Sie sind auf Seite 1von 488

LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY

PLATO
THEAETETUS SOPHIST

(IE an)

Translated by

H.

JV.

FOWLER

I
!

Printed in Great Britain

VOLUMES PUBLISHED
ACHILLES TAT1US AELIAN: ON ANIMALS.
3 vols.

GREEK AUTHORS

AENEAS TACTICUS. ASCLEPIODOTUS. ONASANDER


AESCHINES AESCHYLUS. ALCIPHRON.
2 vols.

Ail IAN.

PHILOSTRATUS:

TIII

\NDOCID1 ANTIPHON APOLLODORUS. APOLLONIUS RHODIUS THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. 2


APPIAN: ROMAN
HISTORY. 4

vols.

ARISTOPHANES. 3 vols. ARISTOTLE: ART OF RHETORIC ARISTOTLE: AI ARISTOTLE: GENERATION OF ANIMALS

ARISTOTL:
ARISTOTLE: ARISTOTLE: ARISTOTLE: ARISTOTLE: ARISTOTLE: ARISTOTLE: ARISTOTLE: ARISTOTLE: ARISTOTLE: ARISTOTLE: ARISTOTLE: ARISTOTLE:

METAPHYSICS.

METEOROLOGIA MINOR WORKS

NICOMACHEAN ETHICS
OECONOMICA, MAGNA MORALIA (with METAPHYSICS.

ON THE HEAVENS ON THE SOUL, PARVA NATURAI \ CATEGORIES, ON INTERPRETATION, PRIOR


i

Vol.

II)

POSTERIOR ANALYTICS, TOPICS

ON SOPHISTICAL REFUTATIONS, and


PARTS, MOVEMENT, PROGRESSION PHYSICS. 2 vols.
POETICS.

othc
I\LS

LONGINUS:
*,

ON mi

DEMETRIUS: ON STYU
ARISTOTLE: POLII ARISTOTLE: PROBLEMS. 2 ARISTOTLE: RHETORICA AD ALEXANDRIA!
(will
2

11)

ARRIAN HISlOKY ATHENAEUS: THE


ST. BASIL:
II

(II

AUXANDEK AND

INDICA.

DUPNOSOPHISIS

ITERS. 4 vols.

CALLIMACHUS: FRAGMIMS CALLIMACHUS. HYMNS. IPIGKAMS. LYCOPHRON. ARAT! \ILNT OH ALEXANDRIA I-HILIPPI< DEMOSTHENES I: OI.VVM:
ORATIONS: I-XV1I and XX DEMOSTHENES II: DE CORONA and DE FALSA LI DEMOSTHENES III: MEIDIAS, ANDROI TIMOCRATES and ARISTOGEITON, I and II DEMOSTHENES IV-VI: PRIVATE ORATIONS and DEMOSTHENES VII: EHNERAI SPFICH, EROTIC
ARISTOCRAI
<
i

AM
>i

and LETTERS

DIO CASS1US. 9 vols. DIO CHRYSOSTOM.

5 vol

DIODORUS SICULUS. 12 vols. Vols. l-Vll. DIOGENES LAERTIUS. 2 vols. DIONYSIUS OF HALICARNASSUS: u
EPICTETUS. 2 vols. EURIPIDES. 4 vols. EUSEBIUS: ECCLESI

IX. X. XI

THE GREEK ANTHOLOGY. 5 vols. THE GREEK BUCOLIC POETS: THEOCRITUS, BIO MOSCHUS GREEK ELEGY and IAMBUS with the ANACREONTE A. 2 vols. GREEK MATHEMATICAL WORKS. 2 HERODOTUS. 4 vols. HESIOD and the HOMERIC HYM
-,

GALEN:

or

.SURE FACULTIES

25S

HIPPOCRATES.

HOMER: HOMER:

4 HI AD. 2 vols. ODYSSEY. 2 %

ISAEUS ISOCRATES. 3 vols. ST JOHN DAMASCENE: BAREAA JCSEPHUS. 9 vols. Vols. 1-VH JULIAN.

^J4
i'H

3*
*

LONGUS:
LUCIAN.

DAPHNIS

AND CHLOE.

PARTHENIUS:

si

8 vols. Vols. I-VII

3&PWWfr

S 5877^-8 181+ Plato Theaetetus and Sophist


NY PUBLIC LIBRARY

THE BRANCH LIBRARIES

CC4
3 3333 05986 1902

THE LOEB

Office of Adult
LOEB, LL.D.

<5

CLA^C&W^fmgr FOUNDED BY JAMES


EDITED BY
tT. E.

PAGE,

O.H., LITT.D.

f E.
L. A.

CAPPS,
POST,

PH.D., LL.D.

W. H. D. ROUSE,

LITT.D.

L.H.D.

E. H.

WARMINGTON,

M.A., F.R.HIST.SOO.

fcfl

c
PLATO
THEAETETUS
SOPHIST

BOOK POOL DISCUSSION PROGR/ OAS - CT

PLATO
WITH AN ENGLISH TRANSLATION
THEAETETUS
I

SOPHIST

BY

HAROLD NORTH FOWLER


OF WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY

CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS

HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS


LONDON

WILLIAM HEINEMANN LTD


MCMLXI

First printed 1921 Reprinted 1928, 1942, 1952, 1961

Printed in Great Britain

CONTENTS
PAGE

PREFACE

Vii

THEAETETUS
SOPHIST

259

PREFACE
THE Greek
Codex
tions

text in this volume

Clarkiaiius

is based upon the and the Codex Venetus. Devia-

from the readings of these manuscripts are noted in the margin at the foot of the page. In most instances disagreement between these two manuscripts,

and occasionally readings found


or
in

in inferioi
as

manuscripts

ancient quotations,

well as

emendations offered by modern scholars, are noted, even when they have not affected the text chosen.

The

following abbreviations are employed

B = Codex

Clarkianus or Bodleianus, written A.D. 895.

T = Codex

Venetus, Append,

class. 4, cod.

twelfth

century.

W = Codex Vindobonensis 54, Suppl.


D = Codex G = Codex
b
t

graec.

7.

Venetus 185.
Venetus, Append, class
4, cod. 54.

w = later
The

hands of B

T W.
aid the reader to appreciate

brief introductions aim merely at supplying

such information as

may

these particular dialogues.

HAROLD

N.

FOWLER
vii

THEAETETUS

A 2

INTRODUCTION TO THE THEAETETUS


IN the Theaetctus Eucleides the Megarian repeats to Terpsion a conversation between Socrates, the mathematician Theodorus, and the youth Theaetetus, who was himself a mathematician of note. The subject is the nature of knowledge, and the discussion is interrupted and furthered by two
his friend

digressions, one concerning midwives, in which Socrates likens his method of investigation to the

the midwife, the other contrasting the lawyer and the philosopher. The definition of knowledge is hard to attain, and The conis, in fact, not attained in this dialogue. fusion between knowledge and various kinds or applications of knowledge is first cleared up, and then the discussion centres upon three definitions
activities of
:

(l)
is

Knowledge

is
;

sensible perception

(2)

Knowledge

true opinion (3) Knowledge is true opinion with reasoned explanation. .The discussion of the first definition contains as one of its most important parts the refutation of the doctrine of Protagoras that " man is the measure of " all but it includes also a discussion of the things doctrine of Heracleitus, that all things are always in S
;

INTRODUCTION TO THE THEAETETUS


Here Plato distinguishes two kinds of motion movement in space and change of quality and asserts that constant motion of the first kind must be accompanied by change, because otherwise the same things would be at the same time both in motion and at rest. This obvious fallacy Plato appears to ascribe to Heracleitus and his school.
motion.

The
rest,

result of this discussion

is that if nothing is at every answer on whatever subject is equally

correct.

The

possibility of false opinion

is

discussed in

This part of the dialogue contains many subtle distinctions and interesting comparisons. The errors of memory are illustrated by the wax tablets which, on account of their imperfections, fail to receive and preserve clear impressions from sensible objects, and the confusion of our recollections by the aviary, the possessor of which takes in his hand one bird when he wishes to take another, though all the birds have previously been caught and imprisoned by him. The third definition is explained in various ways, none of which is found to be satisfactory, and the dialogue closes with its avowed purpose the comunaccomplished, plete definition of knowledge Nevertheless the rejection of the definitions proposed is a gain in itself, and the dialogue may be said to prepare the way for the acceptance of the It serves also as an example of the theory of ideas. importance of the dialectic method, and shows Plato's interest in combating the theories of other

connexion with the second definition.

philosophers. The Theaetetus contains

many

interesting similes

and comparisons, and 4

is,

like

the Sophist and the

INTRODUCTION TO THE THEAETETUS


Statesman, pervaded by a subtle and at the same time ponderous kind of humour which is rather irritating The to some, at least, among modern readers. reasoning is careful and accurate, but the exposition
is

somewhat too prolix for modern taste. The date of the Theaetetus is uncertain, but it cannot be one of the early dialogues. The mention of the Athenian army at Corinth makes any date much earlier than 390 impossible. At the very end
the reader
versation,
is

prepared for a continuation of the con-

and this takes place in the Sophist, but that dialogue and the Statesman may very well have been written some years later than the Theaetetus, from which they differ considerably in style. There are separate editions of the Theaetetus by Lewis Campbell (Oxford, 186l and 1883) and B. H. Kennedy (Cambridge, 1881 and 1894), both with translation and notes.

0EAITHTO2
[H IIEPI EIII2THMH2,
ft
b.
.

TA TOT AIAAOrOT IIPOZQIIA


ETKAEIAH2, TEP^mN, 2HKPATH2,
I.

142

EOAnPOS, 0EAITHTO2

ET.

"Aprt,

co

TEP.

'E77iet/cai? TraAat.

Tep^iojVy 7} miAai e aypov; Kal ere ye C^TOVV /car*


r*
-^

ayopav Kal eOavjjLalyOv ori ofy olos ST. Ou yap -^ /cara


TEP.
ET.

evpelv.

ITou
Ets AtfieW KGLTaf3ai,va)V
1

eatr^rto

<f>pO{JiVW TEP.
ET.

K Y^OpLvBoV
7}

OiTTO

TOV OT/XZTOTTe'SoU 'A6rj-

Zcovrt Zcuvrt

/cat

fJidXa

jLtoAts"

^aAeTra)?
[j.a.XXov

/>tev

yap

/cat UTTO

Tpatyzarcov rtya)^,

fj,rjv

avrov

atpet TO yeyoro? vocn^yLta ev ra> orparev^ari. TEP. Mcuv 7} SucrevTTypta;


ET.

Nat.

TEP.
ET.

Ofov dVSpa Aeyet? ev KivSvvto

etvat.
ITTZI roi

KaAoV re

/cat

ayaQov,

at

Tep^Latv,

THEAETETUS
[OR

ON KNOWLEDGE,
CHARACTERS

TENTATIVE]

EUCLEIDES, TERPSION, SOCRATES, THEODORUS, THEAETETUS


EU. Just in from the country, Terpsion, or did you come some time ago ? and I was looking for TERP. Quite a while ago I could you in the market-place and wondering that
;

not find you. EU. Well, you see,


TERP.

was not

in the city.

Where then ?

EU. As I was going down to the harbour I met Theaetetus being carried to Athens from the camp

at Corinth.

TERP. Alive or dead


EU. Just barely alive

?
;

for

he

is

suffering severely

from wounds, and, worse than that, he has been taken with the sickness that has broken out in the army. TERP. You mean the dysentery ?
EU. Yes.

TERP.
EU.

What

man he

is

who you

say

is

in

danger

noble man, Terpsion, and indeed just

now I 7

PLATO
l vvv TJKOVOV rivcov fjidXa eyKOjfJLiat,6vra)v avrov
rrepl

ryv /za^v.

TEP.

Kat ovoev
el

y* droTrov,

aAAa
r]v.

/cat

TroXv davTTO)?

fjuacrTOTepov,

JJLTJ

roiovros

drdp

OVK

C avrov Meyapol

KareXvev;

ET. 'HTretyero otwraSe' CTTCL eycoy' eSed/x^v /cat ovvefiov\vov, dAA' oi)/c vjOeXev. /cat S^ra rrpOTrefJiavrov, aTnaiv TiaXiv avefJLvricrOrjv /cat 0avfjiaora U?, cus* jLtavrt/ccos aAAa re 8^ etTre /cat Trept TOUTOU. 8o/cet ya/5 jLtot oAtyov 77/00 rou Oavdrov vrv%lv avra) /Ltetpa/cta) ovrt, /cat ovyyevofAevos re /cat StaAe^^et? Travu dyaaOrjvaL avrov r /cat /xot e\06vri 'A^ya^e roJ? re Aoyou? (frvcriv. SteAe^^ avra> Str^yTycraTO, /cat jLtaAa diovs a rovrov eAAoytjitov etWe T6, ort TToiaa dvdyKrj ir)
1

yevecr^at, etVep et? i^At/ctav eXdoL. TEP. Kat dXrjOrj ye, co? eot/cev, ciTrev. TtVe? T^crai/ ot Aoyot; e^ot? av St^y^cracr^ai; ET.

arap

Oj) /xa TOV Ata, OVKOVV ovrai ye

143

/Ltaros"

aAA*

eypa^a^v

TOT*

0,770 oroev^u? ot/ca8* eXOa

VTTOfjLvrj/JLara,

varepov Se /caTa

cn<6fjivo$

ypa<f>ov, /cat ocra/ct?

'A^
fj,r)

rov ajKprrj o eX6a)V eTTrvoOovjLrv'


Tt 77as" o
1

efJLefJLvrjfJLrjv,

/cat

ware

Aoyos yeypartrai.

/jievroL

TJKOvcrd aov /cat Trporepov, /cat 'AXrjOfj' del [JieXXcov KeXevaew eTriSei^ai Siarerpi<f>a Sevpo. aAAa Tt /ccoAuet vw ^/za? SteAfletv; Tfdvrojs eycoye /cat dvarravaaaOai oVo/itat, ca? e^ dypov

TEP.

B
8

ET.

'AAAa

/xey

8^

/cat

THEAETETUS
heard some people praising him highly for his conduct
in the battle.

TERP. That is not at all strange; it would have been much more remarkable if he had not so conducted himself. But why did he not stop here in Megara ? EU. He was in a hurry to get home for I begged and advised him to stop, but he would not. So I went along with him, and as I was coming back I thought of Socrates and wondered at his prophetic For I gift, especially in what he said about him. think he met him a little before his own death, when Theaetetus was a mere boy, and as a result of acquaintance and conversation with him, he greatly admired his qualities. When I went to Athens he related to me the conversation he had with him, which was well worth hearing, and he said he would surely become a notable man if he lived. TERP. And he was right, apparently. But what was the talk ? Could you relate it ? But I EU. No, by Zeus, at least not offhand. made notes at the time as soon as I reached home, then afterwards at my leisure, as I recalled things, I wrote them down, and whenever I went to Athens I used to ask Socrates about what I could not remember, and then I came here and made corrections; so that I have pretty much the whole talk written down. TERP. That is true. I heard you say so before and really I have been waiting about here all along What hinders intending to ask you to show it to me. us from reading it now 1 Certainly I need to rest, since I have come from the country. EU. And I myself went with Theaetetus as far as
;

PLATO
irr]TOi>

TTpovTTejjUJja,

cocrre

OVK av dySajs dvaa^ta

aAA'

tco/zev, /cat r)fjiiv

77ats"

aVayvcoo'eTat.

TEP.
ET.

'Op^ai?

Ae'yet?.
Srj

To

fjiev

flij3Xiov,

to

Tepifjicov,

roi'rr
e/>toi

Se

8^
e</>^

ovrcocrl

rov

Aoyov,

ou/c

tiyyov/Aevov

ws

St^yetro,

aAAa

Sta-

Aeyo/xevov
yeai/uLerprj

ot?

OeoSaSpw

Se ra) SiaX6%9rjvai. <f>7] /cat rai tVa eatr^ra).

re

eV r?y ypa(f)fj

Trape^oiev Trpdyp.ara at jJL,rj Aoycov St^y^cret? 77ept avrov re ovrore Aeyot o


:,

otov, /cat eyco

e<f>r)v

T)

/cat

eyco etTrov,

7} 77ept rou d?70/cptvo^eVou, ort oiW^ ^ ou^ co^toAoyet, TOVTCOV eVe/ca cus aurov a?5rot? StaAeyofjievov eypoujjci, e^eXcbv ra rotaura. TEP. Kat ovSeV ye aTro rpoTrov, cb Eu/cAetSr^. ET. 'AAAa, Trat, Aa/3e ro j3ij3Xiov /cat Ae'ye. 2. 2il. Et /^ev raV eV KupT]!/?] fjidXXov

au

o6fj,r}V,

co

eoScape,

ra

e/cet ai;

ae

/cat vrept
TI

av

rjpcbrcov, et rtre? OLvrodi rrepi yecofjteTpcav

TWO.

(f)iXoao(f)Lav etat rcov ve'cov eVt/^e'Aetav Trotou-

vw
/cat jJidXXov

Se rjTTOV ydp

e'/cetVou?

^ rowcrSe

<f>iXa),

e77tSo^ot

rojv vea>v 7Ti9vfj.a) etSeVat rives i^lv yevea9ai e77tet/cets" ravra S^ auro? re
OCTOV SwayLtat, /cat
rous"

cr/coTTCo /ca^'
ots"

rou? aAAou? epcuroj

oV opcD
STI

veovs

e9eXovras ovyyiyveadai.

aot

ou/c

afto? yap ra

oAtytarot nvV^o'ta^oyo't, /cat ot/cata>s" et re aAAa /cat yeaj^erpias eve/ca.

10

THEAETETUS
1 Erineum, so

also should not be sorry to take a rest

Come,

let us go,

and while we. are

resting, the

boy

shall read to us.

TERP. Very well. EU. Here is the book, Terpsion. Now this is the way I wrote the conversation I did not represent Socrates relating it to me, as he did, but conversing with those with whom he told me he conversed. And he told me they were the geometrician Theodorus and Theaetetus. Now in order that the explanatory
:

words between the speeches might not be annoying or written account, such as " and I said "and I remarked," whenever Socrates spoke, or " "he agreed or "he did not agree," in the case of the interlocutor, I omitted all that sort of thing and represented Socrates himself as talking with them. TERP. That is quite fitting, Eucleides. EU. Come, boy, take the book and read. soc. If I cared more for Cyrene and its affairs, Theodorus, I should ask you about things there and about the people, whether any of the young men there are devoting themselves to geometry or any other form of philosophy but as it is, since I care less for those people than for the people here, I am more eager to know which of our own young men These are the things are likely to gain reputation. I myself investigate, so far as I can, and about which I question those others with whom I see that the
in the
'"
;

young men like to associate. them come to you, and rightly,


1

Now
for

a great

many

of

you deserve it on account of your geometry, not to speak of other


Cephissus.
miles.

Erineum was between Eleusis and Athens, near the Apparently Eucleides had walked some thirty
11

PLATO
ovv
EO.
crot
rii'L

evervxes d^ico Aoyou, r]oea)$ av


IJLTJV,

TTV-

Kat

d/couaat

60 Zco/cpare?, e/xot re etVetv /cat Trdvv d^iov, 0160 i5/,ttv T6ov 77oAtT6oi'

ju,etpa/ct60

evrervx^Ka. aV cr^oSpa Ae'yetv, avrou eivai' vvv Se


/

/cat

et
^tT]

/caAd?, /zev T^V /cat T6o Sd| 6o eV


:

/cat

/^

^Ltot

ou/c ecrrt /caAd?, 77pocre ot/ce Se crot


/cat

r^v re

144

f'x

et -

rd e^co T6ov o/jLj^drcov rjrrov Se -^ en) / ei) dSe6o? S^ Ae y6o. yap ta^t drt

7TO)7TOT

VTVOV- /Cat
fjCTdo/jL-^v

7TO.VV

ovra} Oav/jLaarws ev TO yap evjJLaOfl ovra, a)$ a'AAco ^aXeTrov, npaov av elvcLi Sta^epoWcus , /cat eVt rourots" avS/oetov Trap*
7760
1

ovrivovv,
/cat

eyco

fiev

opa) yiyvofJLtvov*'

ay^tvot
1

/cat

our' aV COO/XT^V yeveodan ovre aAA' ot re d^et? cocrTie/o ovros /zvT^Ltoves' co? ra TroAAa /cat Ttpo?
etcrt,

ra? dpyas 6vppO7Tol


c5o-77ep
7}

/cat

arrovre?
/cat

(f)poi>Ton

TO.

av&pjJidrKJTCL

TrXola,

[iaviK<oTpoi

(frvovrai, ot re au ef-ippiOfcrTepOL a77avT606Tt 77/90? TO.? paOrjcreis /cat 6 oe ovra> XCLOJS re /cat aTTTaicrrcus Xr]0r]s yefjiovres.

dvSpeiorepoi
776O?

vojOpol
/cat

re /cat eXaiov l peovros, (Zare Bav^doai ro Kovrov ovra ovrtos ravra Siarrpdrreo-Oai. 2n. Eu ecrrt TtVo? Se /cat ayyeAAet?.
dvvaifJLOJS

ep^erat

e?7t

rd?

jJLaOijcreis

>

77oAA^s

rrpqorriros,

oiov

0EO.

*A/c7]/coa
e'art

;itei>

rovvoua,

C aAAa
1

{.ivrjuovevcD

Se ow.
raj

yctp

rwvSe T6ov rrpooiovrajv 6 ev


;

yiyv6fj.eyov

ut videtur, Burnet

yiy^o^vovs B, Berol.

12

THEAETETUS
reasons.
is

So if you have met with any young man who worth mentioning, I should like to hear about him. THEO. Truly, Socrates, it is well worth while for me to talk and for you to hear about a splendid young fellow, one of your fellow-citizens, whom I have met. Now if he were handsome, I should be very much afraid to speak, lest someone should think I was in love with him. But the fact is now don't be angry with me he is not handsome, but is like you in his snub nose and protruding eyes, only those features are You see I speak less marked in him than in you.

men

But I assure you that among all the young have ever met and I have had to do with a I never great many yet found one of such marvelHe is quick to learn, beyond lously fine qualities. almost anyone else, yet exceptionally gentle, and moreover brave beyond any other I should not have supposed such a combination existed, and I do not see it elsewhere. On the contrary, those who, like him, have quick, sharp minds and good memories, have usually also quick tempers they dart off and are swept away, like ships without ballast they are excitable rather than courageous those, on the other
fearlessly.
I
; ;
;

hand, who are steadier are somewhat dull when brought face to face with learning, and are very But this boy advances toward learning forgetful.

and investigation smoothly and surely and successwith perfect gentleness, like a stream of oil that flows without a sound, so that one marvels how he accomplishes all this at his age. soc. That is good news but which of our citizens
fully,
;

is

his father

THEO.
it.

I have heard the name, but do not remember However, it does not matter, for the youth is

13

PLATO
dpn yap
eV
raj

ea>

8/>d/zo>

r}Xei<f>ovro

IralpoL re Tives ovroi avrov Kal avros, vvv Se' dAAd d\i^sd;.jLevoL Sevpo teVat. el yiyvcbaKeis avrov. 6 rov lariv, Kal rrdvv ye, at tfttXe, dvftpos olov Kal av TOVTOV Sc^yet, Kal aAAco? euSo/ct/xou, Kal uevroi Kal ovaiav fj,dXa TroXArjv KareXnrev. TO 8' ovoaa ov K oToa rov {JieipaKiov. EO. eairrjro?, aj 2c6/cpare?, TO ye /xeVrot ovaiav SoKovai /xot errirporroi r-f]v dAA' ofjLO>s Kal rrpos rcov oi<f)9apKvaL' Trjv
Xprj/maTcov eXevOepLorrjra OavLiaaros,
5fl.
<i>

TevvLKov Aeyet? rov dvopa. /cat /zot avrov evddbe rrapaKaOi^eaOai,. EO. "Ecrrat ravra. Qeairrjre, Sevpo
cu

Trapd

TOV

dvaoKei/Jco/jiai,

rrolov

0eatT7]T, tva Ka.ya> euavrt e^to TO rrpocrajTrov


/xe
crot

(frrjalv

yap QeoSajpos e^eiv

o/zoiov.

drap

iyovroiv CKarepov Xvpav efirj avrds r)pp,6o-9ai O/JLOLOIS, rrorepov evOvs dv eVtcrreuo/^ev T) e / V N / /)> av, et uovaiKos cov Aeyet; j//a/xei7
et va>^
/ >
^

l\

EAI.
Sfl.

'E77e<TAcet/fd/xe^'

dV.

OVKOVV roiovrov ucv evpovres

dV, dfjiovaov oe, rjTnarovfJiev ; EAI. 'AAr^L?^.

2n.

Nw
>/

8e y',

ot/Ltat,

et rt

yite'Aet

145 Trpoawrrajv

ofjLOLorrjros, CFKCTTTGOV, el

ypa^iKos

>

A/ eyet

17

ou.

THEAETETUS
the middle one of those who are now coming toward He and those friends of his were anointing themselves in the outer course/ and now they seem to
us.

have finished and to be corning here. See if you recognize him. He is the son of Euphronius of soc. Yes, I do. Suniuni, who is a man of just the sort you describe, and of good repute in other respects moreover he But the youth's name 1 left a very large property. do not know. but I THEO. Theaetetus is his name, Socrates believe the property was squandered by trustees. Nevertheless, Socrates, he is remarkably liberal with
;

his

money,
soc.

too.
is

It

a noble
to

man

that you describe.

Now

please tell THEO. I


soc.

him
will.

come here and sit by us. Theaetetus, come here to


;

Socrates.

