherent
in vice is vexed and exasperated, and is often apt to chime in angrily,
"Why don't you go off to my betters then, and leave off bothering me?"
We must therefore be on our guard against praising others, when we are
rebuking a man, unless indeed it be their parents, as Agamemnon says in
Homer,
"Little like Tydeus is his father's son!"[484]
or as Odysseus in the play called "The Scyrians,"[485]
"Dost thou card wool, and thus the lustre smirch
Of thy illustrious sire, thy noble race?"
Sec. XXXIV. But it is by no means fitting when rebuked to rebuke back, and
when spoken to plainly to answer back, for that soon kindles a flame and
causes dissension; and generally speaking such altercation will not look
so much like a retort as an inability to bear freedom of speech. It is
better therefore to listen patiently to a friend's rebuke, for if he
should afterwards do wrong himself and so need rebuke, he has set you
the example of freedom of speech. For being reminded without any malice,
that he himself has not been accustomed to spare his friends when they
have done wrong, but to convince them and show them their fault, he will
be the more inclined to yield and give himself up to correction, as it
will seem a return of goodwill and kindness rather than scolding or
rage.
Sec. XXXV. Moreover, as Thucydides says "he is well advised who [only]
incurs envy in the most important matters,"[486] so the friend ought
only to take upon himself the unpleasant duty of reproof in grave and
momentous cases. For if he is always in a fret and a fume, and rates his
acquaintances more like a tutor than a friend, his rebuke will be blunt
and ineffective in cases of the highest importance, and he will resemble
a doctor who dispenses some sharp and bitter, but important and costly,
drug in trifling cases of common occurrence, where it was not at all
needed, and so will lose all the advantages that might come from a
judicious use of freedom of speech. He will therefore be very much on
his guard against continual fault-finding, and if his friend is always
pettifogging about minute matters, and is needlessly querulous, it will
give him a handle against him in more important shortcomings. Philotimus
the doctor, when a patient who had abscesses on his liver showed him his
sore finger, said to him, "My friend, it is not the whitlow that
matters."[487] So an opportunity sometimes offers itself to a friend to
say to a man, who is always finding fault on small and trivial points,
"Why are we always discussing mere child's play, tippling,[488] and
trifles? Let such a one, my dear sir, send away his mistress, or give up
playing at dice, he will then be in my opinion in all respects an
excellent fellow." For he who receives pardon on small matters is
content that his friend should rebuke him on matters of more moment: but
the man who is ever on the scold, everywhere sour and glum, knowing and
prying into everything, is scarcely tolerable to his children or
brothers, and insufferable to his slaves.
Sec. XXXVI. But since "neither," to use the words of Euripides, "do all
troubles proceed only from old age,"[489] nor from the stupidity of our
friends, we ought to observe not only the shortcomings but also the good
points of our friends, aye, by Zeus, and to be ready to praise them
first, and only censure them afterwards. For as iron receives its
consistency and temper by first being submitted to fire and so made soft
and then dipped into cold water, so when friends have been first warmed
and melted with praises we can afterwards use gentle remonstrance, which
has a similar effect to that of dipping in the case of the metal. For an
opportunity will offer itself to say, "Are those actions worthy to be
compared with these? Do you see what fruits virtue yields? These are the
things we your friends ask of you, these become you, for these you are
designed by nature; but all that other kind of conduct we must reject
with abhorrence, 'cast it away on a mountain, or throw it into the
roaring sea.'"[490] For as a clever doctor would prefer to cure the
illness of his patient by sleep and diet rather than by castor or
scammony, so a kind friend and good father or teacher delight to use
praise rather than blame to correct the character. For nothing makes
rebuke less painful or more beneficial than to refrain from anger, and
to inveigh against wrong-doing mildly and kindly. And so we ought not
sharply to drive home the guilt of those who deny it, or prevent their
making their defence, but even contrive to furnish them with specious
excuses, and if they seem reluctant to give a bad motive for their
action we ought ourselves to find for them a better, as Hector did for
his brother Paris,
"Unhappy man, thy anger was not good,"[491]
suggesting that his absconding from the battle was not running away or
cowardice, but only anger. And Nestor says to Agamemnon,
"You only yielded to your lofty passion."[492]
For it has, I think, a better moral tendency to say "You forgot," or
"You did it inadvertently," than to say "You acted unfairly," or "You
behaved shamefully:" as also "Don't contend with your brother," than
"Don't envy your brother;" and "Avoid the woman who is your ruin," than
"Stop ruining the woman." Such is the language employed in rebuke that
desires to reform and not to wound; that rebuke which looks merely at
the effect to be produced acts on another principle. For when it is
necessary to stop people on the verge of wrong-doing, or to check some