[23,10] ἐπεὶ φέρε, εἰ <οὐχ> ἡγεῖσθε τὸ δαιμόνιον θεῖον καὶ ἀγαθὸν καὶ μηδενὶ κακοῦ μηδενὸς αἴτιον, πῶς φατε γίγνεσθαι κακοδαίμονα ἄνθρωπον; ἢ ὅταν μὴ προσέχωσι μηδὲ πείθωνται τῷ δαιμονίῳ ἀγαθῷ ὄντι; ὥσπερ εἰ νομίζοιμεν τοὺς ἰατροὺς ἅπαντας ἀγαθοὺς εἶναι τὰ τῆς τέχνης καὶ μηδένα αὐτῶν πονηρὸν ἰατρὸν μηδὲ βλαβερόν, τῶν δὲ καμνόντων κακῶς τινας πράττοντας βλέποιμεν καὶ βλαπτομένους ἐν ταῖς νόσοις, δῆλον ὅτι τούτους ἂν φαῖμεν μὴ ἐθέλειν τὰ προσταττόμενα ποιεῖν, τοὺς δὲ πειθομένους ἀνάγκη καλῶς ἀπαλλάττειν· --- καὶ τί ἂν γίγνεσθαι οὐκ ἂν θαυμάζοιμεν. {—} Οὕτως ἔχει. {—} (23,11) {Δ.} Πότερον οὖν δοκοῦσί σοι οἱ ἐγκρατεῖς <εἶναι> καὶ σώφρονες καὶ νοῦν ἔχοντες, οὗτοι ἀπειθεῖν ἂν τοῖς ἰατροῖς τοῖς ἐμπείροις καὶ τὰ συμφέροντα προστάττουσιν, ἢ τοὐναντίον οἱ ἀνόητοι καὶ ἀκόλαστοι; {—} Δῆλον ὅτι οἱ ἀκόλαστοι. {—Δ.} Τί δέ; τῷ δαίμονι χρηστῷ ὄντι πείθεσθαι καὶ ζῆν κατ´ ἐκεῖνον πότερον ἡγῇ τῶν σωφρόνων εἶναι καὶ νοῦν ἐχόντων ἢ τῶν πονηρῶν καὶ ἀνοήτων; (23,12) {—} Τῶν σωφρόνων. {—Δ.} Τὸ δέ γε μὴ πείθεσθαι μηδὲ προσέχειν ἀλλ´ ἐναντίως τῷ θείῳ τε καὶ δαιμονίῳ πράττειν, τῶν κακῶν καὶ ἀγνωμόνων; {—} Πῶς δ´ ἂν ἄλλως λέγοιμεν; {—Δ.} Εἶναι δὲ τοὺς πειθομένους τῷ δαιμονίῳ τοιούτῳ ὄντι εὐδαίμονας, τοὺς δὲ ἀπειθοῦντας κακοδαίμονας; {—} Ἀνάγκη. {—Δ.} Οὐκοῦν κἀνταῦθα συμβαίνει τὸν μὲν σοφὸν καὶ φρόνιμον εὐδαίμονα εἶναι πάντα, τὸν δὲ φαῦλον κακοδαίμονα, οὐχ ὡς τοῦ δαιμονίου κακοῦ ὄντος, ἀλλ´ ὡς αὐτὸν οὐ προσέχοντα ἐκείνῳ χρηστῷ ὄντι.

[23,10] For just consider: If you really believe that the guiding spirit is divine and good and the author of no evil to anyone, how do you explain a man's becoming unfortunate, that is, unhappy? Or does that happen when he does not heed or obey his guiding spirit, this being good? It is just as if we should think that all physicians are good in the matters of (p313) their profession and that none of them is a bad physician or harmful, but yet should see some of their patients doing poorly and suffering harm in their illnesses; evidently we should say that they refuse to obey orders and that such patients as do obey cannot but come through well; and nothing that should happen to them would surprise anyone. (Interlocuteur) That is right. 11 (Dion) Do you think, therefore, that the really self-controlled and sober and sensible patients are those who would disobey their physicians when these are skilled and prescribe the treatment that is good for them, or, on the contrary, the senseless and uncontrolled? (Interlocuteur) Evidently the uncontrolled. (Dion) Then again, do you hold that to obey the guardian spirit when it is good, and to live in conformity with its direction, is a mark of those who are temperate and sensible or of those who are wicked and senseless? (Interlocuteur) Of those who are temperate. 12 (Dion) And that to refuse to obey and give heed and to act contrary to that which is divine and from the guardian spirit is a mark of the bad and foolish? (Interlocuteur) How could we say anything else? (Dion) And that those who obey the guiding spirit, since it is of this character, are 'fortunate and happy,' and that those who disobey are 'unfortunate and unhappy?' (Interlocuteur) Necessarily so. (p315) (Dion) Therefore, here also it turns out that the wise and sensible man is 'fortunate and happy' in every case, but that the worthless man is 'unfortunate and unhappy,' not because his guardian spirit is bad, but because, although it is good, he does not heed it.