Yes, do

myself and dorus says a lyre, and key, should or should we inquire first whether he who said it was a musician ? THEAET. We should inquire. soc. Then if we found that he was a musician, we should believe him, but if not, we should refuse to take his word ? THEAET. Yes. soc. But now, if we are concerned about the likeness of our faces, we must consider whether he who speaks is a painter, or not.
1

Theaetetus, that I may look at see what sort of a face I have for TheoNow if we each had it is like yours. he said we had tuned them to the same we take his word for it without more ado,
so,

The scene

is

evidently laid in a

gymnasium

the young

men have been

exercising.

15

PLATO
EAI.

oKCl ovv
T

fJLOl

EAI.

2n.
EAI.

Ovx> oaov ye //,e etSeVat. Ap' ouSe yeco/zerptKo?;


ria^rcos 8^77ou, a> Saj sp
1

2n.

^H

/<:at

darpovofJUKOs

KCLL Aoytcrrt/cos'

re

ACCU

p.ovcrtKos KCLL oaa rraiSeias e^erat; EAI. "E/xotye So/<ret.

Et
TOV vovv
EAI.

jLtej^

apa

7^/zas

roO aco^taros rt OfJLoiovs v, ov TTOLVV aura>


1

"IcTCOS"

OV.

aperr^v

TTorepov rrjv ifw^v eVat^ot re wat tro^tav; dp' ou/c a^iov ra> OLKOvaavri TrpoOv/JielaOai dvaaKipao6ai TOV e OevTCLf TO) Se TrpoOvfjiajs COLVTOV eTnSeiKvvvai ; EAI. riavv /xev ow, c5 SaJ/cpare?.
2fl.

Tt

8',

et

3.

2n.

"Opa

roivvv,

d>

cf)i)(

eTTiotiKvvva.1, ejjiol 8e

aKOTre'icrOa.i'

eatr^re, crot V laQi J)S

on

OeoSajpo? TvoAAoi)? 87) 77po? /^e eVat^eaa? evovs re /cat darou? oi)SeVa TTCO err'tjveo'ev ws oe vvv EAI. Eu av e^ot, cu Sco/cpares" aAA' opa

Trat^ajv e'Aeyev.

u^ OVTO? 6 T POTTOS OeoScopoiv


TO,
>

dAAa

cu/xoAoyi^/xeVa cr/<7]77TO/zevos rrai^ roV8e, tVa /XT] KCU dvayKao-Ofj fiaprvpeiv yap ot'Sets" 677tcr/c7]0et aura). dAAa, dappwv
rfj o/^,oAoyt'a.

EAI.

'AAAd ^p^ ravra noielv,

el crot So/cet.

2n.
EAI.

Aeye

8?^ p,ot*

^avQdv&is TTOV Trapd Seoowpov

yeco/zerpta? arra;

"Eycoye.

16

THEAETETUS
THEAET. I think we must. soc. Well, is Theodorus a painter ? THEAET. Not so far as I know.
soc.

Nor a geometrician,

either

THEAET.
soc.

Oh yes, decidedly, Socrates. And an astronomer, and an arithmetician,


in general
so.

and a musician, and


THEAET.
soc.
I

an educated man

think

says, either in praise or blame, physical resemblance, it is not attention to him. especially worth while to pay

Well then,

if

he

that

we have some

THEAET. Perhaps not. soc. But what if he should praise the soul of one Is it not worth while of us for virtue and wisdom ? for the one who hears to examine eagerly the one who
is

praised,

and

for that

one to exhibit

his qualities

with eagerness ? THEAET. Certainly, Socrates. soc. Then, my dear Theaetetus, this is just the time for you to exhibit your qualities and for me for I assure you that Theodorus, to examine them though he has praised many foreigners and citizens to me, never praised anyone as he praised you just now. but make sure THEAET. A good idea, Socrates that he was not speaking in jest. But do not seek soc. That is not Theodorus's way. to draw back from your agreement on the pretext that he is jesting, or he will be forced to testify under oath for certainly no one will accuse him of perjury. Come, be courageous and hold to the agreement. THEAET. I suppose I must, if you say so.
; ;

soc.

Now

tell

me

suppose you

learn

some

geometry from Theodorus ?


THEAET. Yes.
17

PLATO

2n.
EAI.
2fl.

Kat raV

Trepl dcrTpovo/JLLav

re

/cat

ap/j,ovia.$

/cat Aoytcr/zou?;

T[po9vfjLOVfjLai

y
to

877.
TTCLI,

Kat yap eyw,

rrapd ye TOVTOV
errateiv.

KCLL

Trap' aXXajv,

ov? av otayzat rt TOVTWV

dAA'

Ta fj.ev d'AAa e^a) irepl avra jJLerpiajs, <j'fJiLKpov e TL a.7ropa), o fjiera crov re /cat
/cat /xot

Aeye* dp' ou TO fJiavBdveiv early TO cro(f)a)Trrepl o

pov yiyveaOai
0EAI.
rials'

^avddvei TL?;
<JO(f)ol

yap ov;
y', ot//,at,

2H.
EAI.

2o0ta Se
Nat.

ot 0o<f>ol.

2n.
0EAI.

Touro Se

/xcov

Sta^epet rt eVtar^/x^s';
e7rtcrr^ ctoves',
/

To
*H

Trolov;

2n.
EAI.

ao<^ta.

^ ou^ dVep

raura

/cat ao(f)Oi;

Tt

/XT^V;

2H.
EAI.

2n.

a'/oa eTrtar^/x^ /cat ao^ta; Nat. Tovr' auro TOIVVV earlv o oLTropco

Taurov

/cat

ou

Swa/xat Xafielv u<ava>s Trap* IfjiavTO), emaT7]ft77 o rt 146 7TOT6 Tuy^dVet 6V. ap' ow 817 e'^o/zez' Xeyeiv avTo; TL <f>aTe; rt? dV rj/jLaji> rrpajTO? etVot; o Se afJLapraiVy /cat 09 dV det d/xaprdv^, /ca^eSetrat, cuarrep (fraolv ot TratSe? ot cr^ai/H^ovTes', 6Vos" '
os"

dv

TT-e/nyeV^rat

dya/xdyOT^ro?,

/cat

eVtrdfet o rt dv fiovXrjTaL d

TL

CTtare;

ou rt
1

Aoytas* dypot/ct^o/xat, TrpoOvfjiovjjievos rjfjLa.^ StaAeyea^at /cat ^>t'Aou? re /cat Trpoorrjyopovs

Aot? yiyvea9ai;
1

^/ia?]

ywaj T.

18

THEAETETUS
soc.

And astronomy and harmony and arithmetic ?


I

THEAET.
soc.

And
who
1

try hard to do so. so do I, my boy, from

him and from any


these things.

others

think

know anything about

But nevertheless, although in other respects I get on fairly well in them, yet I am in doubt about one little matter, which should be investigated with your Tell me, is not help and that of these others. learning growing wiser about that which one
learns
soc.
?

THEAET.

suppose, are wise by wisdom. THEAET. Yes. soc. And does this differ at all from knowledge ? THEAET. Does what differ ? Or are not people wise in that soc. Wisdom.
of which they have knowledge THEAET. Of course.
soc.
?

Of course. And the wise, I

Then knowledge and wisdom

are the

same

thing ? THEAET. Yes.


soc. Well, it is just this that I am in doubt about and cannot fully grasp by my own efforts what knowCan we tell that ? What do you say ? ledge really is. Who of us will speak first ? And he who fails, and whoever fails in turn, shall go and sit down and be donkey, as the children say when they play ball and whoever gets through without failing shall be our king and shall order us to answer any questions he pleases. Why are you silent ? I hope, Theo;

dorus, I am not rude, through my love of discussion and my eagerness to make us converse and show ourselves friends and ready to talk to one another.

19

PLATO
B
av
EO.
eirj

"H/ctcrra

/xet>,

a)

Zcu/cpaTe?,

TO TOLOVTOV
/ce'Aeue' crot

aypoLKOv, dAAa TOJV jiieipa/aau> TL


fjiev

eyco 8taAe'/CTOU, /cat ouS'


a.7TOKpiveoBai'
TO)
5

yap

dijdrjs

rfjs

TOtaSe Se TrpeVot re

av cruveOi^eaOai ^At/ctW e oV rovro /cat TroAu TT\OV


17

yap 6Wt

aAA', cocnrep vjp^oj,

/mrj

epcora. 2fl. 'A/couet? S^, c5 ' f ^ .-j'p* w a7Tiueiv, L cos eyto

aAA

N \ >

vorr)s et? Trav a^teao ro?

/3i

* ot/xat,

eatr^re, a Aeyet
'

oure

cru

ovre

Oe/Jiis Trepl

ra Toiavra dvSpl
dAA' eu

V0)Tpov
0EAI.

aVei$eti>.

ao(j>a) eTrtrarrovrt /cat yevvatojs

Tt CTOt 8o/cet etvat

'AAAa
Trdvrajs yap,

av rt

/cat

a/mprco,

irav-

4.

6EAI.
rts"

2n. IldVu //.et' ow, aV 77ep ye ofot T Ao/cet roivvv {JLOL /cat a Trapa 0eoScupou
fJiddoL
Si)

emarrj/JLaL

a? vi>

CTU

elvai, yeto/xcrpta re /cat SirjXOes, /cat au cr/cuTOTO//,t/C7^ re /cat

at TOJV a'AAwv

^trjjjuovpyojv re^vai, rraaai re /cat TOVTOlVy OVK ttAAo Tt ^ eTTtCTT^^ LVai. Fewat'a)? ye /cat ^tAoScop TToAAd StSco? /cat T/ot/ctAa

0EAI.

nco?
"lacos
1

Tt

TOVTO

Ae'yet?, cu

2n.

)U,ev

ouSeV'
fjirf

o /xeWot ot/xat,

6Vav Xeyr/s aKvriKrjV,


aTJ\\Jjr\v VTToSrj/jidTCov

aAAo
1

epyacrtas

Erp
EAI.

OuSeV.
/

Tt aAAo Te/CTOVt/ajv; jitiy ra>v ^vXivcuv ai<eva)v epyaaias; eTnoTTJiJLrjv rrjs

2H.

It

o,

^>

oTav

f/

w\

direideiv

dTnarea'

BT

d.Tre\deii> al.

20

THEAETETUS
rude,

answer your questions

THEO. That sort of thing would not be at Socrates but tell one of the youths
; ;

all

to

for I

conversation and, moreover, I accustom myself to it. But that would be fitting for these young men, and they would improve much more than I for the fact is, youth admits of improvement in every way. Come, question Theaetetus as you began to do, and do not let him off. soc. Well, Theaetetus, you hear what Theodorus says, and I think you will not wish to disobey him, nor is it right for a young person to disobey a wise man when he gives instructions about such matters. Come, speak up well and nobly. What do you think
;

am unused to such am not of an age to

knowledge

is ?

THEAET. Well, Socrates, For if I make a mistake,


soc.

must, since you bid me.


to set

you are sure

me

right.

Certainly, if

we

can.
I

THEAET. Well then,


all

think the things one might

learn from Theodorus are

knowledge

geometry and
;

the things you spoke of just now and also each and cobblery and the other craftsmen's arts all of these are nothing else but knowledge. soc. You are noble and generous, my friend, for when you are asked for one thing you give many, and a variety of things instead of a simple answer. THEAET. What do you mean by that, Socrates? soc. Nothing, perhaps but I will tell"you what I think I mean. When you say " cobblery you speak of nothing else than the art of making shoes, do you ? THEAET. Nothing else.
;

" " soc. And when you say carpentry ? Do you mean anything else than the art of making wooden

furnishings

21

PLATO
0EAI.
2fl.

OuSe TOVTO. QVKOVV eV dju<^oo>, ov

e/care'pa

TOVTO optetsv 0EAI. Nat.


2fl.
r/v,

To

Se y' epajTT^eV, 1
Tj

c5

eatT^re, ou TOVTO
oTvocrat

TLVWV

eTnoTT^it^,

ovoe

rives'

ov

yap

dpLOfjirjaaL

aura? fiovAo/mevoL

rjpofAeOa,
?)

dAAa,

7TicrTr)fxr)v

CLVTO o TL TTOT* ecrrtV.

0EAI.

147

roSe. et rt? 2fl. S/ce0at 817 /cat / ^ ? J /\ <pavAo)v TL /cat Tfpoy^eipcov epoiTO, oiov Tcepi TTYJAOV, 6 TL TfOT* eartV, et aTTOKpivaijAzOcL avTO) vn^Ao? o vTpecuv /cat TTT^Ao? o rcov iTrvoTrAaOojv /cat
\

>/

-V

o 0EAI.
2il.

TCUJ^

Tr\iv6ovpya)v y OVK av yeAotot

elfji^v;

"laws'.

ITpaJTOV jiteV ye 77ou oto/xevot avvievai e/c rjfJLTpa$ a7TOKpLO~6(Jj$ TOV epCOTCOVTOL, OTOV O TOJl' KO pOTT\OiO O)V TfpOodeVTZS etre aAAco^ (JJVTIVOIVOVV Srjfuovpycov. rf, otet, rts Tt orvvirjcriv TLVOS oVojLta, o /x^ otSev rt ecrrti/;
0EAI.

O
p,rj

6 emaTrjiJLrjV
EAI.

Ou

yap.

2fl. 2/curt/c^v apa ov avvirjcriv os av dyvofj, ovoe TLVCL aXXrjv 0EAI. "E(JTtV
2fl.

FeAota apa
TL
ecrrty,
5<?

77

aTro/cptcrt? ra>

epcor^^eVrt eVtre'^VT]?

orav drro/cptV^rat
;

ro

7'

^pwr^v Burnet
BT.

r6 5^ 7e

puTi)Qh

W,

Berol.;

5' tTrewTT)8tj>

22

THEAETETUS
THEAET. Nothing else by that, either. soc. Then in both cases you define that to which each form of knowledge belongs ? THEAET. Yes. soc. But the question, Theaetetus, was not to what knowledge belongs, nor how many the forms of knowledge are for we did not wish to number them, but to find out what knowledge itself really is. Or is there nothing in what I say ? THEAET. Nay, you are quite right. soc. Take this example. If anyone should ask us about some common everyday thing, for instance, what clay is, and we should reply that it is the potters' clay and the oven makers' clay and the bookmakers' clay, should we not be ridiculous ? THEAET. Perhaps. soc. Yes in the first place for assuming that the questioner can understand from our answer what " clay is, when we say clay," no matter whether we add " the image-makers' or any other craftsmen's. Or does anyone, do you think, understand the name of anything when he does not know what the
; ;
'

'

thing is ? THEAET.
soc.

shoes THEAET. No.

By no means. Then he does not understand knowledge of if he does not know knowledge.

soc. Then he who is ignorant of knowledge does not understand cobblery or any other art. THEAET. That is true. soc. Then it is a ridiculous answer to the question " " what is knowledge ? when we give the name of

PLATO
C
6Vo/za.
EAI.
2fl.

TWO? yap eTnarri^v dVo/cptVeTat ov TOUT


"Eot/cev.

"ETretTa ye Troy c^ov <f>avXa)s


Treptep^eTat

/cat

drroKpivaaOai
KOLl

\> 6V

TT)

TOV
orou

\~5

airepavTOV
/
I

oSoV.
'

otov
*

~\

TT7]AOV

pO)Tr]O~i

(f>CLVAOV

7TOU

KO.L

L7TLV

on y^
e'dV

vypa) (frvpaOtlcra TrrjXos aV


cS

TO
5-

8'

^atpetv.

0EAI.

'PaStoi/,

So; spares',
1

^w

ye ourcu
/cat
e/>tot
1

KrtvSuveyets arap epcurav otov ayrot? 7^/xtv eVay^o? elarjXOe StaAeyo^ueVots ,

atVeraf

D re

/cat TOJ aai O/XCDVU/AOJ


2fi.

rovra) Sco/cparet.

To

TTOIOV 817, c3

OeatV^re;
^/ztv
Trept

0EAI.

Flept

8um/xec6v rt T rptVoSos
1

OeoScopo?
/cat

6'Se

ort fitKei ov cru/x/xerpot T?y Tro Stata

Kara fjiiav e/cacrr^v 7Tpoa.ipov/jLvo$ ev Se ravrrj TTWS eve eTrra/catSe/caTToSo? rfjs ovv elafjXOe TL TOIOVTOV, eTretS^ aVetpot TO
/cat

OVTO)

'

etV

s at ovvdfJtLs e(f>aivovTO t TreLpadrjvai o~uXX eV, OTO) 77acras TauTaj TrpoaayopevaofJiev


>

airo(t>a.ivwi>
1

om.

Burnet brackets.
:

The simple form of the first statement would be square roots of 3, 5, etc., are irrational numbers or surds. The word 5iW/us has not the meaning which we give in " English to power," namely the result of multiplication of a number by itself, but that which we give to '* root," i.e. the number which, when multiplied by itself, produces a given result. Here Theaetetus is speaking of square roots only and when he speaks of numbers and of equal factors
;

24

THEAETETUS
art for we give in our answer something that knowledge belongs to, when that was not what we were asked. THEAET. So it seems. soc. Secondly, when we might have given a short, everyday answer, we go an interminable distance round for instance, in the question about clay, the be to say " clay is everyday, simple thing would " earth mixed with moisture without regard to whose

some

clay

it is.

THEAET. It seems easy just now, Socrates, as you but you are probably asking the kind of put it
;

thing that came up among us lately when your namesake, Socrates here, and I were talking together. soc. What kind of thing was that, Theaetetus ? THEAET. Theodoras here was drawing some figures for us in illustration of roots, showing that squares containing three square feet and five square feet are not commensurable in length with the unit of the foot, and so, selecting each one in its turn up to the square containing seventeen square feet and at Now it occurred to us, since the that he stopped. number of roots appeared to be infinite, to try to collect them under one name, by which we could henceforth call all the roots. 1
;

he evidently thinks of rational whole numbers only, not He is not giving an of irrational numbers or fractions. exhaustive presentation of his investigation, but merely a brief sketch of it to illustrate his understanding of the purpose of Socrates. Toward the end of this sketch the word duva/M$ is limited to the square roots of "oblong" numbers, i.e. to surds. The modern reader may be somewhat confused because Theaetetus seems to speak of arithmetical facts in geometrical terms. (Cf. Gow, Short History of Greek Mathematics, p. 85.)
B

25

PLATO
2n.
/cat

0EAI.
2X1.

"E^itotye SoACou/xev

rjvpere ri roiovrov; o~K07Ti 8? /cat

crv.

Ae'ye.

0EAI. ToV dpiOjJiov rrdvra St^a SteAa/So/ze ev ovvd/Jievov LCTOV to'a/ct? y'iyvzaOai ra>

TO OfjLCL a7TLKOL(jaVTS TerdaJVOV T


TrXevpov
2fl.

Kal

1<JO-

Kat ei; ye. Tov Toivvv p,Tai> TOVTOV, &v Kal ra 148 rpla /cat ra TreVre /cat 77a? o? dSwaro? tcros aAA' 7} 7T\eia)V eAarrovaActs ^ tcra/ct? yevecr^at,
0EAI.
1

l\drra>v TiAeot'cx/ct? ytyyerat, /xet^co^ 8e /cat eXdrraiv del TrXevpd CLVTOV TrepiXa^dvei, ra 77/3O/X7]/cet au

cr^^art
aa/xev.

aTret/cacrayres'

TrpofJuJKr)

dpiO^ov eVaAerovro;
loorrXevpov
fjifJKOs

2n.
EAI.

KaAAtara. aAAa, rt TO "Oaat />tev ypa//-/xat


dpiOjJiov
erepo/JiiJKr],

jLtera

TOI^

/cat

7Ti7T(!>ov
,

TeTpayojVL^ovcn,
e/cetVat?,

djpLcrd[JLTJKI

oaat Se ToV

SwvajLtet?,

cos-

01)
t.

vfjL{jiTpovs

Tot? S' e77t77eSot? a

/cat Trept TO,

crrepea a'AAo TOLOVTOV.


a>crr

2H.

"Apicrrd y' dv9pa)7ra)v, a) TratSes" So/cet o eoScopo? oy/c eVo^o? Tot?

0EAI.

Kat

/X7]v,

co

StoAcpaTe?, o yc e/ocoTa?

aTTOKpivaadai, 7Tpl rov /JLIJKOVS Kol rfjs Swa/xeco?. /catVot CTU ye jitot 80^6 1? roiovrov ri t^relv cocrTe TrdXw av
7TLcrTTJ[jir]$ }

ovK dv

Svi^ai/Jirjv

26

THEAETETUS
soc.

And
I

THEAET.
soc.

did you find such a name ? think we did. But see if you agree.
on.

Speak

divided all number into two classes. the numbers which can be formed by multiplying equal factors, we represented by the shape of the square and called square or equilateral numbers.

THEAET.
one,

We

The

soc.

THEAET. three and

Well done The numbers between these, such as five and all numbers which cannot be
!

formed by multiplying equal factors, but only by multiplying a greater by a less or a less by a greater, and are therefore always contained in unequal sides, we represented by the shape of the
oblong rectangle and called oblong numbers. and what next ? soc. Very good THEAET. All the lines which form the four sides of the equilateral or square numbers we called lengths, and those which form the oblong numbers we called surds, because they are not commensurable with the others in length, but only in the areas of the planes which they have the power to form. And similarly in the case of solids. 1 I think Theosoc. Most excellent, my boys dorus will not be found liable to an action for false
;
!

witness.

THEAET. But really, Socrates, I cannot answer of yours about knowledge, as we answered the question about length and square And yet you seem to me to want someroots. thing of that kind. So Theodorus appears to be a false witness after all. 1 That is, cubes and cube roots. 27
that question

PLATO
C
2fl-

Tt

8e';

et

ae
1

/ ? \ o I^TTOV TI av OiL aAr]ur) TOVO 0EAI. OVK eyajye.


**

OVTO) SpOfJLlKO) <E(/>7] TOJV VO}V VTTV)(r)KVai, SiaOeajv rov d/c/zd^ovTos /cat ra^Larov ijTTrjOr]?, * /o>' / H
eTTCLiveaai ;

2n.

'AAAa

rrjv

(TfJLiKpov

eTnaTrjfJirjv,

axiTrep

vvv
/cat

817

eycb

oiei eivai

^vpiv

ou
a.Kpo-

0EAI.
TOLTOJV.

NT) TOV At" e'yarye /cat p,d\a ye

rcut'

Qdppei roivvv Trepl oavTO) /cat rt otou 0eoScopoy Aeyetv, TrpoOv/uLTJOr^TL Se rravrl rpoTrco TCOV re dAAajv Trept /cat eVtar?^^? Xafielv Aoyot', Tt
.

Trore

Tvy\dvi

6V.
fjiev

EAI.
I'etrat.

YlpoOv/jLia?

eVe/ca,

ai

Sco/cpaTe?, <^a-

6.
Treipto

2n.

"I^t 817 /caAco? yap aprt vfirjyrjcra) ^iiiov^evos rr^v Trcpt rav Svvdfjieajv drroaxjTrep ravra? TroAAa? ovaas eVt et'Set OVTOJ /cat ra? TroAAa? eVtcrr^as evt
1

Aoya> TrpoaeiTrelv. EAI. 'AAA' eu ta^t,

to

SoS/cpare.?, TioAAa/ct? 817

auro eTre^etp^CTa GKeibaaOai, UKOVODV ra? Trapa dAAa yap oi> aov a,77o^epOyU,eVa? epwTrjaeis' awro? Swa^tat 77etcrat e^taurov co? t/cavcD? Tt Aeya>, OUT' aAAou aKOvaai Xeyovro? ovrcos co? en) Sta/ceou /lev 817 au oz58' aTiaAAay^va.t TOU /u-e'At-tv. 1
.

'QStVet? yap,

c5

</>t'Ae

0eatT7^Te, 8td TO /z^

/cevo? aAA' eyKV/AODV zivai. EAI. Ou/c otSa, c5 Zco/cpaTe?"


Ae'yco.
1

6 ^teWot TreVov^a
/j.\\eii>

jitAet^

B, Berol. et

7/>.

W(and Burnet);

T;

eu/jetj/

W.

28

THEAETETUS
If he were praising your soc. Nonsense running and said he had never met any young man who was so good a runner, and then you were beaten in a race by a full grown man who held the record, do you think his praise would be any less truthful ?
!

THEAET.
soc.

Why,

no.

think that the discovery of knowledge, as I was just now saying, is a small matter and not a task for the very ablest men ?

And do you
By
Zeus,

THEAET.
ablest.

think

it is

a task for the very

soc. Then you must have confidence in yourself, and believe that Theodorus is right, and try earnestly in every way to gain an understanding of the nature

of knowledge as well as of other things. THEAET. If it is a question of earnestness, Socrates, the truth will come to light. soc. Well then for you pointed out the way admirably just now take your answer about the roots as a model, and just as you embraced them all
in

though they were many, try to designate of knowledge by one definition. THEAET. But I assure you, Socrates, I have often tried to work that out, when I heard reports of the
class,

one

the

many forms

questions that you asked, but I can neither persuade myself that I have any satisfactory answer, nor can I find anyone else who gives the kind of answer you insist upon and yet, on the other hand, 1 cannot get rid of a feeling of concern about the matter. soc. Yes, you are suffering the pangs of labour, Theaetetus, because you are not empty, but pregnant. THEAET. I do not know, Socrates I merely tell
;

you what

I feel.

29

PLATO
149
2n.

Etra,

to

/carayeAacrre,

OVK aKrjKoas,
/cat

cos

eyoij etftt

vos paias p,dXa yevvaias re

fiXoavpas,

0EAI.

"HS77 TOUTO ye TJ /cat, ort ImTrfievoj Tr\v avrrjv

a/crj/coas";

EAI.
.

'AAA' eu

tcr^'

6Vf

fjirj

/xeWot /xou

77/00? TOJ)? aAAows*.

e^cov TT)^
fiev
/cat

T^V7]V

XeXrjBa yap, c5 eralpe, ravrrjv ol 8e, are OVK et'Sores*, rovro


6Vt
e OLTOTrcoraros et^tt
r)

ov Aeyowcrt
TrotaJ

776/at efjLOv,

rous* avOptorrovs

an-opelv.

/cat

rovro

0EAI.

"Eycoye.
E'tVco

2n.
0EAI.

ow

crot

TO

amov;
ras /xatas
1

navu

/xev ouv.

2H.
e^et, TTOV

'Ey^o7]crov 817 TO rrepi


/cat
cos*

paoy /xa^aet o

/3oJAo/aat.

olaOoL

yap

ovSefJiia avrojv eVt awT-^ /ci/tovco/xeV^ /cat Tt/CTOUcra aAAa? /^ateyeTat, aAA* at ?]S^ dSu

0EAI.
.

Ilavu Alriav 8e ye rovrov (fracrlv efvat TT^V "Ap6Vt aAo^os owaa TT^V Ao^etav et'A^e. crrepi1

^>at?

ju-ev

ow

apa

ou/c

eoojKe fiaievea-Oai,

on

rj

anrivri

aV
0EAI.
.

71

aaOeveo-repa ij Xafielv re^v^v Tat? Sc St* ^At/aay aTO/cot? arreipos'


(frvais

Tt^tajaa Tr^v avrrjs ofjLOLOTrjra.

EtVo?.

Ov/cow

/cat

To8e

et/cos

re

/cat

dVay/catov,

THEAETETUS
soc.

that

am

Have you then not

heard, you absurd boy, the son of a noble and burly midwife,

Phaenarete ? THEAET. Yes, I have heard that. soc. And have you also heard that

practise the

same

art

THEAET. No, never.


soc.

But

I assure

on
not

me

you
;

it is

true
is

to the others

for it

not

only do not tell known that I

But other people, since they do do not say this of me, but say that I am a most eccentric person and drive men to disHave you heard that also ? traction.
possess this art.

know

it,

THEAET. Yes,
soc.

I have. Shall I tell you the reason then

THEAET. Oh yes, do. soc. Just take into consideration the whole business of the midwives, and you will understand

more

easily

what

mean.

For you know,

suppose,

that no one of
is still

them attends other women while she

capable of conceiving and bearing, but only those do so who have become too old to bear. THEAET. Yes, certainly. soc. They say the cause of this is Artemis, because she, a childless goddess, has had childbirth
allotted to her as

her special province.

Now

it

would seem she did not allow barren women to be


midwives, because

human nature is too weak to acquire an art which deals with matters of which it has no experience, but she gave the office to those who on account of age were not bearing children, honouring them for their likeness to herself.
THEAET. Very likely.
soc.
Is it not,

then, also likely and even necessary,


31

PLATO
ras Kvovcras
fjiaiaJv
T)

/cat

fjirj

ytyvc6ovcecr#at fJidXXov VTTO TOJV

T)V aXXajv; 0EAI. Udvv ye. 5n. Kat firjv /cat StSoucrat ye

at

LLCLLCLL

</>ap/,td/cta

eVaSoucrat Suvavrat eyetpetv re ret? ajSti^a? /<:at /LtaA^a/ccure'pa?, aV fiovXuivTOii, iroi^lv, KCLL TLKTZLV re 817 ras" SuaroAcouaa?, /cat e'av ve'DV 6V x
/<:at

@EAI.

2n.
/cat

Ap

"Eart raura. * '5 ofv ert /cat rooe avrtov


>' *

>^'/) fiourjcraL,

"

ort

Seti^orarat, to? 7rd(jao(f)OL Trpo/xv^crrptat OVOCLL ?rept rou yvcDvat Trotav ^p^ TTOIOJ
CTUVofJo-av cu? apicrrovs TratSa? rt/cretv; 0EAI. Trai^y TOVTO otSa.

eiVt

2n. ^ eVt

Ou A N >//)> AAA icrc7


-V

>

ort

e77t

rovrco
IVVOEL

/>>

fJLiL,ov

(p

TT^

ofjL^aXrjTOfjLia.

yap-

rrjs
/cat

avrrjs

otet

revs

zlvcLL

^eaTretW re
/cat at' /cat

ra>v

e/c

y^? KapTrcov
<f)vr6v

TO

ytyvcocr/cetv et?

noiav yrjv Trolov


0EAI.

re

oWp/za

/cara^A^re'ov;

OVK, dAAa

rr^? O.VTTJS.

2n. EtV yuvat/ca Se^ cu ^>t'Ae, aAAryv p:ej^ otet TO roiovrov, aXXrjv Se auy/co/xtS^?; 0EAI. Ou/couv et/co? ye. 150 dAAa Sta TT)V d'St/cov re /cat sn. Ou yap.

are^vov
are

crvvayajyrjv

dv$po$
/xatat,

/cat
/cat

yuvat/co?,

$
fjirj

817

Trpoaycoyia 6Vo/xa, (f)vyovcrt


O6(JLvai

ovaai
CLLTLOLV

at

(fjofiovfievai

els
e?ret

KLvr)v
v6fju/u.ov

rrjv
8^

Sta ta
is

Tavrrjv ejJLTTeaaxnv'

of the

" lawful,"

MSS.

Adam

^775^

impossible ; Schanz suggests " the womb." Possibly Plato

wrote avertov "permissible."

32

THEAETETUS
that midwives should

who

are pregnant and

know better than anyone who are not ?

else

THEAET. Certainly. soc. And furthermore, the midwives, by means of drugs and incantations, are able to arouse the pangs of labour and, if they wish, to make them milder, and to cause those to bear who have difficulty

and they cause miscarriages bearing think them desirable. THEAET. That is true.
in
;

if

they

soc. Well, have you noticed this also about them, that they are the most skilful of matchmakers, since they are very wise in knowing what union of man

and woman
THEAET.
soc.

produce the best possible children ? do not know that at all. But be assured that they are prouder of this
will
I

than of their Just consider.

skill

in

Do you

cutting the umbilical cord. think the knowledge of

what soil the same

is

best for each plant or seed belongs to

art as the tending and harvesting of the fruits of the earth, or to another ?

THEAET.
soc.

To
in

the same

art.

the case of a woman, do you think, my friend, that there is one art for the sowing and another for the harvesting ?
THEAET.
soc. It is
;

And

No
is

not likely. but because there

is

a wrongful and un-

scientific

way

which
are

of bringing men and women together, called pandering, the midwives, since they

of dignity and worth, avoid match-making, through fear of falling under the charge of panderB 2 33

women

PLATO
Tat? ye OVTCDS [Adieus p,6vai$ TTOV
TrpofJivrjaaoOai op9a>s.
Trpocr^/cei
/cat

"R
-

OatVeTat. fjiev roivvv TO>V [JLOLICOV TOCTOVTOV, eXarrov 8e 7cv fjiov Spa/zaTO?. ov yap TipocrecrTt yvvai^lv o> wo. \ / ''N/D' VLOT6 fJLV etOOJAa TIKTCIV, 6(JTL O OT6 OLArjUiVOL, TOVTO 8e fJLrj pqSiov elvai (HiayvtovcLi et yap /xey IOTTOV re /cat /<:aAAio"rov epyov rjv ov KCU /CptVetV TO dXrjOfES T /JLCLiaiS TO
0EAI.

To
\

OVK
7\

otet;

EAI.
\

2fl.

J Ta fjuev aAAa UTrap^et ocra KLvais, ota<pepet oe T aVSpas" aAAa /z^ yup-at/cas" /zateuecr^at /cat Tag" ijjv^a? CLVT&V Tt/CTOuaa? e7rtcr/co77etv aAAa Ta o-a)fj,ara. fJLeyiaTOV 8e TOUT' eVt
/ '
*

"\\

"Eycoye. Tfj oe

ft

w"

"

>

TOD

TO>

Ttyvriy /\> il *

Baaavit,iv
-*

SVVCLTOV

eivcu

TravTi

TOOTTU),

/i.'

?70Tepov etScoAov /cat i/Jevoos avroTt/CTet TOU ve'ou -^ Stavota r) yovi^ov Te /cat aA^^e?. eWt To8e ye
/cat
e/Ltot

uot coretSto-a^, cus* TOVS [1,6V aXXovs epa>Ta>, auTo? Se ou8ev aTro/cptTept ouSevo? Sta TO /Lt^Se^ e^etv cro</>oV, o^etSt^ouatv. TO Se atTtoi^ TOVTOV ToSe' .t o 0eo? avay/cct^et, ye^vav Se d?7e/cc6^Lte Auaei'. ouv auTo? /zev ou ndvv Tt? crc et//,t 817 ouSe Tt /xot eaTiv eup^/m TOLOVTOV yeyoi^o? K.yovov 01 8' e'^tot cruyytywyttei'ot TO
cro^ta?,
/cat
rf877

uxrap^et, OTrep

oVep Tat?

/xatats"
i

ayovo?

et/u,t

It

xroAAot

Tfpa)TOv (fraivovTcii evLOL jJLV /cat Tfdvv d}La9eZs, TrdvTes Se Trpo'Covcrrjs rrjs ovvovcrias, olaTrep dv o

^eo?

Trapet/CT?. if *

OavuacrTOV
I

ooov

eTrtStSovTe?,

cos

34

THEAETETUS
And yet the true midwife is the only proper ing. match-maker. THEAET. It seems so. soc. So great, then, is the importance of midwives but their function is less important than For women do not, like my patients, bring mine. forth at one time real children and at another mere images which it is difficult to distinguish from the real. For if they did, the greatest and noblest part of the work of the mid wives would be in distinguishDo you not ing between the real and the false.
;

think so ? THEAET. Yes, I do. soc. All that is true of their art of midwifery is true also of mine, but mine differs from theirs in being practised upon men, not women, and in tending But the their souls in labour, not their bodies. greatest thing about my art is this, that it can test in every way whether the mind of the young man is bringing forth a mere image, an imposture, or a
real

and genuine

offspring.
:

For

have this in

the midwives I am sterile in point of wisdom, and the reproach which has often been brought against me, that I question others but make no reply myself about anything, because I have no wisdom in me, is a true reproach and the reason of it is this the god compels me to act as midwife, I am, but has never allowed me to bring forth. then, not at all a wise person myself, nor have I any wise invention, the offspring born of my own soul ; but those who associate with me, although at first some of them seem very ignorant, yet, as our acquaintance advances, all of them to whom the god is gracious make wonderful progress, not only

common with

35

PLATO
aurot?
re
/cat

rot?

a'AAot?

So/coucrr

KGLL

rovrc

evapye? ort Trap' ep,ov ovSev rrtoTrore aAA' avrol Trap* avrcov rroAAa /cat /caAa T Kal Te/CoVre?. 1 TYJS fJLVTOl /Xatettt?
\
>

O
"v ~\

06OS
^

re

/cat

yaj

atrto?.

code
/cat

TOVTO dyvoT^aavre?

8e KaTa(f)povTJaai>T$ , r) re? aTrrjXBov 7rpa)aLTpov TOV S Se ra re Aot-rr-a e^r^jiBXaxjav Sta Trovripav


/cat

oe OTjAov TTOAAOL eaurou? atrtaaa/ze^ot, awrot ^ VTT' aAAcov

s~~\

ra

WTT'

e/xou

/zateu^eVra

/ca/ca)?

Tp<f>ovT$

a,77coAe(Tav, ifjevSrj /cat ei'SeuAa ?7ept TrAetovos" Trot^crafjLevoi rov dXr)9ov$, TeXevTOJVTes 8* aurot? re /cat

rot? aAAot? e'So^av a/xa^ets et^at. c5v et? yeyovev 151 'AptaretS^? o Aucrt^u,a^ou /cat a'AAot Trdvu TioAAor ot?, ora^ TrdXiv eXOaxji Seo^tevot r^? e'/x^? ow1

/cat ^au/xacrra Spajvre?, evtot? fte^ TO ytyvo^Ltewv /Ltot Sai/Jioviov oiTTOKcoXveL ovvelvai, eviois Se ea, /cat TrdXiv OVTOI 2 eTrtotSoacrt. Tiacr^oucrt Se

oucrta?

ST)

ot'

e^Ltot

o-uyytyvo^tevot /cat TOVTO TCLVTOV rat?


a>8tVoucrt

rt/croucrats"

yap

/cat

aVopt'a?
rroAz)

ejLtTTt/i-

TrAa^rat
e/cetvat
3'

vu/cra?

re

/cat

T^tepa?
coSti^a
/

TavTTjV
7^

Se ri^v

ftaAAov 77 eyetpety re /cat


/cat

a77077aJetv

B5 OT)
\

</

OUT60?.

Tiyyr] / e^tot? oe, co


e'/xr)

4''>'r^

SiWrat.

OVTOI
>/

So^a>at
e^itou

7760?

ey/cu/zove?

Weatr^rc, ot ai> /xot et^at, yvovs ort o


Trpo/xyaifiat
/cat,

Seovrat,
1
ral

Wyu

eu/xei/cD?

TfKovres

Berol. ; /care^oyres 2 of'Tot T ; auroi B. 3 fKelvai B ; /cetVcu T.

W,

BT.

^/o

Berol., Burriet;

More BT;

friot

W.

THEAETETUS
in their

own

And

it is

opinion, but in that of others as well. clear that they do this, not because they

have ever learned anything from me, but because they have found in themselves many fair things and have brought them forth. But the delivery is due to the god and me. And the proof of it is this many before now, being ignorant of this fact and thinking that they were themselves the cause of their success, but despising me, have gone away from me sooner than they ought, whether of their own accord or because others persuaded them to do so. Then, after they have gone away, they have miscarried thenceforth on account of evil companionship, and the offspring which they had brought forth through my assistance they have reared so badly that they have lost it they have considered impostures and images of more importance than the truth, and at last it was evident to themselves, as
:

well as to others, that they were ignorant. One of these was Aristeides, the son of Lysimachus, and there are very many more. When such men come

back and beg me, as they do, with wonderful eagerness to let them join me again, the spiritual monitor that comes to me forbids me to associate with some of them, but allows me to converse with others,

Now those who are in this matter also like women in childbirth they are in pain and are full of trouble night and day, much more than are the women and my art can arouse this pain and cause it to cease. Well, that is what happens to them.
and these again make progress.
associate with

me

But in some cases, Theaetetus, when they do not seem to me to be exactly pregnant, since I see that they have no need of me, I act with perfect goodwill
37

PLATO
0OJ
ClTTelv,
7TCLVV

LKCLVOJS

TO77aoj
(robots'

of?
Brj

oV
c'^e'

ovaivro'
iAco),

cbv

rroXXovs

/.tei>

TToXXovs Se aVSacrt.
817
crot,

d'AAotS"

re

/cat

Oecr-

Tavra

c5

dpcare, eW/ca rowSe


ACat

VTTO7TT VO)V

G,
/cat

COCT776/5

(LVTOS OlL,
JJL

ctetV
a)$
e

l^

Tt

Kvovvra eVSoy.

7rpocr(f)pov ovv irpos

//.atas

uov

awrov

jLtateurt/cov,
t
>

/cat

a av

TTpoOvfjiOV
/cat
)itat

O7TCOS

OtO? T

OVTO>S d7TOKpiVCLO0CLi'

eav apa cr/co77ou^tevos rt c5v aV Aey^? ^y)]cra>etSajAoi' /cat /r>) aXrjOes, etra ^Tre^atpai/xat /cat
2
/Jirj

CLTTofidXAa),

ayptatve
TroAAot

cocnrep

at

Trpcororo/cot

?rept

ra
ft

77at8ta.

yap

Trpo?

erotjLtot

elvat,

ovrco Stere^o-av, eTretSay rtva


fjie

T^S^, co tocrre are^vco?

Xrjpov

avrajv

d<f>-

atpai/zat, /cat ov/c oiovral

evvota rovro

-rroizZv,

Troppoj

OVTS rov
IJLOL

et8eVat

ort ouSet? ^eo? Suovou?

dvOpcuTTOLS, ouS' e'yco Svcrvola roiovrov ovSev 8pto,

dXXd

J/reuSo?

re
1

orvyx a} P^j oai


.

Ka ^
ef

dXr)9es

d(f)aviaai ouSa/xcus" ^e/zts o rt TTOT* a> eatr^re, A/ * O> ?/ Aeyety tu? o ou^; oio?

77-aAtv 817

ow
<>/

dp^?,
Tretpa)

ecrrt^

eav yap
8.

>\

/^^

'/3/\

c/eos"

eueArj

0EAI.

'AAAa

fjirjoeTror '" T/ ^'^'X /cat avopLLr), oto? T ecret. fjievroL, w Haj/cpare?, crou

ST
et,

eVtcrr^/x^, >

ye

OVTOJ

7TO.paK6\VO}JLVOV

OLiCf^pOV

fJirj

OV

TTCLVri

So/cet ^;et Aeyetv. rpoTTO) 7rpo6v/jLLa6aL o rt rt? o eVto-raftevos' Tt alaQdveaOai rovro o />tot

ow

emoTarat,
ecrrtv

/cat

cos*

ye vuvt ^atVerat,

ou/c

aAAo

ri

VTroirTfvuv

iiTTOTrreuw al.

d7ro/3clX\w

UTro/SdXoj

dtTro^ciXw

W.

38

THEAETETUS
as

match-maker and, under God,


with

fully

whom

I guess very successthey can associate profitably, and I

have handed over many of them to Prodicus, and to other wise and inspired men. Now I have said all this to you at such length, my dear boy, because I suspect that you, as you yourself believe, are in pain because you are pregnant with something within you. Apply, then, to me, remembering that I am the son of a midwife and have myself a midwife's gifts, and do your best to answer the questions I ask as I ask them. And if, when I have examined any of the things you say, it should prove that I think it is a mere image and not real, and therefore quietly take it from you and throw it away, do not be angry as women are when they are deprived of their first offspring. For many, my dear friend, before this have got into such a state of mind towards me that they are actually ready to bite me, if I take some foolish notion away from them, and they do not believe that I do this in kindness, since they are far from knowing that no god is unkind to mortals, and that I do nothing of this sort from unkindness, either, and that it is quite out of the question for me to allow an imposture or

many

to destroy the true. And so, Theaetetus, begin again and try to tell us what knowledge is. And never say that you are unable to do so for if God wills it and gives you courage, you will be able. THEAET. Well then, Socrates, since you are so urgent it would be disgraceful for anyone not to exert himself in every way to say what he can. I think, then, that he who knows anything perceives that which he knows, and, as it appears at present, knowledge is nothing else than perception.
;

39

PLATO
2ft.

/cat

yvvaia>s,
Ae'yetv.
r\

to

Tral'
(f>epe

xprj
Sr)

yap
avro

OVTO)$
KOivfl

a.Tro^>ciLi'6(JLvov

dAAa

aKe^tJOfieOa,

yovi\iov

dve^jnalov

rvy^dvet

ov.

aicr9r](jLs } (fays, iTTLcrTrjfJLrj;

EAI.

Nat.

KtvSweuei? /xevrot Aoyov ov (f>avAov elp-q152 Kevai Trepl eV ccrrry^T]?, aAA' 6V eAeye /cat n/acorayopa?. rponov 8e rtva a'AAov etp7]/ce TO, aura
SQ.
TCLVTOL.
(f>7](JL

ya/5

7TOV

TTOLVTCW ^p^ftaTCOV fJLTpOV

avOpanrov elvai, TOJV /xev oVrcov, cu? eart, TOJV Se ov/c eanv. aveyvco/ca? yap TTOU; /ii) OVTCOV, cos
1

EAI.
2fl.

'Aveyvco/ca

/cat

TroAAa/a?

Ou/com' ouro)

770)? Aeyet,

a>?

ota yuev e/ca-

ara
(rot,

^atVerat, rotaura /zev eortv e/^ot, ofa Se rotaura Se au <ror dvOptoTros Se CTU re /cayto;
ejLtot

Aeyet yap ouv OVTOJ. CTO^V aVSpa /xi] Xrjpeiv errouv aura>. dp ou/c eviore irviovTOS avefjiov rov avrov 6 JJLCV rj^ajv ptyot, o S' ou; >/ *^^ j'^ o oe
EAI.

2H.

Et/co? /xeWot

/cat

o ftev 7)pe/xa,

acpoopa;

EAI.
2fl.

Kat oTeov ouv rdre auro


r)

e<^'

eavrov
7)

TO

01)

ipvxpov
TCO

(ftrjcrofjiev ;

7Tio6}JL9a

rat
e 8\

art Dpcuraydpa "


\

/-tet'

piyovvri i/jv^pov, ra>

/XT)

ou;
"Eot/cev.

EAI.
2fl.

Ou/couz/ /cat ^atVerat OUTCD e/carepa>;

EAI.

Nat.
1

eauroO

W,

Berol.

eavr6

BT.

40

THEAETETUS
soc. Good That is the Excellent, my boy way one ought to speak out. But come now, let us
!
!

examine your utterance together, and see whether


it is

a real offspring or a
say,
is

mere wind-egg.

Perception,

you

knowledge

THEAET. Yes.
soc. And, indeed, if I may venture to say so, it not a bad description of knowledge that you have given, but one which Protagoras also used to give. Only, he has said the same thing in a different way For he says somewhere that man is " the measure of all things, of the existence of the things that are and the non-existence of the things that are not." You have read that, I suppose ? THEAET. Yes, I have read it often. soc. Well, is not this about what he means, that individual things are for me such as they appear to as they appear to you me, and for you in turn such " " you and I being man ? THEAET. Yes, that is what he says. soc. It is likely that a wise man is not talking nonsense so let us follow after him. Is it not true, that sometimes, when the same wind blows, one of us feels cold, and the other does not ? or one feels slightly and the other exceedingly cold ? THEAET. Certainly. soc. Then in that case, shall we say that the wind is in itself cold or not cold or shall we accept Protais
;
;

goras's saying that it is cold for and not for him who does not ?

him who

feels cold

THEAET. Apparently
soc.

we

shall accept that. of

Then

it

also

seems cold, or not, to each

the two ? THEAET. Yes.


.

41

PLATO
2fl.

EAI.

2n. rat
2fl.

8e ye ^atVerat alaOdveadai eartv; "Ecr7w yap. Oavraata d'pa /cat aiadrjais ravrov eV re

To

/cat Trdcn rot? TOIOVTOIS. ola yap alcrOdveKa<jros, roiavra e/ccrra) rat /cii^Su^evet elvai.

EAI.
Aicr9r]cri$

apa

rov

ovros

det

ecrrtv

/cat

difjV(!)6s d)? eVtcrT^/x^ ovcra.

EAI.
T
2li.

OatVerat.

Ap'

ow

Tlpajrayopas,

77/30? Xa/3iVau> 7rdaao<f)6s TL$ r^v 6 KCLL rovro rat r^lv ^ev

fjvia/ro

<jvp(f>ra>,

TOLS Se fJLadrjrals ev d

J)

0EAI.
.
<\

e'Aeyev; IIcO? S^, c3 ^La)KpOLTS,

TOVTO
(Its \6yov, >o.5>/ ovo av dAA', eav a>?

'Eya
/xei^

epto

/cat
/cat/

ev

auro

>

(f>avXov /)>f\>o/> auro ouoev eariv,


rt,
/cat

/xaA'

01)

TrpocretTTOts'

6p9o)s ouS' oTTOtovow

/.ieya

rrpoaayopevrj?,

afJLiKpov

<^avetrat,

/cat

eav fiapv, Kovfiov, ^v/JLTravrd re OVTOIS, d)s oVro? evoj />t7yre TIROS' fJi^jre OTTOLOVOVV e/c Se re /cat /cu^o-eco? /cat /c/oacrecos vrpo? a'AA^Aa yty^erat Trdvra d $TJ (f>a{JLv etrat, oz)/c 7rpoaayopVOVTS' ecrrt /xe^ yap ouSeVor' ouSeV, det
1

8e ytyj^erat.
/cat

/cat Trept

TOVTOV Trdvres
1

TrA^v' Ilap/xevtSou au/x^epeV^cov,

z^fjs ot ao^ot Ilpwrayopas" re


/cat

Hpa/cAetro?
d/cpot
,

/cat

'E/x-TreSo/cAT]?,

ra)v

TTOLTTJ-

TOJV ot

T^?

vrot^CTecos'

e'/carepas",
"QjjL-rjpos,

KajfjLOj

TpaycLiSias Se

o?

et

re ^eaV yeVecrtv

/cat

jLt^repa Tr]9vv
ffv^epeyQov

(ut videtur), Burnet; Berol., Eus.; ffv^tpovro. Stobaeus.


2

TW,

8s

add. Heindorf.

42

THEAETETUS
soc.

But "seems"
It does.

denotes perceiving

THEAET.

soc. Then seeming and perception are the same thing in matters of warmth and everything of that For as each person perceives things, such they sort. are to each person. THEAET. Apparently. soc. Perception, then, is always of that which exists and, since it is knowledge, cannot be false, THEAET. So it seems. I wonder if Protagoras, soc. By the Graces who was a very wise man, did not utter this dark saying to the common herd like ourselves, and tell the truth l in secret to his pupils. THEAET. Why, Socrates, what do you mean by that ? soc. I will tell you and it is not a bad description, either, that nothing is one and invariable, and you could not rightly ascribe any quality whatsoever to
!

anything, but

if you call it large it will also appear to be small, and light if you call it heavy, and everything else in the same way, since nothing whatever is one, either a particular thing or of a particular

and quality but it is out of movement and motion mixture with one another that all those things become which we wrongly say "are" -wrongly, because And on nothing ever is, but is always becoming. this subject all the philosophers, except Parmenides, may be marshalled in one line Protagoras and Heraand the chief poets in the cleitus and Empedocles two kinds of poetry, Epicharmus, in comedy, and in tragedy, Homer, who, in the line
;

Oceanus the
1

An

origin of the gods, and Tethys their mother allusion to the title of Protagoras 's book, Truth. 2 Homer, Iliad, xiv. 201, 302.

43

PLATO
eiprjKev

e/cyova

pO7Js

re

/cat

/av^creajs"

rj

ov 8o/cet rovro \eyeiv;


0EAI.
Q.

"Ejuotye. sn. Tt? ow


/cat
fjirj

aV

ert

Trpo?
1

ye

TOOOVTOV

153 OTpaToVeSov
diuL^Lor^rjT^aas

arparrjyov "Qjjirjpov Swatro ov x /carayeAacrros yeveaQcu;


a)

0EAI.

ecuV^re. eTret /cat ra8e TO) ort TO yuev efvat 8o/cow /cat TO t/cava, Aoya> crrjfjiela /cat /ctVr^at? Trape^et,, TO 8e jLt^ etvat
2n.
7]o-u^ta'

Ou paSiOV, Ov yap, <5

Hco/cpares'.

TO yap
Tpitpeais'

OepfJiov

re
2

/cat

Trup,

o 8^ /cat TaAAa Tat e'/c (fcopds ^


01)^;

yewa
/cat

/cat eTTirpoTrevei,

avro yevvaSe

rovrcu

avTat yeveaet? Trvpos;


At>Tat
jitev

0EAI.

ouv.
e/c

Kat
EAI.

jU,T]v

TO ye TCOV ^wa>v yeVos"

ria)? 8* ou;

Tt 8e ;
/cat /cat Kivr](je(.ov

^ TOV crto/xaTOJV e^t? ov^; UTTO ^ apyta? StoAA^Tat, t77O yi^vaatcov Se eVt TO ?ro
ev
/ctvcrecDp'

EAI.

Nat.
8'

/cat

U-eeT?

ovTcov,

/cTaTat

Te

p,a6rj/jLCLTa /cat crto^erai

8'

rjav^las,

/cat yt'yyeTat ^eXricor, VTTO a/f-eAeT^CTta? Te /cat apaOias


fjid9rj

ouVe Tt fjiavOdvei a re aV
1
/ATJ
5

ou

TOJTW
^Trt
;

BT. W, Eus., Stobaeus B 2 W, Berol. rouro BT, Stobaeus.


;

/UTJ

TO

TroXt)

line)
4

^?rl TroXi)

B, Stobaeus Burnet.

u>s

^?ri

TroXi)

(ws

above the

Kwficreuv ovcru>v

Stobaeus

Kivycrloiv 8vToii>

Buttmann.

44

THEAETETUS
has said that all things are the offspring of flow and motion; or don't you think he means that? THEAET. I think he does. soc. Then who could still contend with such a great host, led by Homer as general, and not make

himself ridiculous ? THEAET. It is not easy, Socrates. For the doctrine soc. No, Theaetetus, it is not. is amply proved by this, namely, that motion is the cause of that which passes for existence, that is, of

becoming, whereas rest

is

the cause of non-existence

and destruction
know,
is

or fire, which, you the parent and preserver of all other things, is itself the offspring of movement and friction, and Or are not these the these two are forms of motion.
;

for

warmth

source of

fire

THEAET. Yes, they are. soc. And furthermore, the animal sprung from these same sources. THEAET.
soc.

kingdom

is

Of

course.
is

Well, then,

not the bodily habit destroyed

by

rest

and

ing,

by

idleness, and preserved, generally speakgymnastic exercises and motions ?

THEAET. Yes.

Does soc. And what of the habit of the soul ? not the soul acquire information and is it not preserved and made better through learning and practice, which are motions, whereas through rest, which is want of practice and of study, it learns nothing and forgets what it has learned ?
45

PLATO
EAI.

Kat

/xaAa.

2H.

To

fj,ev

dpa dya9ov

KLVYJCTIS

Kara re

Kal Kara aoj/xa, TO Se rovvavrtov;


0EAI.
"Eot/cev.
(joi Ae'yco i^ve/ztW re feat Kal oaa roiavra, ort at /zev r^av^iai arprovai Kal
,

"Ert ovv

ra

8* ere/oa crco^et;

/cat

em
1

royrot?
rr^v

ayay/ca^co

Trpocrfiifid^ajv,

J)

aeipdv c5? owSev aAAo ^ TOV ^'Atov "O/x^po? Aeyet, /<:at 8^Aot oVt eco? /^ep aV 7^ Trepi^opa Kal 6 rjXios, ndvra eori Kal aaj^erat TO, e
re Kal dvOpcoTrois, et Se crratr) rovro ojcnrep rrdvra ^prjfjiar^ av SiafiOapei?) Kal yevoir* av TO
dVco Kara) rrdvra; 0EAI.

'AAA' e/zotye So/cet,


Aeyet?. roivvv,

co

ScuKpaTe?, ravra

w, aVep
10.

2n,

'YTioAa^e
ofJijJLara

a>
8rj

apiare,
AcaAet?

ovrcoai-

Kara ra

Trpwrov,

XVKOV,

fjirj

efvat

auTO erepov
o^u,/,tacrf

ri

efa>
/

TOJV
Ttv'

o/JifJidrcov

/x^S'

eV Tot?
rfir]

yU7]Se
irj

avra)
2

^aSpav drroTd^rjs'
/cat /Lteov

yap av
a

re S^TTOU

ci

/cat ov/c

ev yeveaet yyvoiro.

EAI.

'AAAa
ifidfav

TW,
BT.

Berol.

dva-y/cafw

B, Stobaeus ; 7i7>o<r/3/3dfu> (omitting dpa7K<fw) Cobet, followed by Burnet. Possibly avaypatyu Trpocrpi.pafai'.
2

STJTTOV
3

Schanz

di' TTOU

Kal^vov Stobaeus;

Keifj-evoi

pr.

B (corr. /cai

46

THEAETETUS
THEAET. Certainly. soc. Then the good, both for the soul and for the body, is motion, and rest is the opposite ? THEAET. Apparently.
soc.

Now

shall

go on and mention to you

also

windless air, calm sea, and all that sort of thing, and and say that stillness causes decay and destruction And shall that the opposite brings preservation ? I add to this the all-compelling and crowning argu" ment that Homer by " the golden chain : refers to so long as that means and than the else sun, nothing the heavens and the sun go round everything exists
is preserved, among both gods and men, but if the motion should stop, as if bound fast, everything would be destroyed and would, as the saying is, be turned upside down ? THEAET. Yes, Socrates, I think he means what you

and

say he does.
friend, you must apply the doctrine as concerns vision, the colour that you call white is not to be taken as something separate outside of your eyes, nor yet as something inside of them ; and you must not assign any place to it, for then it would at once be in a definite
soc.

Then,

my

in this

way

first

position

and stationary and would have no part

in

the process of becoming. THEAET. But what do you


1

mean ?

Homer, Iliad, viii. 18 ff., especially 26. In this passage Zeus declares that all the gods and goddesses together could not, with a golden chain, drag him from on high, but that if he pulled, he would drag them, with earth and sea, would then bind the chain round the summit of Olympus, and^all " the rest would hang aloft. This " crowning argument is a reductio ad absurdum of the habit of using texts from Homer in support of all kinds of doctrine.
47

PLATO
TOJ apTi \6yaj, [JLrjSev

avro
K(U

aVTO eV OV Tl0VT$

/Cat

Tj/Jilv

OVTCO fJLeXdV T

XVKOV
ro)v

/cat

OTIOVV d'AAo xpto/za IK rfjs TrpoafioXfjs


Trpos

o^aTOJV

r^v

TrpocnJKovaav

(fjopav

fiaveirai

154

<f)aiJLv

yeye^/xeVov, /cat o 817 eKacrrov elvai TO TTpoafidXXov oure TO ^paj/za, OVT


ecrrat,

dAAa

fJLera^v

TL

e'/cdcrra)
cos",

yeyoi'os"

-^

orv

8ttcr^u/)tcrato
^pcoijia.,

aV

olov

ool

</>atVerai
i

e/caarov

TOLOVTOV Kai KVVL

KOI OTOJOVV
0EAI.
.

E,a)CL>: ^> t * i

Ma, At" OVK eywye. Tt Se; d'AAa) avBpanrto ap* o/AOtov OTIOVV; e^et? TOVTO La^vpco?,
OTL OVO
CTOt CLVTO)

/cat
r)

crot

rroXv

/JitiXXoV,

TCLVTOV Std TO /JL7]O7TOT

CLVTOV oeavTO)

0EAI.

ToUTO
0*5 /cow

^LtaAAoV /XOt So/C6t


et
jLte^
r)

^ 6K61VO.
f)

2n.

a)

Trapa^Tpov^Oa
)}

ov
a.v

e^aTTTOfJieOa, yiteya
rroT

Aeu/cov

Oep^JLov

TTJV,

OVK

d'AAa) TcpoaTTeaov d'AAo

aj^

eyeyovet, auro ye

er jJLTafidX\ov
<f)CLTTTOIJifVOV

et

Se au TO
T^V

eKCLCTTOV
r\
/

TOVTOiV
<

OVK
OLVTO
/

GLV

GLV

d'AAov

TrpoaeXOovTOs

TL

TradovTO?
*

Tfavov

/i\

aAAo
OL

"\>

^ ai^

'

eye^eTO.

eTret

vw

ye,
TTOJ?

ct

?/'\
<pi.Ae,

T6

/cat

yeAota
9?>atT7

eu^epco?

Xeyeiv,

co?

oV

dVay/cariptoTayopas re /cat
1

TO,

avTa

e/cetVco eVt^etpaii/ Ae'yew.


1
v>

MSS.

Cornarius.

48

THEAETETUS
Let us stick close to the statement we made ago, and assume that nothing exists by itself as invariably one then it will be apparent that black or white or any other colour whatsoever
soc.

moment

is the result of the impact of the eye upon the appropriate motion, and therefore that which we call colour will be in each instance neither that which impinges nor that which is impinged upon, but something between, which has occurred, peculiar

to each individual. Or would you maintain that each colour appears to a dog, or any other animal you please, just as it does to you ? THEAET. No, by Zeus, I wouldn't. soc. Well, does anything whatsoever appear the same to any other man as to you ? Are you sure Or are you not much more convinced that of this ? nothing appears the same even to you, because you yourself are never exactly the same ? THEAET. Yes, I am much more convinced of the
last.

soc.

in size, or or hot, it

Then, if that with which I compare myself which I touch, were really large or white would never have become different by
;

coming in contact with something different, without and if, on the other hand, that which itself changing did the comparing or the touching were really large or white or hot, it would not have become different when something different approached it or was affected in some way by it, without being affected For nowadays, my friend, we in some way itself.
ourselves rather easily forced to make extraordinary and absurd statements, as Protagoras and everyone who undertakes to agree with him would
find
say.

49

PLATO
EAT.
2fl.

Ha>s

817

/cat TTO ta

Aeyet?;
/cat

E/zt/cpoV

Aa/3e

TrapdSety/za,

TrdWa

dcrrpaydAou? yap TTOU e, aV p,ev Terrapa? aurot? TrpoaeWy/cr]?, TrXeiovs ^a/zei' etvat rwv TTTapU)V KOI rjfJLLoXiov?, eav 8e ScoSe/ax,
etcret

a /?ouAo/mt.

eAarrous
\
/

/cat
\
9

^tcrets"
/>

/cat

oi)8e

OLVGKTOV

aAAcu?

Aeyeii>-

17

cru

aye^et;

0EAI.

OVAC eycoye.

2H.
a'AAo?'

Tt
co

ow;

aV

(re

IlpcoTayopaj ep^rat
T)

17

rt?

eatV^re, ecr^ OTTCOS rt /.tet^ov yiyvzrcLi aAAco? ^ av^iqBev; ri airoKpivel;


EAI.

TT\OV

'Eav

fteV,

cu

Zaj/cpare?, ro So/cow 77po? ort ou/c eoriv.


fir)

eav Se Trpo? r^v rrporepav, (f)vXdrrajv


et7ra>,

zvavrla

ort ecrriv.

2n.

Eu ye

^17

r^v "Hpav,

(5

^t'Ae,

/cat

Oeicos.

drap, co?

eot/cev,

eav aTTOKpivr) ort

ecrrtv,

Euptm-

8etov rt ^v/JL^-rjaerai' r\ /zev ecrrat, 77 Se c^p^v ou/c


0EAI.

yap yAcorra

dveAey/cros"

2H.
cru

Ov/cow
e/c

et /.te^ Setyot /cat cro^ot


ret

eyco r

/cat

r)[JLv,

TTOLVTCL

raiv $>peva)v e

av TO AotTroy

Treptoucrta? dAA^Acov

E crw\Q6vTS

cro(f)LaTiKa)s et?

^tct^v roiavrriv,
e/cpouo/zei''

Tov? Aoyou? Tot? Aoyot?


Trpo? auTa, Tt TTOT* ecrriv
1

t'StaJTat Trptorov fiovArjaop-eOa

OeaaaaBai avra.

aAATyAots

^v^aivel

TI

Stavooy/>te#a, 01)8' OTTOKJTIOVV.

50

THEAETETUS
THEAET.
soc.

What do you mean


little

What

statements

example and you will know all Given six dice, for instance, if you I have in mind. compare four with them, we say that they are more than the four, half as many again, but if you compare twelve with them, we say they are less, half as many and any other statement would be inadmissor would you admit any other ? ible THEAET. Not I. soc. Well then, if Protagoras, or anyone else, ask " Theaetetus, can anything become greater or you, more in any other way than by being increased ? what reply will you make ? THEAET. If I am to say what I think, Socrates,

Take a

'

with reference to the present question, I should consider the earlier question, I say "no," but if I should say " yes," for fear of contradicting myself Hera soc. Good, by Excellent, my friend !
!

you answer "yes" the Euripidean spirit; for our tongue

But apparently,

if

it

will

will

be in be un-

convinced, but not our mind. THEAET. True.

soc. Well, if you and I were clever and wise and had found out everything about the mind, we should henceforth spend the rest of our time testing each other out of the fulness of our wisdom, rushing

battertogether like sophists in a sophistical combat, ing each other's arguments with counter arguments. But, as it is, since we are ordinary people, we shall wish in the first place to look into the real essence of our thoughts and see whether they harmonize with one another or not at all.
1

Eurip. Hi/ppol. 612,

77

7X0)0-0-' 6fj.u/ji.ox

T/

<f>pr)i>

my tongue has

sworn, but

my mind is

unsworn."
51

PLATO
0EAI.
II.

Hdvv
2n.
r/

p,ev

Kat
r]pfj,a,

fjirjv

ovv eycoye TOUT' av ore 8' OVTOJS eya>.


TTOLVV TfoXXrji'

aAAo TL
155 TrdXiv

cus*

eTravaoKet/JoiJieOa,

a^oXrjv ayovres, ov ovaKoXaivovres, dAAa

avrovs e^era^o^res', arra TTOT' ecrrt raura ra ^acr/xara ei^ TI^IV; &v rrpcorov eVtcr/cora> OVTL rjid?
co? eyco
fjiel^ov /X7)Se
ecDS"

ofyxat,

eXarrov yeveaOai /x^Te oy/cco laov e'lrj avro eavrco. ov% ovra
aj

0EAI.

Nat.

2n.

d(j)aipolrOy
(frOiveiv,

AeuTepov Se' ye, rovro p,rjr


Ko/XtSiy
JJLCV

pr/re rrpoariOolro av^dve&dai, rrore

del Se laov tlvai.

0EAI.
T
2fi.

OVV.
rjv,

Ap' ow ou /cat rpirov, o fjir) rrporepov 1 varepov aAAa rovro eivai dvev rov yevecrdat,
yiyvtaBai dovvarov; EAI. Ao/cet ye 817.
2n.

/cat

Taimz

817, of/xat,

o/xoAoy^aTa
i/Jvxf],

T/ata

/xa^eTai

auTa auTOt? eV
6vra }
Se
/j.-rjr

Try

rjuerepa
T)

orav rd

rrepl rajv

dcrrpaydXcov Aeyaj/xev,

av^Oevra
fjirjoev
> /

/x-^Te

OTav ^aj/xev e/xe T?]At/covSe rovvavriov rraOovra, eV


fjiev

eviavra) o~ov rov veov vvv

fiei^co elvai,
\

varepov

eXdrrco,

aAAa C5\\V

crou avgrjuevros. eifJLL yap OT) vcrrepov o rrporepov OVK r), ov yevo/xevo?' aVew yap TOU ytyveoOai yeveaOai aovvarov, [Jirjoev Se aVoAAus' rou

/) /

rov e/xou oy/cou a 5\ 0\W

oyKov OVK dv

Trore ^yiyvo\Juf]v IXdrrajv. /cat aAAa fjivpia 67TL fjivpiois ovrcos e'^et, elrrep /cat ravra

d\\a
i.e.

dXXa

is

BT (schol. 6 IT/so/cXoj TO dXXa transposed to the second place); dXXd varepov

Stephanus

et al.

52

THEAETETUS
THEAET. Certainly that is what I should like. soc. And so should I. But since this is the case, and we have plenty of time, shall we not quietly, without any impatience, but truly examining ourselves, consider again the nature of these appearances within us ? And as we consider them, I shall say, I think, first, that nothing can ever become more or less in size or number, so long as it remains equal to itself. Is it not so ? THEAET. Yes.
soc.

And
is
is

secondly,

that

anything

to

which
is

nothing
is

added

and

from

which

nothing

subtracted,

neither increased nor diminished, but

always equal. THEAET. Certainly.

soc. And should we not say thirdly, that what was not previously could not afterwards be without becoming and having become ? THEAET. Yes, I agree.
soc. These three assumptions contend with one another in our minds when we talk about the dice,

when we say that I, who do not, at my age, either increase in size or diminish, am in the course of a year first larger than you, who are young, and afterwards smaller, when nothing has been taken
or

from

my size, but you have grown. For I am, it seems, afterwards what I was not before, and I have not become so for it is impossible to have become without becoming, and without losing anything of my size I could not become smaller. And there are countless myriads of such contradictions, if we are to accept these that I have mentioned. You follow
;

53

PLATO
errei x

yap

TTOV,

So/ccfe

yow

jitot oi)/c

aireipos TCOV TOIOVTOIV elvai.

0EAI.
<f>va)s

Kat i^

TOI)?

Oeovs ye,

to

Sdj/cpares-,

vnepeVtore

a)s OavfJid^o) TL 77or' ecrrt errajv els OLVTCL

ravra,
atVerat

/cat

2il.

eoSco^oo? ya/>, cS
Trepl

(f)iXe,

01)

p,dXa yap (f>i\oTOVTO TO TrdOoSy TO Oavfjid^ew ov yap cr6<j)ov dp%r) (friXocrofiias rj avTfj } /cat eoiKev 6
rfjs
<f)vaed)s
<f

aov.

\piv Qav/jiavTOs

eKyovov

\oyelv. rotaur*

dAAd TTOTepov
eoTLV
TJ

firjaas ov /ca/ca)? fjiavddveis rjorj St' 6

yevea

Tavra
tfrafjiev

wv

rov

UpcoTayopav

\eyew,
0EAI.

OVTTW;
JJLOL

QvTTO)

OOKO).

2H. Xdptv ovv jjioi e'ioei, edv ooi dv'opos, /xaA\ov oe av^pa)v ovo/xacrro)^ r^s* Stavota? TTJV dXrf
0EAI.
12.
ITo)?
5fl.

yap OVK

etao/xat, /cat TTOVV

ye

"AOpei

Sr)

7raKovrj. elvai ^ ov av ovvaiVTai aTrpit; Tolv xepolv XafiecrOai,, 7rpdt;eis Se /cat yeveaeis /cat TTOV TO aopa-

TrepKJKOir&v (JLr) rts elalv oe OVTOL ol ovSev dXXo

TOV OVK aTTOoeojievoL


EAI.

ct>?

ev ovaias
Saj/cpares",

Kat

fjiev

oij,

c5

crKXrjpovs

ye

156 Aeyet? /cat avTiTvirovs dvOpa)7rovs< 2H. Etatv yap, a) 77at, /xdA' ew d/xoucrof dAAoi Se 77-oAu KOjJLifjoTepoi, &v /zeAAo) aot rd > \/ <^o^ \^/>/-f o /cat a viw Aeyetv. o-px^] oe, eg 7)9 OT) TtdvTa ripTrjrai, rjoe avTajv, ws TO TTO.V /ctV^crt? rjv
>

/cat

dAAo

Tra/od
1

TOVTO ovbev,
eTrei

TTJS

oe Kivrjcreajs Svo

Heindorf; efcr* BT. 2 b #175 BTW. ^$

54

THEAETETUS
me,
I

take

it,

Theaetetus, for

think you are not

new

at such things.

when when

THEAET. By the gods, Socrates, I am lost in wonder I think of all these things, and sometimes I regard them it really makes my head swim.

soc. Theodorus seems to be a pretty good guesser For this feeling of wonder about your nature. shows that you are a philosopher, since wonder is the only beginning of philosophy, and he who said that Iris was the child of Thaumas l made a good But do you begin to understand why genealogy.

attribute to Protagoras, or do THEAET. Not yet, I think.


soc.

these things are so, according to the doctrine you not as yet ?

we

And
man

will

to search out the

famous

or,

THEAET.
grateful.
soc.

Of

you be grateful to me if I help you hidden truth of the thought of a I should say, of famous men ? course I shall be grateful, very

Look round and see that none of the unis

initiated

listening.
is

The

uninitiated

are

those

who think nothing

except what they can grasp the existence firmly with their hands, and who deny of actions and generation and all that is invisible. THEAET. Truly, Socrates, those you speak of are very stubborn and perverse mortals. soc. So they are, my boy, quite without culture.

But others are more

am going to
is

upon which

ing of depend,

the things we were just now speakis the assumption that everything besides this, really motion and that there is nothing 1 Hes. Theog. 780. Iris is the messenger of heaven, and
all

clever, disclose to you.

whose secret doctrines

For them the beginning,

Plato interprets the

name of her father as "Wonder"

(0aO/*a),

55

PLATO
jJLev

drreipov eKarepov, SvvajJLLV 8e ro K 8e rf$ TOVTCOV


rpii/sea)s

o/ztAta?

re

/cat

e/cyova

rrXrjOei

alcrOrjrov,

TO

rrpos d'AA^Aa ylyverai drreipa, Si'Si>//,a Se, TO ^tei' e atcr^r^crt?, aet ovvtKTriTTTOvaa. KO.I
/^ey

at JJLV oiiv alaOrjyevvaj^JLevri /JLETOL rov alcrOrjTOV. cret? TO, TOiaSe 7/ atv governs oVofictTa, O^J&L? re KCLL
(

a/coat

/cat

o<j(j>p'/jaL?

KCLL

ipv^eis

re

KCU Kavaeis

/cat rjoovai
/ce/cA?^ LteVat
/

ye

S'/]

/cat XVTTO.L /cat eniQu^ia.1 /cat <j>6{$oi

aAAat, arrepavroi fjiev at avaj ' Se at co^o/xacr^teVaf TO au al yevos rovrajv e/cacrTat? o^oyovov, oifjeoc [lev fjLara TT'ai'ToSaTratS" TravroftaTrd, a/coat? Se co
/cat
Traf-iTrXrjOe'iS

^ojvat, /cat Ta?? aAAats* alaOijcreaL wyyevrj yiyvofJLeva. ri 8rj ovv

ra a'AAa
rjfJLiv

alaOrjTO.
fiovXero.i

ovros 6
0EAI.

fJLvQo^y-a) QeaLrrjre, 77/30? TO,

rrporepa; apa

Ou

rrdvv, a)

'AAA' adpei y edv TTCJOS arrore\eaOfl. fiovXerai yap STJ Aeyetv a>? ravra rrdvra fteV, ojcrrrep Xeyo^ev, Kivelrai, Ta^o? Se /cat PpaSvrrjS evi rfj Kivr/aei avrajv. oaov /mev ovv fipaSv, ev ra> avra) /cat Trpo?
2n.
TO,

rrXriaid^ovra rrjv Kivr^aiv 'ivyei /cat ovra> Srj yevva, rd 8e yevvwjj,eva ovra) 8rj Odrrcu eariv. ydp /cat eV c/>opa auTcDr 77 /ctV^at? ow ojia /cat aAAo Tt TOJV rovrco
irXrjcridaav yevvijar)

ryv XevKorrjrd re

/cat

atfjdrjaw avrfj ^vfj^vrov, a OVK dv rrore eyevero arepov eKeivcov 77/00? aAAo eXOovros, rore 17

(j>epofjievajv rfjs fJ^ev 6ifjea>s

Trpos TCJV 6(f>0aX-

56

THEAETETUS
but that there are two kinds of motion, each infinite number of its manifestations, and of these kinds one has an active, the other a passive force. From the union and friction of these two are born offspring, infinite in number, but always twins, the object of sense and the sense which is always born rind brought forth together with the object of sense. Now we give the senses names like these sight and hearing and smell, and the sense of cold and of heat, and pleasures and pains and desires and fears and so forth. Those that have names are very numerous, and those that are unnamed are innumerable. Now the class of objects of sense is akin to each of these all sorts of colours are akin to all sorts of acts of vision, and in the same way sounds to acts of hearing, and the other objects of sense spring forth akin to the other senses. What does this tale mean for us, Theaetetus, with reference to what was said before ? Do you see ? THEAET. Not quite, Socrates. soc. Just listen perhaps we can finish the tale. It means, of course, that all these things are, as we were saying, in motion, and their motion has in it either swiftness or slowness. Now the slow element keeps its motion in the same place and directed towards such things as draw near it, and indeed it is in this way that it begets. But the things begotten
in the
:

way are quicker for they move from one place to another, and their motion is naturally from one place to another. Now when the eye and some
in this
;

appropriate object which approaches beget whiteness and the corresponding perception which could never

have been produced by either of them going to anything else then, while sight from the eye and whitec 57

PLATO
E
I^LOJV,

TO

XevKOTrjTos 77/50? TOV ovvaTTOTiKTOVTOS 6 fuiev 6(f)9aX/jios dpa oifseajs e^TrXeajs eyeVero /cat opa orj Tore KOI eyeVeTO ou Tt 6'j/ft? dAA' 6(f)9aXjjio^ opwv, TO 8e ^vyyevvrjcrav TO ^pa/xa
rrjs oe

^pa)fjLa y

7Tpi7rXijcrOr] /cat eyeVero 01) XCVKOTTJ? av l aXXoi XevKoVy etre ^uAov etre XiOos eire OTOVOVV O 2 xp<jDO-9f]vai TO) rotoura) ^pco
/cat

rdAAa

Si]

OVTOJ, aKXrjpov /cat Oep/Jiov /cat

TOV ai)TOV TpOTTOV V7ToXr)7TTOV , CLVTO fJLV KdQ* CLVTO 157 fjirjoev zivai, o or) /cat rare eXeyofjiev, ev Se r^
o? a'AA^Aa o/xtAta TrdVra yiyveaOai /cat Travrota eVet /cat TO TTOIOVV etvat Tt /cat TO Tfdaxov (LVTWV eVt eVo? vorjcrai, c5? <^acrtv, oi)/c
etp-at

77aytco?.

TO)

Trao"XpVTi

avveXOrj,

ouYe ya/o TTOIOVV eo*Tt ouVe Trda^ov,


/Cat

Tt,

Trptv

ai/

Trpiv

av TCO

TTOtOWTf TO T TlVt CTUVeA^O^ av TrpooTTeo'ov Trda^ov dvefidvrj.


TOVTOJV, oTrep c
/ca^'

7TOLOVV
e

a)o~T

dp^?

avTO,

dAAa

eXeyofiev, ovoev etvat Ttvt de! ytyp'ea^at, TO 8'

etvai

rjfJiLS TroAAd /cat a/art TjvayKao'fJLeOa VTTO crvvrjOeia? /cat aveTTicrTrjfjio-

TravTa^oOev
Gvvrjs
>

e^aipeTeov, ovx oVt

TO 8' or) Set, to? 6 TOJV Aoyo?, ouVe Tt avy^ajpelv\ \OVTC TOV W OVT* e/Ltou QUTe Tooe OUT e/cetvo OUT6 aAAo ouoei^ oi'Ofj,a o Tt oV tcrT^, dAAa /caTa $vaiv (/>$eyyecr#at ytyvojitet'a
cro<f)ajv
/

xP^ a @ aL a ^<^/ Q.
_v

J/

>/

O> \

/cat

a>?

7TOiov/jLva /cat dVoAAJ/zeva /cat dAAotou/xeva' eav Tt Tt? OTrjarj TO> Aoya>, eue'Aey/CTO? o TOVTO

Schanz
vulg., Burnet.
2

6'rou

oftv

BT

brqovv Campbell; ortcOr


;

Xpu>Aia

BT

xpy/

Ja
-

Heindorf, Burnet

<rx^ a Schanz.

58

THEAETETUS
ness from that which helps to produce the colour are moving from one to the other, the eye becomes full of sight and so begins at that moment to see, and becomes, certainly not sight, but a seeing eye, and the object which joined in begetting the colour is

assume, we said before, that nothing exists in itself, but all things of all sorts arise out of motion by intercourse with each other for it is, as they say, impossible to form a firm conception of the active or the passive element as being anything separately; for there is no active element until there is a union with the passive element, nor is there a passive element until there is a union with the active and that which unites with one thing is active and appears again as passive when it comes in contact with something else. And so it results from all this, as we said in the beginning, that nothing exists as invariably one, itself by itself, but everything is
; ;

with whiteness and becomes in its turn, not white, whether it be a stick or a stone, or whatever it be the hue of which is so And all the rest hard and hot and so coloured. forth must be regarded in the same way we must
filled

whiteness, but

always becoming in relation to something, and "being" should be altogether abolished, though we and even just now have often been compelled by custom and ignorance to use the word. But we the use of ought not, the wise men say, "to permit " " " or " somebody's or " mine or " this something " " or or that other word that

any

implies

making

things stand

still,

but in accordance with nature

we

should speak of things as "becoming" and "being made" and "being destroyed" and "changing"; for anyone who by his mode of speech makes things

59

PLATO
Set
rrepi

Se

/cat

Kara

jJiepos
co

ovrco \4yeiv KO\

aQpoiafJiari or) dvdpajTTov re riOevraL Kal \idov Kal eKacrrov o>dV re Kal eioos. ravra orj, cb Qeairrjre, dp' rjoea So/cet ooi elvai, Kal yevoio av avrajv co? apecrKOVTIDV;
EAI.

TToXXcov

ddpoio-Oevrajv,

oiSa eyujye, d> Scoarpares" Kal yap aov SiW/>tai KaravorjaaL, irorepa SOKOVVTOL aoi Xeyecs avra T) IJJLOV axroTretpa. t > /\ c\ 2H. Uf /xv^/zoveyet?, co ^tAe, ore eya> /xev our oiSa ovre TTOiovjuiai TCOV roiovrojv ovSev efjiov, aAA* et/xt aurajp' ayovo?, ere Se ^tateuo^at /cat rovrov eVaSco re /cat 7rapari9rj/jLL eKaarcov TCJJV cro^>aJv a ea)? av et? ^cD? TO aov Soy/xa yevaaaOai, / > > */ Qf ^ "^ eg-ayayw ega^fevTO? oe TOT 070-^ cr/cei//o/>tat etVe aAAa ave/xtatov yovijjiov ava^av-qaerai.
ouSe
Trepl
l
>

OVK

-?

f/

>/

'

' /

a av

Oappcov Kal Kaprepa)v ev Kal avSpziajs drroKpivov (f>aiV7]Ta.i croc Trepl d>v av epcora).
0EAI.
13-

'EpajTa
2il.

8r^.

Aeye

TOLVVV

TrdAiv,

et

crot

apecr/cet

TO /z.r^ Tt eivai aAAa yiyveaOai del KaXcv l Kal irdvra a apTt 8t7^/>tey.
EAI.

dyaOov Kal
aKOva)
e^eiv

'AAA'

efjLOLye,

eVetS^
(^aiverai

crou
a)s

OVTOJ

Ste^toVros",

Oavimaaia)?

Xoyov

Kal VTToXrjTTreov fj77p SieXr/XvOas. 2H. MT) TOLVVV oaov e a7ToXi7Ta}/JiV avrov. AetVeTat Se evvrrviajv re Trept /cat Te aAAcov /cat fjiavias, oaa re rrapaKoveiv

Trapopav
1

r]

ri

dXXo

TrapaiaOdveoQai

Xeyerai.

ayadbv

Kal KaXbv AISS.; seel. Ast.

60

THEAETETUS
stand
still is

easily refuted.

And we must

use such

expressions in relation both to particular objects and collective designations, among which are "mankind" " and the names of every animal and and " stone Do these doctrines seem pleasant to you, class.

Theaetetus, and do you find their taste agreeable ? THEAET. I don't know, Socrates besides, I can't tell about you, either, whether you are preaching them because you believe them or to test me. soc. You forget, my friend, that I myself know nothing about such things, and claim none of them as mine, but am incapable of bearing them and am merely acting as a midwife to you, and for that reason am uttering incantations and giving you a taste of each of the philosophical theories, until I may help
;

And when it is to bring your own opinion to light. brought to light, I will examine it and see whether it is a mere wind-egg or a real offspring. So be brave
and patient, and in good and manly fashion tell what you think in reply to my questions. THEAET. Very well; ask them. soc. Then say once more whether the doctrine pleases you that nothing is, but is always becoming good or beautiful or any of the other qualities we were just enumerating. THEAET. Why, when I hear you telling about it as you did, it seems to me that it is wonderfully reasonable and ought to be accepted as you have
presented
soc.
it is
it.

Let

us, then,

defective.

The

not neglect a point in which defect is found in connexion

with dreams and diseases, including insanity, and everything else that is said to cause illusions of sight and hearing and the other senses. For of course
61

PLATO
olaOa yap TTOV

on

eAey^ecr^at So/cet 6V apri

eV Trdon rovrois d/ioAoyoiyzeVtos Sifjfjiev Aoyov, a>9 TTOVTOS


1

158 fJidXXov r^ulv j/reuSets" at'a^cret? eV aurot? ytyvo/zeVa?, /cat TroAAou Set 1 ra (^aivo^eva e/cacrroj ravra /cat >\\\^ >< * ? T etvat, aAAa TTCLV rovvavnov ovoev cmv (patverat etvat
/
\ /

0EAI.

rp/OVTT
eiTL(JT7J/jir]i>

c5 'AA^^eo-rara Aeyet?, \/ /s\/ Sco/cparc?. ItS" OT) OfVj CO TTCLL, AL7TTaL AoyO? T6J

~\
TJ]V

riOejJieva)

/cat

ra
tVeti> ort

e/cacrra) t

raura

/cat etvat

rovra)
t

oj </>atVerat; ' r i

@EAI.
ou/c
T^a>

'Eca

ieV

c3

Saj/cares'

o/c^ai

auro.

rt Aeyco, Stort /xot eVet c5? aA^^ai? ye


CUS"

vw 8^
oi)/c
TTJ

77eV Ar^^a? ZITTO


a^t^>tcr-

aV 8u^at/u,^v
Ol

Ot

fJLGLLVOfJLeVOl,

OViptOTTOVTS OV
ei^

Sod,ov<JLv, OTCLV ot

/^et>

^eot aurcD^ otcoyrai


TO) VTTVCO

etvat, ot Se Trrrjvoi, re /cat to? Trero/xe^ot


T
2ri.

ouSe TO rotdvSe a/x^tCT^T^jLta evAp* voet? Trept avraJi/, yLtaAtcrra Se ?rept rou 6Vap r /cat
0EAI.

ow

To
*0
TToAAa/ct?
o*e

2n.
Tt

dV rt? e^ot

reKfjiripiov aTroSet^at,

ot/xat d/C7^/coeVat epcorcovrcov , et rt? epoiro

VVV OVTCOS
TTO.VTCL

V TO) TTCtpOVTl, 7TOTpOl>

Ka0v8ofjiV KOi
r)

a Sta^oou/xe^a oveipcorro^Lev ,

e'yp^yopa/^eV

re

/cat U77a/3 dAAr^Aots" StaAeyo/^e^a. 0EAI. Kat a) Sco/Cjoares , aTTOpov

^v,

ye orco

VtSet^at
,

reAr/x^pta)

Trd^ra

yap

avricrrpo(f)a

ra avra rrapaKoXovQel. a re yap ouSev /ca>Auet /cat eV ra VTTVU) So/ceti'


Seti/

Set

MSS.

Heindorf,
XPil

followed Hultsch.

by Schanz and

Wohlrab.
2

xM

TW

XP^V

x/ie '*"/

62

THEAETETUS
you know that
just
in all these the doctrine we were presenting seems admittedly to be refuted, because in them we certainly have false perceptions, and it is by no means true that everything is to each man which appears to him on the contrary, nothing
;

is

which appears.
THEAET.
soc.

What you say is very true, Socrates. What argument is left, then, my boy, for the man who says that perception is knowledge and that
each case the things which appear are to the one whom they appear ? THEAET. I hesitate to say, Socrates, that I have no reply to make, because you scolded me just now when I said that. But really 1 cannot dispute that those who are insane or dreaming have false opinions, when some of them think they are gods and others fancy in their sleep that they have
in

to

wings and are flying. soc. Don't you remember, either, the similar dispute about these errors, especially about sleeping and

waking
soc.

THEAET.

What dispute ? One which I fancy you have


is

often heard.

asked, what proof you could give if anyone should ask us now, at the present moment, whether we are asleep and our thoughts are a dream, or whether we are awake and talking with each other in a waking condition. THEAET. Really, Socrates, I don't see what proof can be given for there is an exact correspondence in all particulars, as between the strophe and antiTake, for instance, the strophe of a choral song. conversation we have just had there is nothing to prevent us from imagining in our sleep also that we
;
:

The question

63

PLATO
8taAe'ye(7$ar
Sti^yetcr^at,

KOI orav
OLTOTTOS
rj

Srj

ovap

oveipa.ro.

O^JLOLOTTJ?

TOVTCDV

'Opas ovv on TO ye a/z^icr/^T^crat ov /cat norepov IOTIV VTrap r) 6Vap retrat, ACCU 817 taou 6Vro? row ^povov ov K
2n.

ore

a)

eypriyopafJiZVy
TCL

i/JV%rj

ev eKarepa) Sta/xa^erat rjf del Trapovra Soy/xara TTCLVTOS fjidXXov elvoa


t'o-ov

dXrjOrj,

cocrre

/xev

^o^oy raSe
KOLI
o/.tota>S'

(fia/jiev

ovra

laov Se

eKiva,

0EAI.

IlavTaTraort /zev

ow.
vocrajp'

OVKOVV

/cat

7ie/3t

re KOI

fjiaviwi'

CLVTOS Aoyo?, TrXrjv rov 0EAI. 'Op9a)S.

^povov ori

ov)(l Laos;

Tt

ow

TrXtjOeL

^povov KOI dAtyor^rt TO


eti)
Tr

0EAI.

PeAotoi^ jueVr' a^

cra^e? e e'^et? OTrota TOVTCOV TOJV 8o^aap.aTa>v dXrjOrj;


EAI.

2n.

'AAAa

rt

aAAo

Ou

jLtOt

So/Co).

TOIVVV

CLKOV

Ottt

av Aeyotev
zlvai

ot TO, aet &OKOVVTOL opL^o^evot ra>

OOKOVVTL

dXrjOrj.
'

Aeyouat Se,
CO

ct>?

ey 6^ ot/mt, OVTOJS
CtV

pO)TO)VTS'
Tracriv,
\JJT]

0atT7]T, O

TpOV

T)

7717

Ttva

ereptu;

/cat

^17

SiW/zty T^V avrrjv e^et TO) V7roXd^cof.iV rfj fiV ravrov eivai
Tt
e'^etv

epajTa>/zej^, TT^

Se erepov, aAA' oAcu? erepov."


07

EAI.

'ASwafOK roivvv ravrov

cV

64

THEAETETUS
are carrying on this conversation with each other, and when in a dream we imagine that we are relating dreams, the likeness between the one talk and the

other

is

remarkable.

So you see it is not hard to dispute the point, since it is even open to dispute whether we are awake or in a dream. Now since the time during which we are asleep is equal to that during which we are awake, in each state our spirit contends that the semblances that appear to it at any time are certainly true, so that for half the time we say that this is true, and for half the time the other, and we maintain each with equal confidence.
soc.
.

THEAET. Certainly.
soc.

And may

not, then, the

same be

said

about

insanity
is

and the other

diseases, except that the time

not equal ? THEAET. Yes.

soc. Well, then, shall truth be determined by the length or shortness of time ? THEAET. That would be absurd in many ways. soc. But can you show clearly in any other way which of the two sets of opinions is true ? THEAET. I do not think I can. soc. Listen, then, while I tell you what would be said about them by those who maintain that what appears at any time is true for him to whom it
/

They begin, I imagine, by asking this " Theaetetus, can that which is wholly question other have in any way the same quality as its alternative ? And we must not assume that the thing in question is partially the same and partially other, but wholly other." THEAET. It is impossible for it to be the same in
appears.
:

c2

65

PLATO
159 SwajLtet
ere/oof.
77

cv

d'AAto

OTCOOVV,

6Vai>

77

ouV
roiovrov
2n.
fl

ou

Kai

dvofjioiov

dvayKaiov TO

"E/xotyc So/cet. TI ovufiaivei OJJLOLOV ra) LT iT eaVTO) OLVOfJiOLOV,


EAI.

Et apa

'

jj,V TOLVTOV

(frijaofjiev

yiyveaOaiy avo^oiov^Levov Se

zrzpov;
EAI.

'AvdyKr],

2n.
177

OVKOVV TrpoaOzv

eAeyo/xev

to?

77oAAa

/u,ev

ra
EAI.

TTOIOVVTCL KG! aTreipa, d)cravTO>s Se

ye ra ?7a-

cr^ovra;

Nat.

OTI ye aAAo aAAaj fjirjv Kai aAAa> ou rai^ra aAA' ere/oa


2fl.

Kat

EAI.

HaVf

/xev

ow.
^

2n. Aeyco/xev ST) e/xe re /^at ere Kai rdAAa /cara rov avrov Aoyov, Saj/cparry vyiaivovra
arrj

av daOevovvra.

Trorepov

O^JLOLOV

TOUT

oXov EAI. ^IcoKpdrrj, rovro Aeyet? oAco e/cetVa), TOJ vyiaivovri ^ajKpdrei; 2n. KaAAicTTa VTreXafies' avro rovro Aeyaj.
EAI.

avo^oiov <f)rj0o{jLv ; ^Apa TOV dadevovvTa

'Avo^totov ST^TTOU.

2n.
EAI
2fl.
.

Kat erepov dpa ovrcos a)O7Tp


'

dvofjioiov;

Avay/cr;

Kat Ka9ev8ovra
1

Sr)

/cat

rfdvra

vw

8r)

SLTJX0ofjLV t (jjaavrojs
vvv
dij

(frrjcreis;

Heindorf ;

j/O*/

BT.

THEAETETUS
anything, either in quality or in any other respect whatsoever, when it is wholly other. soc. Must we not, then, necessarily agree that such a thing is also unlike ? THEAET. It seems so to me.
soc. Then if anything happens to become like or unlike anything either itself or anything else we shall say that when it becomes like it becomes the same, and when it becomes unlike it becomes other ?

THEAET.
soc.

We

must.
said before, did
?

Well,

we

we

active

elements were many likewise the passive elements THEAET. Yes.

infinite

not, that the and in fact

soc. And furthermore, that any given element, by uniting at different times with different partners, will beget, not the same, but other results ?

THEAET. Certainly. Well, then, let us take me, or you, or anything else at hand, and apply the same principle Shall say Socrates in health and Socrates in illness. we say the one is like the other, or unlike ? " do THEAET. When you say " Socrates in illness you mean to compare that Socrates as a whole with Socrates in health as a whole ? soc. You understand perfectly ; that is just what
soc.
I

mean.
THEAET. Unlike,
soc.

And

I imagine. therefore other, inasmuch as unlike

THEAET. Necessarily.
soc. And you would say the same of Socrates asleep or in any of the other states we enumerated just now ?

67

PLATO
EAI.

"Eycoye.
"E/<:a<7TOV SYJ rcov TrefivKorcov rt rroielv a'AAo
fjiev Xdfirj

2n.
Tt,

orav

vyiaivovrcL ^aiKpdrr), a>? erepii)


cos erepa);

rjaerai,

0EAI.
.

Tt

8*

orav Se daOevovvra, ov fjieXXei;


^
e'</>'

Kat erepa
Tt ft^;

re 6

7Tdcr%ut>v /cat e/cetvo

TO TTOIOVV;
TTLVOO

0EAI.
.

"Orav
Nat.

ST)

olvov

vyiaivatv,

TJ$VS

EAI.
.

'EyeV^cre ya^

3rj

IK rcov
vKVTTfr
}

TO T

TTOIOVV KO.I TO 7TCLO"OV


ayu-a cfrepofjteva

KOL

d^d>6repa

/cat

TO> Wcr^ovTO? oucra aladavo^evr^v TTJV yXcorrav e yAu/cuTT]? Trpo? TOU otVou ?rcpt aVetpyacraTO, 7^
?
(frepo/jievr]

yXvKvv rov oivov

rfj

vyiaivovarj

rrrj eTroirjaev /cat etvat /cat </>atWo-#at.

0EAI.

Ilavu

/xei'

ow

TO.

Trporepa

r^lv OVTCOS

f]

8e daOevovvTa, aAAo Tt TrpaJrov JJLZV ov TOV auTov eAa/3ev; avofjioica yap or) dX^Oeia
EAI.

TrpocrrjXOev.

Nat.

au eyVvrjadTr]v o re roiovro? Troo-t?, Trepl ^ev rrjv yXcorrav aicdtyaiv TriKporrjros, rrepl oe rov oivov
5fl.

"ETepa

ST]
r)

T.o)Kpdrr)$

/cat

rov otVov

68

THEAETETUS
THEAET. YeS. soc. Then each of those elements which by the law of their nature act upon something else, will, when it gets hold of Socrates in health, find me one object to act upon, and when it gets hold of me in illness, another ? THEAET. How can it help it ? soc. And so, in the two cases, that active element and I, who am the passive element, shall each pro-

duce a different object


THEAET.
soc.

So,

Of course. then, when

am

in

health and drink

wine, it seems pleasant and sweet to me ? THEAET. Yes. soc. The reason is, in fact, that according to the principles we accepted a while ago, the active and passive elements produce sweetness and perception, both of which are simultaneously moving from one place to another, and the perception, which comes from the passive element, makes the tongue perceptive, and the sweetness, which comes from the wine and pervades it, passes over and makes the wine both to be and to seem sweet to the tongue that is in health. THEAET. Certainly, such are the principles we accepted a while ago. soc. But when it gets hold of me in illness, in the first place, it really doesn't get hold of the same man, does it ? For he to whom it comes is certainly
unlike.

THEAET. True. soc. Therefore the union of the Socrates who is ill and the draught of wine produces other results in the tongue the sensation or perception of bitter:

69

PLATO
yiyvofJLvr]V /cat (f>pojjivr]v TTLKporyra, /cat rov

ov rrLKpor^ra dXXa TTiKpov,


aAA*
0EAI.
2fl.

{ji

Se oi)K

olu

JLV OVV.

QVKOVV

eya) re ouSet' aAAo 77ore

160

OVTCUS alaOavofJLevos' rov yap aXXov aXXrj /ca ' aAAotov /cat aAAov Trotet TOP' al
OVT*
e/cetj^o

TO TTOLOVV

e/xe jLt^TTOT*

aAAa>
OLTTO

TauToi^

yevvfjcrav

TOLOVTOV

yevrjrcu'

yap

aXXov aAAo yew^o-at' aAAotov yev^creTat. EAI. "EcrTt ravra.


2n.

Oi5Se jLt^v eyajye eyitauTa) TOLOVTOS, e/cet^o eauTai TOLOVTOV yevrfcrerai.


EAI.

Ou yap ow.
'Avay/ci] Se ye e/xe T
yiyvajfjuai,'

Ttvo? yiyveaOai, orav

Se alaOavo/jievov

yap, /x^Sed$vvarov yiyveoBai" e/cetvo


alcrdavo/uLevov

Ttvt ylyvecrOai,
yiyvr}TO.i'

rov

orav yXvKV TJ TTiKpov TJ roiovyAu/cu yap, /^TjSevt Se yAu/cy d

TO^ yeveoOai.
EAI.
2fl.

riavTCtTTacrt /xev ouv.

AetVeTat
ef^at,

817,

ot)uat,

^/ztv

dAA^Aots",

ytyw/ze^a, ytyvea^at, eVetVep ovcriav avvSel jLteV, o-u^Set Se rjfjicijp TJ avdyKri rrjv > o T-r "^^ >^> '\\/\ ouoe^t TCOV aAAcov, ouo au 7)/Lttv aimns". aAA^Aots
ecr/xeV,
\

etVe

/^

AetVcTat

cruvoeoeaOaL'

ware
?}

ei/re

Tt?

etvat Tt

Ttvt etvat

Tt^oy

77poj TI prjreov avra> t

70

THEAETETUS
a bitterness which is engenness, and in the wine dered there and passes over into the other the wine is made, not bitterness, but bitter, and I am made, not perception, but perceptive. THEAET. Certainly. soc. Then I shall never have this perception of any other thing for a perception of another thing the percipient is another perception, and makes nor can that which acts on me different and other ever by union with another produce the same result for by producing or become the same in kind another result from another passive element it will
; ;
:

become

different in kind.

THEAET. That is true. soc. And neither shall I, furthermore, ever again become the same as I am, nor will that ever become the same as it is. THEAET. No.
yet, when I become percipient, I must become percipient of something, for it is impossible to become percipient and perceive nothing and that which is perceived must become so to someone, when it becomes sweet or bitter or the like for to become sweet, but sweet to no one,
soc.

And

necessarily
;

is

impossible. THEAET. Perfectly true. soc. The result, then, I think, is that we (the active and the passive elements) are or become, whichever is the case, in relation to one another, since we are
to one another by the inevitable law of our being, but to nothing else, not even to ourselves. The result, then, is that we are bound to one another; and so if a man says anything "is," he must say it is to or of or in relation to something, 71

bound

PLATO
j/

etre

/)

y tyvecrc/at

ytyvojitei'ov oi>Ve

auro oe e0 avrov TL avr(o XCKTCOV our' a'AAov


Aoyo? ov

**

rj

ov

rj

CLTToSeKreov, cos 6

0EAI.

TLavTOLTTaai yuev

ow,
TO

co

2n.
KCLL
>/

Ou.icow ore

77

e/xe

TTOLOVV

ep,oi

ecrnv

OVK aAAa>, eya>


EAI.

/cat

alaOavofjiCLi

avrov, aXXos

8>

ou;
ITa)?

ouo-ta?

ov; yap V \f.-\W/J apa e^Ltot T) e/x?) atac/7]crts aet eariv KO.\ eyco Kpirrjs Kara rov
e/zot, cos ecrrt, /cat

ITpcorayopav ralv re OVTOJV


/.CT)

oVrcov, co? ou/c ecrriv.


"Eot/cev.

0EAI.

15-

2n

Hcos"

av

ow

anfjzvSrjs
-

cjv

/cat

Stavota Tret ra 6Vra

ivoeva OVK OV yiyvo^eva

a
0EAI.
2il.
I)AC

ei^v uivnep
07TCOS

uaLtCO?

OV

Day/caAoj? apa aot etp^rat ort aAAo rt eanv 7} alaQr^ai?, /cat etV rayrov

criyz-

7T67TTa>Kev,

Kara

/JL6V "QfjL-rjpov

TO TOLOVTOV

(frvAov

'Hpa/cAetrov /cat oiov pevfjiara KiveloOai TO,

/cat

Kara
rrdvTtov

Se

ITpcoTayopav

TOV

xprjfjtdrajv

avOpcoTrov fierpov

etvat,

oo(f>cjrarov /caTa

8e

Seairrjrov
crov

rovra>v
r]

ovrws
yap,
a)

e^ovrajv

atarOrj&w

eTnarrjfjLrjv

yiyveaOai.
p,ev
7}

Qeairrjre;

rovro
EAI.

etVat
770)?

ofov veoyevey TratStov,

Se /xateu/za; 2n.

Aeyet?;
a>? eot/cev, /xoAts TTOT
1

OVTCOS' avay/cr^, c5

TOUTO

/.tev

Sry,

eyev-

72

THEAETETUS
" becomes but he must similarly if he says it not say it is or becomes absolutely, nor can he accept such a statement from anyone else. That is the meaning of the doctrine we have been describing. THEAET. Yes, quite so, Socrates.

and

"

soc.

Then, since that which acts on

me

is

to

me
it,

and and

to
I

me

only,
?

it is

also the case that

perceive

only THEAET.
soc.

Of course. Then to me my perception


it is

is

true
;

for in

always part of my being and I am, as Protagoras says, the judge of the existence of the things that are to me and of the non-existence of those that are not to me. THEAET. So it seems.

each case

then, if I am an infallible judge and never stumbles in regard to the things that are or that become, can I fail to know that which I
soc.

How,

my mind
perceive

THEAET. You cannot possibly fail. soc. Therefore you were quite right in saying that knowledge is nothing else than perception, and there is complete identity between the doctrine of Homer and Heracleitus and all their followers the that all things are in motion, like streams doctrine of the great philosopher Protagoras that man is the measure of all things and the doctrine of Theaetetus that, since these things are true, Eh, Theaetetus ? Shall perception is knowledge.

we
say

and the
?

say that this is, so to speak, your new-born child Or what shall we result of my midwifery ?

THEAET.
soc.

We

must say

Well,

we have

that, Socrates. at last managed to bring this

73

PLATO
vr)o~afj,V ,

6 rt

877

Trore Tuy^dVet 6V.

jLtera

Se rov

TOKOV

TO.

dfji(f)iSp6fJu.a

avrov

a>? dXrjdujs eV /cu/cAa>

7Tpl0pKTQV TO) XoyO), OKOTTOV^VOV^ fJirj OVK aiov 6V Tpo<^? TO yiyvojjievov, rjfJLas
161 dve/xicuoV re
Acac

Xddr] aAAa.

ifjevSos.
/cat ^17

rj

crv

otet Travrcu?
r)

TO ye

cr6i>

rpe^eiv

aVoTifleVai,

/cat

eAey^o/xevov opwv, /cat ou <j(f>68pa ^a edV Tt? crou a? TrpcororoKOV auTO v<f>aipfj ;

0EO.

'Avc^eTat,

a)

yap

Sua/coAos".

31a)KpaTes, 0eatT7^TOS" ou8aaAAa 77^6? ^ecDv etVe', 7^ au

ovrcos

OtAoAoyos" y* ef aTe^va)?

/cat

^/a^crTos , c5

0eo8a)/)e, 6Vt /xe otet Aoycov Ttva. etvat


/oaStco?

OvXaKov
ouSet?

/cat

e^eXovra epetv c6?


yty^o/xe^ov
oz)/c
9

ou/c

au

e'^et

OUTCO ravra"
TcDy

TO

8e

evvoels,

on

dAA' det irapa rov e/xot Se ouSev 77/00 cr8taAeyo/zeVou, eya> eVtara/xat TrAeov

Aoycov e^epxerai Trap

efjiov

TrA^v fipaxeos, oaov Aoyov Trap' Xaflelv /cat a7roSe'aa$at fjierpiajs.

eVepou
/cat
^ui/

crofiov

TOUTO

Trapa rovSe Tretpdcro/zat, oy Tt avTo? etVetF. 0EO. 2u /cdAAtov, cu SaJ/cpaTe?, Aeyets"


Trotet

Qlcrd'

otv,

d)

rov eraipov aov TlpcoTayopov;


EO.
1

To

TTolov;

The rite called amphldromia took place a few days After some ceremonies of purificaafter the birth of a child. tion the nurse, in the presence of the family, carried the
74

THEAETETUS
forth,
is

whatever

it

turns out to be
]

and now that

it

perform the rite of the circle of our running round argument and see whether it may not turn out to be after all not worth rearing, but only a wind-egg, an imposture. But, perhaps, you think that any offspring of yours ought to be cared for and not put away or will you bear to see it examined and not get angry if it is taken away from you, though it is
born,
;

we must

in very truth with it in a circle

your first-born ? THEO. Theaetetus will bear it, Socrates, for he is not at all ill-tempered. But for heaven's sake,
Socrates, tell me, is all this wrong after all ? soc. You are truly fond of argument, Theodorus, and a very good fellow to think that I am a sort of

bag full of arguments and can easily pull one out and say that after all the other one was wrong but you do not understand what is going on none of the arguments comes from me, but always from him
;
:

who

is

talking with me.


little,

except just a from another


fairly.

enough
is

try to extract this thought from Theaetetus, but not to say anything myself. THEO. That is the better way, Socrates ; do as

man who And now I will

myself know nothing, an argument wise and to receive it


to extract

you

say. soc.

me

in

Do you know, then, Theodorus, what amazes your friend Protagoras ?


What
is it ?

THEO.

infant rapidly about the family hearth, thereby introducing him, as it were, to the family and the family deities. At this time the father decided whether to bring up the child or to expose it. Sometimes, perhaps, the child was named on this occasion. In the evening relatives assembled for a feast at which shell-fish were eaten.

75

PLATO
2H.
To,
fjLev

d'AAa /zot

rrdw

rjSetos

eiprjkev, c5

TO So/cow /caoTa> rovro /cat eariv ryv 8' apxty LTT.V dp^6(JiVO? TOV X6yOV TeOaV/JLCLKOL, GTL OVK
rrjs

dX^deia?
TI

on

TTO.VTCOV
r\

xprj^drajv fxerpov lo~rlv


TOJV

v$

KvvoK6(j)aXos

rt

wa,

aAAo droTranepov jLeaoTreTraJS /cat

Xeyeiv, e OTI rJiels [J,v CLVTOV axjTrep 6eov eOavfJid^ofjiev Tv ao(f)ia } 6 3' dpa
fieXriajv

liri

^arpd^ov

yvpivov,
1

/ZT)

ort

a'AAou

TOV

a> 0eoSajpe; et yap dv6pd)TT(jJV. T] 77tD? Aeyto/zev, " <j.\c/ '^l^ >/3' <Z / ' Y e/cacrra) aA^c/es' ecrrat o ay ot atcrc/^crea)? oo^a^T], O-TI

t\o>

aAAo? fieXriov Sta/cptvet, 2 So^av Kvpicorepos earat \ \ TrLO~Kipao~6ai jLtT^re TT)V f/ '/3^/ <J/ A\/ Tpos Ti]V erpov t opur] rj yjevorjs, aAA o Tro/AAa/cts CLVTOS rd avrov e/caaros fJiovo? So^acrei,
/cat /Z7]T
ft

ro aAAou

TTa.Oo'S

e\

oe Trdvra opOd

/cat

eratpe, npajTayopas" ftev

o~O(f)6s }

dXrjOfj, rt 897 Trore, ajcrre /cat

c5

SiSacr/caAo? d^LovaOai St/catto? /zero,


,

^/xet? Se

d^aQearepoi re
/xerpoj

/cat

Trap*

eKelvov,

6Vrt

avraJ
(f)d)/jiV

e/cacrra)

avrov
T^?

oo(f)ias;

ravra

TTOJS ^rf

Aeyetv rov
eftTy?

n/Dcorayopav; TO 8e 817 e/zoV re /cat re^T^? r^? ftateurt/c^? crtya), oaov

yeAcora d^Atcr/cayo/xev ot^Ltat Se /cat ^vp,Tracra r) TOV OLaXeyeodai vrpay/zareta. TO yap e 3 /cat eVt^etpetv eAey^etv TO,? aAA^Acov re /cat Solas', op6ds eKaarov ovaas, ov fj.ct.Kpd

BT
2

\yo/j.ei>

SiaKpivei

most
3

editors

^Trtxetpety

TW

diaKpivy
;

vulg.

(emendation) T.

om. B.

76

THEAETETUS
soc. In general I like his doctrine that what appears to each one is to him, but I am amazed by the beginning of his book. I don't see why he does not say in the beginning of his Truth l that a pig or a dog-faced baboon or some still stranger creature of those that have sensations is the measure of all

Then he might have begun to speak to us very imposingly and condescendingly,, showing that while we were honouring him like a god for his wisdom, he was after all no better in intellect than any other man, or, for that matter, than a tadpole. What alternative is there, Theodorus ? For if that opinion is true to each person which he acquires through sensation, and no one man can discern another's condition better than he himself, and one man has no better right to investigate whether another's opinion is true or false than he himself, but, as we have said several times, each man is to form his own opinions by himself, and these opinions are always right and true, why in the world, my friend, was Protagoras wise, so that he could rightly be thought worthy to be the teacher of other men and to be well paid, and why were we ignorant creatures and obliged to go to school to him, if each person is the measure of his own wisdom ? Must we not believe that Protagoras was "playing to the gallery" in saying this? I say nothing of the ridicule that I and my science of midwifery deserve in that case, and, I should say, the whole practice of dialectics, too. For would not the investigation of one another's fancies and opinions, and the attempt to refute them, when each man's must be
things.
1 Truth was apparently the Protagoras 's book.

title,

or part of the

title,

of

77

PLATO
162
(Jiev

KOI StcoAuyto? <f>Xvapia, et dA^^s" 17 YlpajTayopov, dAAd fjir) Trai^ovcra e/c TOV dovTOu
EO.
&
\

TTJS ptfiXov l(f)9ey^cLTo;


?

or)

L7T$.

^1 %o)KpaTS, <J>L\OS ?<$/?


OVK
>

i\

o.v

ovv

oegaLfJirjv

dvrjp, (jjcnrep ov vvv OL eyitou ofJLoAo-

^>>^<\
CTOI

yovvros eAey^ea^at TlpajTayopav, ouS' av aol Trapa

86av

dvTiTLViv.
KOI
vvv

TOV ovv QeairrjTov TTaXiv Aa/8e*


Brj
/xctA*

TTOLVTOJS

eyLt/^eAa)?

e</>atVero

VTTCLKOVeiV.

^Apa

8a)/3e,

Trpo?

KOLV els AaKcoaifjiova eXOcjv, cS 0eoTCI? TTaXcLLcrTpas d^tot? av aAAou?


fjirj

6cbfjivos yviJivovs, eviovs <^av\ovs, avros 7TL$lKVVVai TO ClSoS TTapCLTTOOVOfJieVOS /


EO.

avr-

'AAAa
/cat

rt

fjirjv

eTTtrpei/feiv

TftiaeaOau;

ooKels, etVep /LteAAoteV ftot warrep vvv ol^iai vjj,d?


fjirj

TTciaeiv e/xe /zev e'dV

Oedodai KO!

e\Kiv

Trpos TO

yvfjivdatov o*KXr)pov ySr) OVTCL, TO) 8e 8rj re /cat vypOTepaj OVTL TrpoaTraXaUiv.

va>Tpco

2n. 'AAA' et a) OVTOJS, 0eo8cope, aoi ovS' e/xot )(0p6v, (f>aalv OL 7rapot/ztao/zei'Ot. TrdAtv 8^ oui^ eVt TOV aofiov QeaiTTjTov treov. Aeye
17.
(f>iXov,

a) 0eatr^re, TrpajTov p,ev a vw 817 StT]A^o^iev, 1 dpa ov avv9avp,d,is et eai(f)vr)s OVTCJS dva<f>a,vr}o~i fjirjoev XLpa>v 6t$" o~O(f>iav OTOVOVV dvdpcjTrcov r) /cat
or),

6eojv;
els

rj

f\TTov rt otet TO
AT
T)
\
>'

UpajTayopeLov
>

fjueTpov

Oeovs

0EAI.

Ma

et? dvdpajTrovs AeyeaOai; / A /> > \ At ou/c eycoye' /cat oxrep


TIVLKCL

ye epa>Tas,
ov
TpoTrov etvat TO>

ndvv

Oavfjid^a).

yap

Oifj/Jiev

Ae'yotei'

TO OOKOVV
yLtot

e/cdcrTO)

TOVTO

/cat

So/couvTt, Trdvu

ev

<f>aivTO XeyeoOdi'

vvv Se

TOVVaVTLOV
1

ffvv0avfj.dfis

BT

<ri>

Oavjj.dfas

W.

78

THEAETETUS
be tedious and blatant folly, if the Truth of Protagoras is true and he was not jesting when he uttered his oracles from the shrine of his book ? THEO. Socrates, the man was my friend, as you So I should hate to bring about the just remarked. refutation of Protagoras by agreeing with you, and I should hate also to oppose you contrary to my real convictions. So take Theaetetus again ; especially as he seemed just now to follow your
right,

suggestions very carefully. soc. If you went to Sparta, Theodorus, and visited the wrestling-schools, would you think it fair to look on at other people naked, some of whom were of poor physique, without stripping and showing your own form, too ? THEO. Why not, if I could persuade them to allow me to do so ? So now I think I shall persuade you to let me be a spectator, and not to drag me into the ring, since I am old and stiff, but to take the younger

and nimbler man


soc.

as your antagonist.

Well, Theodorus, if that pleases you, it does not displease me, as the saying is. So I must attack the wise Theaetetus again. Tell me, Theaetetus, referring to the doctrine we have just expounded, do you not share my amazement at being suddenly exalted to an equality with the wisest man, or even " measure " god ? Or do you think Protagoras's
applies any less to gods than to
; ;

men ?

THEAET. By no means and I am amazed that you ask such a question at all for when we were discussing the meaning of the doctrine that whatever appears to each one really is to him, I thought it was good but now it has suddenly changed to the opposite.
;

79

PLATO
.

Ne'o?

yap

ei, d>

</>t'Ae

Trar

r^?

ow

pta? c^etos i>7TaKOVis /cat rreiOeL. rrpos yap ravra a) epet IlpcoTayopas 17 rt? d'AAo? UTrep avrov' yevvaloi TralSes re /cat yepovres, cruy/ca^e^o/xevot, Oeovs re etV TO fjitaov ayovre?, 01)5- eya; e/c re rov Aeyetv /cat rou ypdffreiv Trepl
1

CLVTOJV, d>$ elalv

TJ

ctt?

ou/c eicriv, e^aipto, /cat

ot

TroAAot

av aTioSe^oti'TO d/couovres', Aeyere ravra,


t? oo(j>iav e'/caoTO? rcDv
1

co? Setvov et /LtT^Sev Stotcret


a,vdpu)7TO>v

fiooKTJfJiaTOS

orovovv

aVoSei^tv

Se

/cat avay/CT^v , to el

ouS' ryrivovv \eyere, dAAa ra> et/cort eOeXoi 0eo8ajpo? r) d'AAo? rt? TOJV yea>yecofierpetv,
cr/co7retre

^pco/xeyo?

7n9avo\oyia re /cat ei/cocrt 77pt 163 T^Ai/couroji^ 2 Aeyo/zeVou? Adyou?. EAI. 'AAA' 01) 3t/caiov, c5 Sdj/cpare?, oure cru
o re ad;
/cat

av et^. IJLOVOV et OiTTO^e^ecrOe

ow

cry

a^to? re /cat

ouS'

eVo?

eoScopofj

d 0eo8a>pot> Adyo?. ITdvu /xev ouv d' EAI.


TTySe
1

re

et d'pa ecrrtv e Si) aKOTTaJfJiev et? yap rourd CLLoOrjcns ravrov T) erepov. TTOU Tras d Adyo? 7^/xtv eretvev, /cat rourou X-P LV T ^ 77oAAd /cat d'roTra ravra eKivrjaafjiev. ov yap;
/cat

2n.

EAI.

sn.

H ow

navrd77a(Tt /xev

ow.
a
raj

ofjioXoyrjoof-iev,

opdv ala9a-

vofjieOa TJ TO) aKoveLV, rrdvra ravra. d'/xa /cat e77tcrraolov raiv fiapfidpojv rrplv ^adelv rrjv <f)covr]v <jQa.i;

TTorepov ov
1

</>7^cro/>tev

d/couety, 6'rav (fideyycovraL,


iv.
2

r)

/^ou] Adam, CZa55. 1?^. coin, a copper."

p. 103,

suggests

J/O/ZOK,

"a

TyXiKovTuv

T;

TOVTWV B.

80

THEAETETUS
soc.

You

are

young,

my

dear boy

so

you are

For quickly moved and swayed by popular oratory. in reply to what I have said, Protagoras, or someone " speaking for him, will say, Excellent boys and old men, there you sit together declaiming to the people, and you bring in the gods, the question of whose existence or non-existence I exclude from oral and written discussion, and you say the sort of thing that the crowd would readily accept that it is a terrible thing if every man is to be no better than any beast but you do not advance any in point of wisdom cogent proof whatsoever you base your statements on probability. If Theodorus, or any other geometrician, should base his geometry on probability, So you and he would be of no account at all. Theodorus had better consider whether you will
;
;

accept arguments founded 011 plausibility and probabilities in such important matters. THEAET. That would not be right, Socrates neither you nor we would think so.
;

Apparently, then, you and Theodorus mean look at the matter in a different way. THEAET. Yes, certainly in a different way. soc. Well, then, let us look at it in this way, raising the question whether knowledge is after all the same as perception, or different. For that is the object of all our discussion, and it was to answer that question that we stirred up all these strange doctrines, was it not ? THEAET. Most assuredly. soc. Shall we then agree that all that we persoc.

we must

? For instance, say that before having learned the language of foreigners wr e do not hear them when they speak, 81

ceive
shall

by sight or hearing we know

we

PLATO
d/couetv

re

/cat
/XT)

7Ti<JTCLa6ai

a Acyoucri;
fiXeirovres

/cat

ypd/z/xaTa

eVicrra/xevot,
77

eiV

av aura

TTorepov oi>x opaV

emaTacr$at

eirrep opco/xei' 81-

ye, ai Soj/cpares", TOVTO CLVTOJV, OTrep 6paj[jLv re /cat aKOvofjiev, eVtaracr^at <f>TJaofjLv TOJV fJLi> yap TO oxfjfjia KO.I TO ^yocD/m opav re /cat

to^uptou/xe^a; EAI. Ai)ro

em'(7Tacr$at,

aKoveiv r

TCOV 8e r^v o^vrrjra /cat a/xa /cat ei'SeVar a Se ot re

arat

Trept aurcDt' /cat ot ep/jLrjvels StSaa/coucrtv,

owre
.

aladdi>(j9ai ra> opdv r) d/couetv oure eVto-racr^at l8. 2n. "Apiard y', a> Qeairrjre, /cat oi)/c

a^iov CTOL Trpos ravra d/z^tcr^T^crat, tva /cat dAA' opa 817 /cat roSe a'AAo TrpoaLov, /cat cr/co77et

auro
EAI.

To
rp>

TToloV
/

2H.

S lo rotovoe*

"

'

et

rt? epotro,

f<T^ apa OVVCLTOV,


/

orov

rt?

eVto-r^yLtcov

yeVotro
/cat

77ore,

eVt

[JLvrjfJLrjV

avrov rovrov
^,17

cra>^op.evov,

e^ovra TOT ore


'

/ze'/zv^rat

eVt'crrao-^at

auro TOVTO o ^te/xv^rat


1

jLta/cpoAoyai 8e, cu? eot/ce, ^ouAo/xevo? fjiaOcbv TIS rt /xeyLtv^/zeVos /XT) otSe.

epeadai, el

QEAI.

Kat

77CO?, c5

Scu/cpares

Tepas yap aV
Se.

117

o Aeyet?. 2H. Mi)

ow

cya>

A?7pcu;

cr/co7ret

dpa TO
ai'a^atv; yeyovev

opav
2n.

ou/c

aladdveoBai Aeyet?

/cat TI)V

oi/ftj^

0EAI.

"Eycuye. Ov/couv o tScot' Tt

eiTLo-TTJfjiajv

K6ii>ov

o et8ev /caTa TO> d'pTt Aoyoi/;

THEAETETUS
or that
again, if we do not know the letters, shall we maintain that we do not see them when we look at them or that if we really see them we know them ?

And

we both hear and know what they

say?

THEAET. shall say, Socrates, that we know just so much of them as we hear or see in the case of the letters, we both see and know the form
:

We

colour, and in the spoken language we both hear and at the same time know the higher and lower notes of the voice but we do not perceive through sight or hearing, and we do not know, what the grammarians and interpreters teach about them. soc. First-rate, Theaetetus and it is a pity to But look out dispute that, for I want you to grow. for another trouble that is yonder coming towards us, and see how we can repel it. THEAET. What is it ? soc. It is like this If anyone should ask, " Is it a if man has ever known a thing and still possible, has and preserves a memory of that thing, that he does not, at the time when he remembers, know that

and

I seem to be very thing which he remembers ? pretty long winded but I merely want to ask if a man who has learned a thing does not know it
;

"

for what does, Socrates you suggest would be monstrous. soc. Am I crazy, then ? Look here. Do you not say that seeing is perceiving and that sight is per;

when he remembers it. THEAET. Of course he

ception ? THEAET.
soc.

do.
said,

Then, according to what we have just

the

has seen a thing has acquired knowledge of that which he has seen ? 83

man who

PLATO
EAI.
2fl.

Nat. Tt Se'; iwr}^f}v ov


Nat.

Ae'yet? /ueVrot rt;

0EAI.

2H.
EAI.

norepov ovBevos
TtVO? S^TTOU.

TJ

TWOS;
/cat

2n.
0EAI.

QVKOVV
TiVCDV ;

d>v

efjia0

a)v

jjoOero,

rotou-

Tt

/U,7]l^;
17

2n.
EAI.

eiSe rt?,

fJiefJ,vr)Tat

TTOV eVt'ore;

2H.
EAI.

Me/x^rat.
feat {Jivcras;
r)

'AAAct

Setvov,

c5

rovro Spdaas eVeAa^ero; Scu/cpare?, rovro ye


1

164

2n.

Aet ye
et

/xeVrot,

et

owaofjiev

rov

rrpoade

Aoyov
EAI.

Se /x^, ot^erat.
eyoj, vy rov Ata, vrrorrr^vu) ,
TTTJ.

Kat
Tfjoe-

ov

fjirjv

iKavats ye o~vvvoa>' a)\X elrre


2fl.

fJLev

6po)V eVto'T^/xcup', (^a/zeV, TOU1

rou yiyovev ovTrep 6pa)v ravrov EAI. Ilavu ye.

oj/fts

yap Kat

aicrdrjcris

'0 oe ye wpa, eav [J<vo"fl,


.

0/30) i^

Acat

/Lte/x^Tyrat

eVtaT^/zcov yeyova;? ou e avro. /xe, ou^ opa Se

rj

-yap; EAI.

Nat.

2n.
EAI.
.

To
/cat

Se' ye ofy 6pa OVK TO opa erriararai.

eVtcrrarat

eartv,

Sf/xj8atVet apa, ou rt? eVtCTT^/xajv e'yeVero,

Dissen

auiaoi.fj.ev

BT.

84

THEAETETUS
T11EAET. YeS.
Well,, then, do you not admit that there such a thing as memory ? THEAET. Yes. soc. Memory of nothing or of something ? THEAET. Of something, surely. soc. Of things he has learned and perceived
soc.
is

that sort of things

THEAET.
soc.

Of

course.

A man

seen, does

sometimes remembers what he has he not ?

THEAET.
soc.

He
It

does.

Even when he
?

shuts his eyes, or does he

forget if he does that

THEAET.
soc.

our with it. THEAET. I too, by Zeus, have my suspicions, but I don't fully understand you. Tell me how it is. soc. This is how it is he who sees has acquired knowledge, we say, of that which he has seen for it is agreed that sight and perception and knowledge are all the same. THEAET. Certainly. soc. But he who has seen and has acquired knowledge of what he saw, if he shuts his eyes, remembers Is that right ? it, but does not see it. THEAET. Yes. " soc. But " does not see is the same as "does not if it is true that know," seeing is knowing. THEAET. True. soc. Then this is our result. When a man has acquired knowledge of a thing and still remembers
;
: ;

would be absurd to say that, Socrates. must, though, if we are to maintain otherwise, it is all up previous argument

We

85

PLATO
opd'
o repas e^a/jiev av etVat
et

ytyvotro.

'AXrjOeorara Ae'yei?. Tajv dSiWrcoy 17 rt av^aiveiv 2ft. edV rts" 7rL(TT^fJLrfV KOI ataOrjcnv ravrov <f)fl et^at.
0EAI.
2fl.

0EAI.

"}^OIKV.

"AAAo apa
Kt^Sureuct.
r-f-i/

KOLTpOV
>

(f)CLTOV.
>

EAI.

2n.
,

It ovv
co?

-j-

(>

orjr

av

/\

>

tirj

eoiKV, XtKreov.
rrepi;
/zot

emoT^/zyy ; TraAt^ Kairoi rt Trore

eg

co

SeairrjTe, $pdv;

0EAI.
.

TtVo?

Oatvo/ze^a

aAe/crpuoyo? dyevt'ous

TOU

2ft.

'AvrtAoyiKtos eotVa/xev
ofJioXoyias
77eptyevo)Lterot

77/36?

ra? TCOV ovo/cat

fjidrajv

dvo/xoAoy7]cra/xevot

rotourco
/cat

rtvt

rou

Aoyou

dya77av,

ou

<j)dcrKovTs

6dvofjiV
0EAI.
2ft.

dycovtcrrat dAAa 0tAocro<^ot etvat Aayravra eVetVot? rot? Setvot? dv8pdmv

TTOiovvres.
OVTTCJD fjiOvOdvoi) O77CO? Aeyet?.

'AAA'
rt?
Tt

e'yto 77etpao-o/zat

S^Acocrat Trept
el fjiaOwv
/cat

o ye

ST) voco.

rfpofJieOa
/XT)

yap

STJ,

eVt'crrarat,

Kal roy iSoyra

/cat

vr^^vov opcovra. 8e
ou/c

01)

eiSora
S*

aTre^ei^a^ev

/cat
/cat

d'/za

rovro

etrat

aSwaroy.

ourco

dmoAero o DpcoTayopeto?,
/cat atcr^^creco?,

/cat

d CTO?

d/>ta

ort raurdv

ecrrti/.

86

THEAETETUS
it,

we

he does not know it, since he does not see it said that would be a monstrous conclusion.
THEAET. Very true.

but

if

soc. So, evidently, we reach an impossible result we say that knowledge and perception are the same.

THEAET. So
soc.

it

seems.
are different.

Then we must say they


I

suppose SO. We must, soc. Then what can knowledge be ? And apparently, begin our discussion all over again. yet, Theaetetus, what are we on the point of doing ? THEAET. About what ? soc. It seems to me that we are behaving like a worthless game-cock before winning the victory we have leapt away from our argument and begun to crow. THEAET. HOW SO ? soc. We seem to be acting like professional debaters we have based our agreements on the mere similarity of words and are satisfied to have got the better of the argument in such a way, and we do not see that we, who claim to be, not contestants for a prize, but lovers of wisdom, are doing
; ;

THEAET.

just

what those ingenious persons do. I do not yet understand what you mean. soc. Well, I will try to make my thought clear. We asked, you recollect, whether a man who has learned something and remembers it does not know it. We showed first that the one who has seen and then shuts his eyes remembers, although he does not see, and then we showed that he does not know, although but this, we said, at the same time he remembers was impossible. And so the Protagorean tale was brought to naught, and yours also about the identity of knowledge and perception.
THEAET.
;

87

PLATO
E
0EAI.

OcuVerai.
TL av,
//I

Ov **(/ rov
2n.

oifjiai,,
>/4

a)
'

</>i'Ae,
N N
\

etVe/o
\ N
V

ye o
'rt

rrarrjp
"

ai> erepov fivoov eL,r], aAAa TroAAa rjfjivve' vvv oe 6p<j>avov CLVTOV T^/xet? TTpOTT^XaKi^o/Jiev. /cat

1 x

yap ou8'

ot eVtrpOTTOt,

ou? n/jcorayopa? KareXiTrev,


2

fiorjdeiv eOeAovaiv, &v QeoSaipos ef? avrot KivSwevcrofjiev rov OLKOLLOV 17

6'Se.

aAAa
aura)

eVer'

EO.

Ov yap
o

eyto,

c5

ZaWpare?, aAAa
ra)V

165 KaAAta?

'ITTTTOVLKOV

eKeivov

Se TTCU? Odrrov EK TOJV ifiiXwv Xoycov rrpos

am

e^ofjiev,
.

eav avra)
Aeyet?,

fior]9fjs.
cu

KaAa)?

0eoSa/)e.

OKt/jat

ovv

y
aV rt?

l^v

j3or/0i,av.

ra>v

yap apri
OLTT-

rov vovv,
0EO.

o/ioAoy^cretev yu.?) 7r/oocre^ajv rot? ro rroXv eWiafjieOa (frdvai re Kai fj aol apveiaOai. Xeyco OTTTJ, r/ Seairijra);
El'?

TO KOIVOV

fJL6V

OVV, OLTTOKplVeaOo)

vecorepos' afiaXeis
ip.
ecrrt

yap
or)

rjrrov

2H.

Aeyco

ro

oeivcrarov

Se, oi^ai, rouovoe ri'

dpa oiov re rov avrov


eloevau;

ctSora
EO.
EAI.

rovro o oioev

p,r)

Tt orj ovv 'Aovvarov


Oy/c, et TO

OLTTOKpivov/jLeOa,

Seairrjre;
TL

TTOV, otftat eycoye.


o/sap'

2H.
1

ye erriaraaOai
efs

9r)aeis.
3

TroXXa

om. T.

ora. T.

crot

om. B.

88

THEAETETUS
THEAET. Evidently. soc. It would not be so, I fancy, my friend, if the father of the first of the two tales were alive he would have had a good deal to say in its defence. But he is dead, and we are abusing the orphan. Why, even the guardians whom Protagoras left one of whom is Theodoras here are unwilling to come to the child's assistance. So it seems that we shall have to do it ourselves, assisting him in the
;

of justice. THEO. Do so, for it is not I, Socrates, but rather Callias the son of Hipponicus, who is the guardian of his children. As for me, I turned rather too soon

name

from abstract speculations to geometry. However, I shall be grateful to you if you come to his assistance. soc. Good, Theodoras Now see how I shall help
!

him

for a

man might

find himself involved in still

worse inconsistencies than those in which we found ourselves just now, if he did not pay attention to the terms which we generally use in assent and denial. Shall I explain this to you, or only to

Theaetetus
THEO.

To both
for

of

us,

but
less

let

the

answer
soc.

he

will

be
I

disgraced

if

younger he is

discomfited.

Very well

now
:

am

going to ask the most

It runs, I believe, frightfully difficult question of all. something like this Is it possible for a person, if he

knows a
THEO.
tetus?

thing, at the
?

same time not


shall

to

know

that

which he knows

Now, then, what


is

we

answer, Theae-

THEAET. It
soc.

Not

if you

impossible, I should think. make seeing and knowing identical.

89

PLATO
yap
yjpr\Gi d<f>VKTO)
1

epajTij/jLari,

TO XeyofJievov cv

cf)peaTL

owe^oftevo?,

dv/ip, KaToXafiuov rfj

e'pwra ave a v TOV eVepov xetpt


TOVTO)

orav

et

opa? TO
0EAI.

ifJiOLTiov

TO> /caretA^/z/xeVaj;
OlfJLCLL,

Ov

(f>ljo~0),

y,

TO)

(JieVTOl

QVKOVV opas T Kal ovx opa?


9 / \9^\ foev eya>,

a/xa TCLVTOV;

0EAI.

OVTOJ ye

TTCD?.
I

<p'/)cret,

TOVTO OVT

>t

rarrco our

>/

TO oTTws, dAA'

et

o eTTtoracrat, TOVTO Kal

o ou^ opa? 6pa)v (f>aivL. ajfjLoXoyrjKOJS oe Tvy^dvei? TO opav rricrTao~9a.L Kal TO {J.TI opciv fjir] eiriaTaaOai. e^ ouv TOVTOJV Xoyi&v,
eTrtcrTacrat.

OVK

yw

8'

Ti aOL OV}JifiaiVL. EAI. 'AAAa XoyifgOfJiat

ort

rdVaima

ot?

Se y', a> ^au/xacrte, TrAei'co ai/ rocaur' et rt? ere Trpocn^pcura, 6 err LOT 0.08 ai ecrrt
o^u, eart Se dfJi^Xv, Kal eyyvOev /zev eTrtcrrao-^at, TToppaiOev 8e /u,^, /cat afioSpa Kal rjpefjia TO avTo,
t'

Kal dXXa

p,vpt.a,

eAAo^alj/

aV TreAracrTtKos' av^p
j]vli<

v Xoyots epofJLevos,

eVtcrTTy/z^v
et?

/<:at

TavTov e9ov,
/cat

e/JifiaXcbv

av

TO a/couetv

oa(f)paLVa9aL Kal TCLS rotaura? rfAey^ev av eTre^ajv Kal OVK avtet? 77/>tv
TTjV

ov

STJ

TToXvdpaTOV oo(j>iav ovv7TO$ia6r)s ae ^etyococra^tevos T /cat crwS^cras'


1

B
wj'

(TVffX&fJi-evos
;

B 2 T.

bt

tv\oxw BT.

90

THEAETETUS
there
is,

For what will you do with a question from which is no escape, by which you are, as the saying

caught in a pit, when your adversary, unabashed, puts his hand over one of your eyes and asks if you see his cloak with the eye that is covered ? THEAET. I shall say, I think, " Not with that eye, but with the other." soc. Then you see and do not see the same thing at the same time ? THEAET. After a fashion. " " soc. That," he will reply, is not at all what I want, and I did not ask about the fashion, but whether you both know and do not know the same Now manifestly you see that which you do thing. But you have agreed that seeing is knownot see. Very well ; ing and not seeing is not knowing. from all this, reckon out what the result is." THEAET. Well, I reckon out that the result is the contrary of my hypothesis. soc. And perhaps, my fine fellow, more troubles of the same sort might have come upon you, if anywhether it is one asked you further questions possible to know the same thing both sharply and dully, to know close at hand but not at a distance, to know both violently and gently, and countless other questions, such as a nimble fighter, fighting for pay in the war of words, might have lain in wait and asked you, when you said that knowledge and he would have perception were the same thing
;

charged down upon hearing and smelling and such senses, and would have argued persistently and unceasingly until you were filled with admiration of his greatly desired wisdom and were taken in his toils, and then, after subduing and binding you he would
91

PLATO
Tore
eSo/cet.

cXvrpov xprmdrcuv oo~a>v crot' ye /ca/cetVoj rtV ovv 897 o I7pa>rayopa?, (f>acr]s av tcrco?,
7TLKOVpOV TOL? CIVTOV
e'/jet;

AoyOJ>

ttAAo

Tt

77ei-

pdjfjieQa Aeyetv;

EAI.

2O.

2H.

Ilavu ^tev ovv. Tawra re Srj navra ocra


/cat o/xocre,

^/.tet?

eVa-

166 [Jivvovres aura) Ae'yo/xet', aerai Kara^povcov rjiiwv

oipat, xcopij'

o mwKpOLTrjs 6 xprjcrros, e'Setcrev et otoy re


ajua
/cat

ovro? 817 Ae'ycov eVetS?) aura) TratStov rt


/cat

roi^

aurov ro auro

/^

et'SeVat, /cat Setcrav aTrefirjcrev

Svvaa9ai Trpoopdv, ye'Aajra 817 rov e'/xe ro Se, d> paOv/jLorare eV rot9 Aoyot? o.rre^ei^ev
Sta ro
yLt^
.

T7y8' e^eto~KO7rfjs,
iriv

orap' rt ra)v e/xa)v 8t* epajTij-

lav

fjiev

6 cpajrrjOeis oidrrep av

e'ya>

aTTOKpivafjievos

o^dXX^rai, eyw

eAe'y-

%OjLtat,

et

Se

ya/3

So/cet?

aAAota, auro? o epojrrjOeis. crot rtva ovy^ojpriaeadaL

aurt/ca
fjivtjfjirjv

rrapelval rco d>v eTraOe, TOLOVTOV rt ovaav 7rci6os TroAAou ye olov ore eVacr^e, /Lt^/ceVt 77acr^ovrt; otov r' etvat au 8et. r) a7TOKVTJo*iv o/xoAoyetv
CioevaL /cat
/X77

et'SeVat

rovro

Set'cn],

SaScret^

rov auroi^ ro avro; Trore rov auroi^

TJ

eti'at

dvofjioiovuevov ra) Trptv dvo/jiOLOvaOaL OVTL; Se rov etvat Tiva, aAA' o?5vt rows', /cat rourou?

yiyvo\L.vovs aTreipovs, eavirep ayo/xotajcrt? ytyv^rat,

et 817

ovofjidrcuv

ye Se^cret Brjpevaeis

92

THEAETETUS
once proceed to bargain with you for such ransom might be agreed upon between you. What argument, then, you might ask, will Protagoras produce Shall we try to carry on to strengthen his forces ?
at

as

He will, I fancy, say all that we have said in defence and then will close with us, saying contemptuously, "Our estimable Socrates here frightened a little boy by asking if it was possible for one and the same person to remember and at the same time not to know one and the same thing, and when the child in his fright said ' no,' because he could not
soc.

the discussion ? THEAET. By all means.


his

foresee what would result, Socrates made poor me a laughing-stock in his talk. But, you slovenly when you examine Socrates, the facts stand thus any doctrine of mine by the method of questioning,
:

the person who is questioned makes such replies should make and comes to grief, then I am refuted, but if his replies are quite different, then Take this the person questioned is refuted, not I. Do you suppose you could get anybody example. to admit that the memory a man has of a past feeling he no longer feels is anything like the feeling at the Or time when he was feeling it ? Far from it. that he would refuse to admit that it is possible for one and the same person to know and not to know one and the same thing ? Or if he were afraid to admit this, would he ever admit that a person who has become unlike is the same as before he became unlike ? In fact, if we are to be on our guard against such verbal entanglements, would he admit that a person is one at all, and not many, who become infinite in number, if the process of becoming
if

as I

93

PLATO
\\ /\

aAArjAtov;

>\\ aAA

to

(t

jita/capte,

(prjcrei,

yewatOTeytyrovrat,

pa)S
d)$

eV
ov^l

auro
t'Stat

e\9(ji>v

o Xeya), et

Swaaat, e^eXey^ov
rjfJLtov

alaOrjaeis e/cdcm/j

a>?

tStajv

yiyvo^evajv ov8ev TL
Kivct)

av ^LtaAAov TO

<f)a.Lv6[Jievov

fj,6va)
eir)

ovofjid^ew,

ylyvoiTOy r\ el elvai Set corrzp <f>aivTOLL' v$ Se 817 /cat KVVO-

K6(f>d\ovs Aeycov ou [LOVOV


TO?)?

a/couovras" TOVTO
dvaireiOeis, ov

avros vyveis, aAAa /cat Spav els ra cruyy/octft/zara


eyca

D />tou

/caAa)? TTOICOV.

yap

(frrj/jLi

ev rrjv dXrjOeiav
KOL(JTOV
rjfjLOJV

e\iv cos yeypa^a' OVTCOV KO.L ivCLi TWV T

/zerpov
fJLTj'

yap

fJLVpLOV

l^tvTOi
ret)

Sta^epeti'

fjiev

aAAa eart Te
/cat

erepov erepov avra* rovra), on feat </atVerat, TO> Se aAAa.

/cat

ao(f)iav

crofiov

dVSpa TroAAou Sea) TO


/cat

^,7)

<f)dva,L

etvat,

dAA' aurov rovrov


d) (fraiverai /cat

Ae'ya)

o? dV Ttvt
fidXXcov

rjfjicov,

eaTt /ca/cd,

TOirjcrr)

dyadd
1

(fxzivecrOai

re

/cat

elvai.

E Toy
Tot?

Se Adyov au

jit ))

TO> pr^Jiari (JLOV Stto/ce, dAA'

a>Se eVt oafiearepov fidOe rt Ae'yco.

otov yap eV
6Vt
/cat
.

TrpoaOev eXeyero dva/xv^cr^T]Tt, daOevovvri rriKpd (fraLverai a ea9iei

TO;
ecrTt,

/xev

TOJ

Se vyiaivovTi rdvcLvria eari /cat (fxiiverai oxx^arrepov jLtey ouv TOUTOJV ouSeVepov Set Trot^crat ouSe

167 yap

SwaTov

ouSe KaT7]yopr]Teov (Ls 6 fiev Ka

dfJiaBrjs

or i rocavra So^d^et, d Se vyiaivaiv 6Vt dAAota* neraf3Xr)roi> S' e?rt ddrepa' d^ei

94

THEAETETUS
dear fellow," he will different continues ? But, " attack real doctrines in a more generous say, manner, and prove, if you can, that perceptions, when they come, or become, to each of us, are

my

my

not individual, or that, if they are individual, what appears to each one would not, for all that, become to that one alone or, if you prefer to say 'be/ would not be to whom it appears. But when you talk of pigs and dog-faced baboons, you not only act like a pig yourself, but you persuade your hearers to act so toward my writings, and that For I maintain that the truth is is not right. each one of us is the measure as I have written of the things that are and those that are not ; but each person differs immeasurably from every other hi just this, that to one person some things appear and are, and to another person other And I do not by any means say that things. on the wisdom and the wise man do not exist
;

to contrary, I say that if bad things appear and are any one of us, precisely that man is wise who causes a change and makes good things appear and be to him. And, moreover, do not lay too much stress upon the words of my argument, but get a clearer

understanding of

my meaning
is

to say. Recall to your that his food appears

from what I am going mind what was said before,

and is bitter to the sick the opposite of bitter to the man in health. Now neither of these two is to be made wiser than he is that is not possible nor should the claim be made that the sick man is ignorant because his opinions are ignorant, or the but a healthy man wise because his are different change must be made from the one condition to
man, but appears and
;

95

PLATO
\

yap

i)

erepa et?.

>

OVTCO be Kai ev

>

/%

<>

rrj

Tratoeta avro

crepas eeais r^v djuetvco fJiera^Xr/reov o /zev larpos </>ap^itd/cots* yitera/SdAAet, o Se Gro^tor?}? eVet ou rt ye ifjevSrj So^aowa rt? rtra Adyots cure yap ra varepov dXrjOfj eVoi^ae So^a^et^. V > M > / J/\ \ V ovra ovvarov oogaaai, ovre aAAa Trap a av fir] Ta Se det dXr}9fj. dAA' ot/xat, 7rovr]pa l
1

em

dAA*

O.

(>

t\

So^d^orra avyyevrj eavrrjs xprjarrj So^daat erepa rotawra, a Si] rtve? TO,
(fjavrdafiara VTTO arreipia.? dXr]9rj KaXovau , eyd) Se ^SeArtCD //-ei^ ret erepa raiv erepcoy, dXr^Oearepa x / <$ \ '^' J /^ V' oe ovotv. KO.L TOU? aocpovs, cu 0tAe 2-ojAcpare?,
1

>

TroAAou

fiarpdxovs Ae'yetv, dAAd /card tarpou? Aeya>, /card Se (f)VTa yap Acac TOVTOVS rot? (f>vrols dvrl
8eco

orav ri avr&v dcrOevfj, ^prjards /cat 4 wytetva? atcr^crets' T /cat dXrjOels IfJiTroielv , TOVS $ ye vofiovs re /cat dya^ou? prjropa? rat? TroAecri rd xprjOTd dvrl TOJV Trovrjptov 8t/cata So/cetv eti^at TTOielv. eVet otd y* dv e/cdcrri] vrdAet St/cata /cat ^. w >\ /caAa OOKYJ, ravra /cat etvat aurry, eco? ai^ aura

\\o^.

*?

^\

dAA' o aofios dvrl TTOvrjpojv ovraiv aurot? e/cdarcov xprjard eTroiTfCrev etvat /cat So/cct^. /card 8e rdi^ aurdv Aoyov /cat o cro^no-r^s' rou? TiatSeuojLtevofjii^i)'

vows

altos'

OVTCD Suvd/zevos' TratSayajyetv aofios re TroAAcDv ^p^drcov rots Trai&evOelaiv'


1

/cat /cat

OUTCD oro^corepot
1

re' etcrtv

erepot erepajv
;

/cat

ouSets

irov-rjpq.
2

Aldina

Trovrjpas

BT.

eauTTjs
4

BT ai)r??j some JMSS. and editors. d\-i]()eis BT aXyddas Schleiermacher.


;

Sofafoi/ra

Tb

So^dfoiras B.

THEAETETUS
the other, for the other is better. So, too, in education a change has to be made from a worse to a better condition but the physician causes the change by means of drugs, and the teacher of wisdom by means of words. And yet, in fact, no one ever made anyone think truly who previously thought falsely, since it is impossible to think that which is not or to think any other things than those which one feels and these are always true. But I believe that a man who, on account of a bad condition of soul, thinks thoughts akin to that condition, is made by a good condition of soul to think corres;

pondingly good thoughts and some men, through inexperience, call these appearances true, whereas I call them better than the others, but in no wise truer. And the wise, my dear Socrates, I do not by any means call tadpoles when they have to do with
;
;

the

human body,

call

them

physicians,

and when
;

for I they have to do with plants, husbandmen assert that these latter, when plants are sickly, instil into them good and healthy sensations, and true ones instead of bad sensations, and that the wise and good orators make the good, instead of the evil, seem to be right to their states. For I claim that whatever seems right and honourable to a state is really right and honourable to it, so long as it believes it to be so but the wise man causes the good, instead of that which is evil to them in each And instance, to be and seem right and honourable. on the same principle the teacher who is able to train his pupils in this manner is not only wise but
;

is

also entitled to receive


is

high pay from them when

their education

finished.

And

in this sense

it is

true that

some men are wiser than


D 2

others,

and that
97

PLATO
ooi;aL,ei, /cat VOL, eav re povArj eav re in], Y) aveKreov ovri //,eVpar crco^erat yap ev rovrois o Xoyos ovros. d) en) et /zez> e%eis e dp^rjs dyu,<^tcrfirjreiv,
8t'
du<f>io-f$r}rei

^o>/}

t f

/\

* /

Aoyco

dvrioie^eXOcov

el

oe

epa>rr)aeojv (3ovXei, 8t' epcorrjaeaiv ovSe yap rovro (frevKreov, dAAd rravraiv ^LtdAtcrra oiaiKreov
TO)

vovv eovri.
ra>

TTOiei

jievTOi

OVTCOCTL-

epcordv /cat yap rroXXrj dXoyia dperrjs cf)do~KOvra emueXeloOai jjirjSev dAA' r) dSt/cowra
ev XoyoLS StareAetv.
d8t/cetv 8' earlv ev ra> roiovra),

ev

orav

to? dyaivi^ofjtevos rds fJ,ev Siarpifids TTOirjrai, ^copt? Se StaAeyo^evo?, /cat ev

ns

^copt?

fjiev

ra> rraitrj re /cat crfidXXrj /ca^' ocrov aV 8uv7^rat, eV Se TO) StaAe'yea^at crTrouSd^ re /cat erravopOoi rov TrpocrStaAeyo^Ltevov, e/cetva fjiova avra> ev8et/cvu-

rd o^dX/mara, a auros" y</>' eavrov /cat ^^ T 168 TTporepajv O-VVOVOLOJV rrapeKeKpovaro' av fj,ev yap ovra) rroifjs, eavrovs atrtderovrat ot TvpocrStajjievos

rpifiovres
ctAA*

crot

TT^?

avrwv rapa^s
f

/cat

drropias,

Stco^ovrat avrovs oe u,Lar>o-ovai /cat (bevfovrai d<^' eavrajv els


ere,

ou

/cat ere ^tev

/cat (^LXrjaovcriv,
/

II
1

(^iXoao^iav ,
ot

yevouevoi aTraAAaycocrt TOJV rrporepov rjoav edv Se rdvavria rovrajv Spas ot TroAAot, rdvavria ^viiBriaerai crot /cat
lv*

d'AAot

TOJ)?

cruvoVras

dvrt

(f>iXoo~6(f)CL)v
,

fJLLaovvras

rovro

rd rrpdyaa drro^avels errecSdv Trpeafivrepoi yevcuvrai. edv ovv euol rreiOrj, o /cat rrporepov eppijOrj, ov Sva/Jievajs ovoe yLta^rt/ccus", dAA' tAeoj T7y Stavota
crvyKaOeis
coy

dXrjOws

cr/ce'0et

rt

Trore

Xeyofjiev,

98

THEAETETUS
no one thinks falsely, and that you, whether you will or no, must endure to be a measure. Upon these and if you can positions my doctrine stands firm dispute it in principle, dispute it by bringing an
;

or if you prefer the opposing doctrine against it method of questions, ask questions for an intelligent person ought not to reject this method, on the conHowtrary, he should choose it before all others. do not be unfair ever, let me make a suggestion in your questioning it is very inconsistent for a man who asserts that he cares for virtue to be con;
;
:

between merely trying to make points and carrying on a real argument. In the former he may jest and try to trip up his opponent as much as he can, but in real argument he must be in earnest and must set his interlocutor on his feet, pointing out to him those slips only which are due to himself and his For if you act in this way, previous associations. those who debate with you will cast the blame for their confusion and perplexity upon themselves, not upon you they will run after you and love you, and they will hate themselves and run away from themdistinction
;

stantly unfair in discussion when a

discussion

and

it

is

unfair

in

man makes no

selves, taking refuge in philosophy, that

they

may

escape from their former selves by becoming different. But if you act in the opposite way, as most teachers do, you will produce the opposite result, and instead of making your young associates philosophers, you will make them hate philosophy when they grow older. If, therefore, you will accept the suggestion which I made before, you will avoid a hostile and combative attitude and in a gracious spirit will enter the lists with me and inquire what we really mean

99

PLATO
i

re aVo^atyd/zevot ra rrdvra, TO re SOKOVV


/cat etvat l$LO)rr)

e/cacrra>
/c

rovro

re

/cat TfdAet.
et're

/cat

rouro)!'

eVtcr/ce'i/fet,

etre rauroy

/cat

a'AAo

CTTLorrTjfjirj

/cat aicrOrjcrLS,

aAA*

ou;\% (ocnrep apri, e/c

avvrjOzias pr^f^aTajv re /cat o^OjLtarojv, a ot 77oAAot 07727 av rv^coaiv eA/covres" aTropta? dAA^Aot? TravroSaTT-as"

Trape^ouCTt."

ravra,

co

0eoSa>pe, TOJ eraipto


Swa^ttv,

crou etV /3orj0(,av Trpocnrjp^d/Jirji' /car* eft^v

afjiiKpa

OLTTO

afJiiKpcJjv

et

S*

auTO?

e^i], yiteyaAeto-

rcpov aV rot? avrov


21.
EO.
ITat^et?,

efioTJOrjcrev.
c5

Sctj/cpare?*

77avy

yap

TO) at'Spt
.

Eu

Ae'yet?, a> eratpe.


a'prt

/cat ftot

elne'

evevorj-

crds TTOV

Xeyovros

rou Upcorayopov

/cat oi^etSt-

^ovros" ?}/xtv art Trpo? TratStW


fjiVOL rat

rou? Aoyou? TTOLOV!

rov TratSo?

<f>6j3a)

d'ycovi^o/^eOa
0,770 /caAtov,
OL

et?

ra

eavTOV,
vvvajv

/cat ^aptevrtcr/zov

rtva

Se

TO

TTOVTOJV
roi'

jjierpov,

cnrovSacraL

Ste/ceAeyaaro Trept

avrov Aoyov;

0EO.

yap Tt ow; /ceAeuet? rreiOzoOai avra>;


rials'

ou/c evevorjaa, d)

EO.

opa
'Opa?
et
1

ye.

2H.
ccrrtV.

ow ort raSe ow Tretcrd/ze^a


dyuvifo/jieda

rrdvra
TOJ

TrArjV

aov
e'yLte

rraioia
/cat
ere

avSpi,

ayuvioi/jieda. T.

100

THEAETETUS
when we
declare that
is

all

things are in motion and

that whatever seems

you will consider the question whether knowledge and perception are the same or different, instead of doing as you did a while ago, using as your basis the ordinary meaning of names and words, which most people pervert in haphazard ways and thereby cause all sorts of perplexity in one another." Such, Theodorus, is the help I have furnished your friend to
the best of
are small
;

man

or state.

And on

to each individual, the basis of that

whether

my
but

ability
if

have

helped

his

not much, for my resources he were living himself he would a fashion more offspring in

magnificent. THEO. You are joking, Socrates, for you have come to the man's assistance with all the valour of youth.
Tell me, did you soc. Thank you, my friend. observe just now that Protagoras reproached us for addressing our words to a boy, and said that we

made the

boy's timidity aid us in our argument against his doctrine, and that he called our procedure a mere display of wit, solemnly insisting upon the

importance of "the measure of

all

things/'

and

urging us to treat his doctrine seriously ? THEO. Of course I observed it, Socrates.
soc.

THEO.
soc.

Well then, shall we do By all means.


all

as

he says

Now you see that and you myself, are boys.

those present, except


if

So

we

are to do as

101

PLATO
E
Set

epcoTCtWds
*

CTTrouSdcrat

T avrov
1

/cat

irepl

aTTOKpivojj,Vovs TOV Adyov, tva

jU,^

rot

ey/caAetv, J)$ Trai^ovTes 77/30? 2 (jLipaKia Steovcej/rdfte^' ajrrou TOV Adyov. 0EO. Tt 8'; ou TfoAAcov rot eatT^ros jLteyaAous

TOVTO

ye

e^

e^ovrcuv a^eivov av eVaAcoAou^crete Aoyco


2n.

'AAA' ou rt crou ye,


e'/xe

cS

eoScope, a/xetvov.

ouv otou

/xev TO) cra> eTatpaj


ere

169 Setv TTavrl rpoTrco eTra/zwetv,


t^t, co a'/otcrre, oAtyoi^ errLairov,

Se
1

/z^Sevt, dAA'

^XP TVTOV
om
cov

avrov

eco?
'

av

elScofJiev

etVe

apa ae Set Staypa^


/cat

fjierpov etvat,

etVe Trdvres o/xotco?

eauTOt? et? Te aarpovofJLiav


atTt

TaAAa
1

S^

en)

e^et?

EO.
[JLVOV

0?)

fJLr)

pqSiov, c6 Sco/cpaTes , crot StSdvat Aoyov, ctAA' e'yto cxpTt TrapeXrjprjcra


1

(fxicrKCtJV

ore

emrpeifjeLV /xot

^t ^

aTroSJecr^at, /cat

CTJ) Se' dvay/cacretv KaOaTrep So/cet? Trpo? TOV 2/ctpcova yu-aAAov TetVetv. Aa/ceSat/xdvtot jitev yap ameVat ^ a77oSuecr^at /ceAeuouat,

Aa/ceSaty-tbVtof

cru

Se /caT* 'AvTatdv Tt /xot ^taAAov


i

So/cets"

TO Spa/>ta

Spav

TOV yap TrpocreA^cWa ou/c dvt^s" Trptv dv 3 dvay/cdo 27S' dTroSucras eV Tot? Adyots TrpocrTraAatcrat.
1

2n.
icacra?
1
1

"ApicrTa ye,

co

0edScope, T-^V vdcrov


1

tcr^upt/ccoTepos yiteWot e'yd) e/cetvcov.


^e B rot 7-676 T ; rour6 7e W. r6v apogr. Coislinianum 155 ; a5 TOV rd? T. A? Heindorf ; irpi^ BT.
;

rot roOro

2 ai/roO

roroi'
3

r^

TT/)!?'

102

THEAETETUS
the man asks, you and I must question eacli other and make reply in order to show our serious attitude towards his doctrine then he cannot, at any rate, find fault with us on the ground that we examined his doctrine in a spirit of levity with mere boys.
;

THEO. Why is this ? Would not Theaetetus follow an investigation better than many a man with a long beard ? soc. Yes, but not better than you, Theodorus. So you must not imagine that I have to defend your deceased friend by any and every means, while you do nothing at all but come, my good man, follow the discussion a little way, just until we can see whether, after all, you must be a measure in respect to diagrams, or whether all men are as sufficient unto themselves as you are in astronomy and the other sciences in which you are alleged to be superior.
;

THEO. It is not easy, Socrates, for anyone to sit beside you and not be forced to give an account of himself and it was foolish of me just now to say you

would excuse me and would not oblige me, as the Lacedaemonians do, to strip you seem to me to take rather after Sciron. 1 For the Lacedaemonians tell people to go away or else strip, but you seem to me for you do not let to play rather the role of Antaeus anyone go who approaches you until you have forced him to strip and wrestle with you in argument. soc. Your comparison with Sciron and Antaeus a more pictures my complaint admirably only I am
;
;

1 Sciron was a mighty man who attacked all who came He was overcome near him and threw them from a cliff. by Theseus. Antaeus, a terrible giant, forced all passersby to wrestle with him. He was invincible until Heracles crushed him in his arms.

103

PLATO
yap
'Hpa/cAeV? re /cat Qrjcrees evrv^ovrcs rrpos TO Ae'yety /xdA' eu Kaprepol vyKKO(j)acrLV, dAA' eya) ouSeV rt /xaAAov d^tora/^af ovrco rt?
17817 /xot
2
1

eptus
/XT)

Setvo? eVSe'Su/ce T^? vrept

ravra

ouv /xi]Se cru (f)9ovr)ar)s aaurov re a/xa /cat e^e ovrjaaL. @EO. OuSev ert avrtAeyco, aAA' aye 6Vi]
TT]v

^e'

Trepl

ravra

etftap/xeV^v

T^V

aV

3
cri)

Set aVarATpai eAey^o/xep'ov.

oi5

/xeVrot

Trepairepa) ye a>v rrporiOeaai oios T* ecro/xat aoi.


.

napa/zot

Tippet

'AAA' dp/cet /cat /xe'^pt TOUTOW. TO TOto^Se, /XT^ TTOU 77-atSt/cov Tt


Aoya)!'
Trotou/Ltevot,
/cat

/cat

ei5o?
EO.
vco/xat

ralp'

Tt? TrdAtv

'AAAct
.

817

7TLpdao/jLai

/ca^' OCTOV

aV Su-

22.

2fl.

TouSe roivvv

Trpajrov

TraAtv

dWtAa-

^a)fjie8a ov7Tp TO Trporepov, /cat t'Sco/xev op6a>$ 77 ov/c opdaJs e'Sucr^epatVo/xev eVtTt/xajvTe? TO Aoya>

OTt

avrdpKrj
/cat

eKaarov
o

et?

(frpovrjcnv

eVot'er
77ept

/cat

^ajp^crev
tva' cro(f)ov$.

ITpajTayopa?

Te
877

TOU
/cat

^etporo? Sta^e'petv rivds, ovs ou^t;

Nat. Et /xet' roivvv auro? Trapcbv avrov /XT) i7/xet? fiori9ovvres VTrep owSep' av TrctAtv e'Set eVavaAa
EO.
5fl.

coyLtoAoyet,

dAAd

vvv 8e
e/cetVou
2

TO*;^'

^
;

o/xoAoytas
1

Tt? ^ctS" d/cupou? riOeir} rrjs vrrep 8to cr /caAAtovtos" e'x et


1

^7-i^6i'Te9

Kaprepol

&Tvyx&vovTes B.
3
T)*'

Kparepol T.

at-

?)>

BT.

104

THEAETETUS
stubborn combatant than they for many a Heracles and many a Theseus, strong men of words, have fallen in with me and belaboured me mightily, but still I do not desist, such a terrible love of this kind of exercise has taken hold on me. So, now that it is your turn, do not refuse to try a bout with me it
; ;

will

be good for both of us. THEO. I say no more. Lead on as you like. Most assuredly I must endure whatsoever fate you spin for me, and submit to interrogation. However, I shall not be able to leave myself in your hands

beyond the point you propose.


soc. Even that is enough. And please be especially careful that we do not inadvertently give a playful turn to our argument and somebody reproach us again for it.

THEO. Rest assured that

will

me

try so far as in

lies.

soc. Let us, therefore, first take up the same question as before, and let us see whether we were right or wrong in being displeased and finding fault with the doctrine because it made each individual self-sufficient in wisdom. Protagoras granted that some persons excelled others in respect to the better and the worse, and these he said were wise, did he not ? THEO. Yes. soc. Now if he himself were present and could agree to this, instead of our making the concession for him in our effort to help him, there would be no need of taking up the question again or of reinforcing

But, as it is, perhaps it might be argument. we have no authority to make the agreement for him therefore it is better to make the 105
his

said that

PLATO
ydp
ov crrepov irepl rovrov CLVTOV Sto/zoAoy^trao-^ar Tl (JfJLlKpOV 7TO.paXXdrTL OVTCO$ ^X OV *l dXXo>S'
0EO.
2H.
Ae'yet? dXrjOfj.

Mr/ Toivvv
o)$ Sta

St*

aXXcov aAA*

e/c

rov

Kivov

170 Xoyov
EO.
.

/Spa^vrdrajv Xdj3a>/jLv rrjv o/xoAoytW.

Ha)s;
OvTCOOTL'

TO

OOKOVV

C/CaCTTO)

TOVTO

KO.I

elvai

^>f](ji

TTOV a)

0EO.
.

O^crt yap QVKOVV, cL n/acorayopa,

/<:at

^/

irov, /JidXXov Se

TrdvTwv dvOpanraiv So^a? Xe /cat cf>aiJLei> ouSeVa OVTIVCL ov rd /zev auray 7/yetcr^at raiv d'AAcov oocfxjjTcpov, ra Se aAAous" eavrov, /cat eV ye rots' /zeytcrrots- /ct^Swots , orav ev orpare LOLLS
1

Tj

vooois

r)

0ov$ ^X

lv

eV daXdrrrj ^et/xa^ayrat, wanep rrpos TOVS iv eAcaoTOts" dp^ovras,

77

TTpoaooKatVTas, OVK dXXco TO) /cat Trdvra TTOV fjiEard rdv6po)7nva. t,rjrovvro}V StSacr/caAou? re /cat dpxovras eavrujv
o(f>ajv

ra) etSeVat*

re

/cat

re au iKavaiv
/cat

rcDy aAAcov ^aa>v rair re epyaaicov, oto/zeVcov jjiev StSaa/cetv, IKCLV&V 8e ap^etv etvat.
-^

e^ TOVTOIS aVacrt rt aAAo </>^cro/xe^

avrovs

TOVS
0EO.
2n.

dv9pu)7TOVs

rjyeiaOai

oo^iav

/cat

d^aOuap

etvat Trapd 0<j)iaiv;

OySev aAAo. Ou/cow r^y

jitev

ao(f)iav
ifjevofj

dXr]9f}

Sidvoiav

riyovvrai, rrjv

oe d/JLaOiav

So^av;

0EO.
211.

Tt ft^v; Tt ow, co n/>a>rayopa, xprjaofieOa rat Aoya>;

106

THEAETETUS
agreement
it

still

makes a good deal of

clearer on this particular point difference whether it

for

is

so

or not.

THEO. That is true. soc. Let us then get the agreement in as concise a form as possible, not through others, but from his own statement. THEO. How ? soc. In this way He says, does he not ? " that
:

whom

which appears to each person really


appears." THEO. Yes, that
soc.
it

is

to

him

to

is what he says. Well then, Protagoras, we also utter the opinions of a man, or rather, of all men, and we say that there is no one who does not think himself wiser than others in some respects and others wiser

than himself in other respects for instance, in times of greatest danger, when people are distressed in war or by diseases or at sea, they regard their commanders as gods and expect them to be their saviours, though they excel them in nothing except knowledge. And all the world of men is, I dare say, full of people seeking teachers and rulers for themselves and the animals and for human activities, and, on the other hand, of people who consider themselves qualified to teach and qualified to rule. And in all these instances we must say that men themselves believe that wisdom and ignorance exist in the world of men, must we not ? THEO. Yes, we must. soc. And therefore they think that wisdom is true thinking and ignorance false opinion, do they not ? THEO. Of course.
;

soc.

Well then, Protagoras, what

shall

we do
107

PLATO
Trorepov dXr)9rj
7}

<j)ojfjiv

del rovs dvOpconovs

irore

yap

e fjLev dXrjOr), rrore oe i^evorj ; dfji(f)orepa>v TTOV avfjifiaiveL /XT) aet dXrjOrj aAA* a/z^orepa

avrovs

So^a^eiv.

oKorrei
a//<^>t

yap,

to

Qeobcope,
T)

el

av TIS raiv
re elvaL Kal

TlpajTayopav
r^yecrat

av avro?
erepov

ouSet?
d/JiaOfj

trepos

0EO.

'AAA' aTTiarov,

a>

2n.

Kat

/xr)v

etj

TOUTO ye dvdyKT]s 6 Adyo?

EO.

o Trdvrajv ^pr^jLtarajv /xerpov avOpajnov Aeycov. ITais' S ^;


1

2n.

"Orav

cru

/cptVa? Tt Trapd

aavra) npos
8e

fie

So^av, atV^ rov eKeivov Aoyov aAr^es earo),


776pt rives'
1

crot jLtev Sr)

TOVTO Kara.
8r)

r)p,lv

rot?

d'AAots

77pt rr^?

cr^s"
rj

KpLaetos Trorepov OVK

Kpirals yeveadai,
^
fjivpiOL

del oe KpivofJiev dAr]6rj

eKaarore aoi /xa^ovrac


TOI>

rjyovfjivoi ifjev8fj Kpiveiv re /cat otecr^at;

EO.
Srjra,

Nr)
(frrjarlv

Ata,

CL)

"O^po?,
.

IZcuKpares, fjidXa ot ye /xot ra e dv0pa)7ra>v

Trpay/xara Trape^ovaiv 2n. Tt ow; fiovXei Ae'ycu/xev cu? IJLCV dXrjOrj So^a^et?, rots' Se /xwptots
EO.

cr?)

rore cravraj

i/JevSr) ;

2H.
cl
<Z \

fjirjoe

"Eot/cev e/c ye rou Aoyov dvdyKT) etvat. Tt Se avra) Upairayopa; ap* ou^t dvdyKr^ wero /xeVpov et^at avOpcoTrov /JL6V /X7]8e auras " t \\ 5 'J'^^v ot ovoe
'
> \
/

77oAAot,

ajCTTrep

oiovrai,

jjirjoevi

or)

elvai ravrrjv rrjv dXrjOeiav

r^v e'/cetvos

eypa^ev;

et

108

THEAETETUS
about the doctrine ? Shall we say that the opinions which men have are always true, or sometimes true and sometimes false ? For the result of either statement is that their opinions are not always true, but may be either true or false. Just think, Theodoras
;

would any follower of Protagoras, or you yourself, care to contend that no person thinks that another is ignorant and has false opinions ? THEO. No, that is incredible, Socrates. soc. And yet this is the predicament to which the doctrine that man is the measure of all things
inevitably leads. THEO. How so
soc.
?

you have come to a decision in your own mind about something, and declare your opinion to me, this opinion is, according to his doctrine, true to you let us grant that but may not the rest of us sit in judgement on your decision, or do we always
;
;

When

men on

udge that your opinion is true ? Do not myriads of each occasion oppose their opinions to yours, believing that your judgement and belief are false ?

THEO. Yes, by Zeus, Socrates, countless myriads in truth, as Homer 1 says, and they give me all the trouble in the world.
soc. Well then, shall we say that in such a case your opinion is true to you but false to the myriads ? THEO. That seems to be the inevitable deduction.

soc.

And what

of Protagoras himself?

If neither

he himself thought, nor people in general think, as indeed they do not, that man is the measure of all things, is it not inevitable that the "truth" which he wrote is true to no one ? But if he himself thought
1

Homer, Odyssey,

xvi. 121, xvii. 432, xix. 78.

109

PLATO
171 Se avros fJiV (Zero, TO oe TrXfjOos
/XT)

ota^' oTt 7rpa)Tov f^ev oaco TrXeiovs of? Ot? OOKL, TOCTOVTO) /JLOiXXoV OVK <JTLV

/XT)

owoterai, OOKCL 77
<JTIV .

TT)

0EO. 'Avay/CT], etVep ye KOL& e/cacrTT^v ooav eorai KCU OVK ecrrat. 2H. "ETretra ye TOUT* e^et /co/x^orarov Kivos Trepl rfjs avrov ot^creajs" TT)V rcov a^
o'ir^uiv,
fj

cKelvov yyovvrat, ifjv^eodai }

TTOV

aXr]9fj

efmt
U,ev

OjitoAoycuv

ra

6Vra

0EO. 2n.
r-^v

ITavu

ouv.
a.v

OUKOW
yy

r^v aurou

j/feuS^

(ruy^copor, ei

ra)i>

O.VTOV

d\Yjdfj elvai;

0EO.
2n.

Oc Se

y* aAAot ou crvyxaipovaiv eavroTs

Secr^at; EO.
.

Ou
j

ya/o ouv.
oyu-oAoyet
/<rat

'0 8e y' au
OatVerat.

Taur^v

dXrjOrj rrj

EO.

apa
}

0,770

VTTO ye d/ji(f)L(j^rjT'^(Jrai /maXXov Se oftoAoy^crerat, orav ra> rdvavTia Aeyovrt dXrjOrj avrov Soaeu>, rore /cat o

e/ceti^ou

auros

CTuy^cop^crerat

jLti^re

Km>a /x^re rov eVt/ZTySe

ru^ovra avOpajTTOV fierpov etvat ou at' /.IT) fjiddr^. ov% ovrcos;


EO.
\

Trept

eVos

QVTCOS. Ou/COuV TTLOr) d{JL(f)lCrl3r]TlT(U V7TO TTa ' / JJ * t TT i<z \ 'D a ouoevt ai^ et^ )) llpcorayopou aA7)c/eta U ^ > > / > if\ \ oi>re rtvt aAAa> our avrco Kivco. 110
211.
if

>

>/

THEAETETUS
in general do not agree with place you know that it is just so much more false than true as the number of those who do not believe it is greater than the number of those who do. THEO. Necessarily, if it is to be true or false according to each individual opinion. soc. Secondly, it involves this, which is a very
it

was

true,

and people
first

him, in the

he concedes about his own opinion pretty result the truth of the opinion of those who disagree with him and think that his opinion is false, since he grants that the opinions of all men are true. THEO. Certainly. soc. Then would he not be conceding that his own opinion is false, if he grants that the opinion of those who think he is in error is true ? THEO. Necessarily. soc. But the others do not concede that they are
;

in error, do they

THEO. No, they do not.


soc. And he, in turn, according to his writings, grants that this opinion also is true. THEO. Evidently. soc.

Then

all

will

dispute

or

men, beginning with Protagoras, rather, he will grant, after he

once concedes that the opinion of the man who even Protagoras holds the opposite view is true himself, I say, will concede that neither a dog nor any casual man is a measure of anything whatsoever Is not that the case ? that he has not learned.
THEO. Yes.
soc.

Then

since

the " truth"

of Protagoras

is

disputed by
to

all, it

would be true to nobody, neither


Ill

anyone

else nor to him.

PLATO
@EO.
2fi.

"Aycu>,

c5

Hoj/cpaTes",

rov

eTalpov

JJLOV

KaTaOeo/JLev.

aS^Ao^ el Kai rrapaye dpa eKelvov rrpea^VTepov ovra ao(f)O)Tpov rjfjLcov eivai' KOI el aurtVa evTV0V dvCLKVlfjl fte^pt TOV aV^eVo?, 77oAAa O.V fJL re e'Aey^a? Xrjpovvra, ajs TO etVo?, /cat ere o/xoAoaAA' 7]^u,tv , KaraSvs aV CU^OITO aTrorpe'^ajv.
rot, a)
(f>iXe,

'AAAa

Oeofjiev

TO op66v.

ei/co?

, ot/xat, xprjaOai, r^Jilv avrois, OTTOLOL Tives KOI ra SOKOVVTOL del ravra Xeyeiv. KOL Srjra i vvv aAAo TL (fxjjfjiev ofJioXoyelv av rovro ye OVTIVOVV, TO elvai <jo(f)a)repov erepov erepov, elvai
,

0EO.
23.

'EjLtot

yovv
/cat

So/cet.

2H.

'H

ravrrj

av /jLaXtara

laraoOai

rov

Xoyov,

Tlpwrayopq,

^L ^ftet? VTieypd^ja^ev fiorjdovvr&s to? TO, /xey TroAAa T) So/cet, ravrr) Kai

eKacrra), Oepfid, ^pd, y\VKea, rrdvra oaa rov rvTTOV rovrov el oe TTOV ev Ttcrt $ia(f)epeiv aAAov d'AAou, rrepi rd vyiewd Kai vocra)or) eOeXfjaai dv (j>dvai fj,r) rrdv yvvaiov Kai iraioiov, Kai 9r]piov oe, IKOVOV elvai Idodai avrd yLyvcoaKov eavraJ TO vyieivov, aAAa evrauda 877 d'AAoi^ ct'AAou
Siacfrepeiv, e'iTrep TTOV; EO. "^fjiocye So/cet OVTCOS.

eanv

172

2n.

QVKOVV Kai

rrepl TroAtTt/caiv,

KaXd

fiev

Kai

alo"%pd Kai OLKaia Kai d'St/ca /cat ocrta /cat /mij, ola dv eKaarr] 770 At? olrjOelo-a dfJTai. v6f.iLfjia avT-fj, ravra Kai eivai TTJ dXrjdeia e/caaT7y, /cat ev TOVTOLS ovoev aoficvTepov ovre loLOJTrjv ISicbrov ovTe
TroXeajs eivai'

ev oe TO)

Gv^epovra

eavrfj

112

THEAETETUS
THEO. I think, friend too hard.
soc.

Socrates,
I

we

are

running

my

But,

my

dear man,

do not see that we are

Most likely, though, running beyond what is right. he, being older, is wiser than we, and if, for example, he should emerge from the ground, here at our feet, if only as far as the neck, he would prove abundantly
that
all

was making a fool of myself by my talk, in and you by agreeing with me then he would sink down and be off at a run. But we, I suppose, must depend on ourselves, such as we And so now are, and must say just what we think. must we not say that everybody would agree that some men are wiser and some more ignorant than
I

probability,

others ? THEO. Yes^


soc.

think at least w must. think his doctrine might stand most firmly in the form in which we sketched it when defending Protagoras, that most things hot, are to each dry, sweet, and everything of that sort
I

And do you

person as they appear to him, and if Protagoras is to concede that there are cases in which one person
excels another, he might be willing to say that in matters of health and disease not every woman or knows what is or beast, for that matter child wholesome for it and is able to cure itself, but in this point, if in any, one person excels another ? THEO. Yes, I think that is correct. soc. And likewise in affairs of state, the honourable

and disgraceful, the just and unjust, the pious and


opposite, are in truth to each state such as it thinks they are and as it enacts into law for itself, and in these matters no citizen and no state is wiser than another ; but in making laws that are advanits

113

PLATO
7}
fjirj

avfJL(f)povra TiOeaOai, evTavd* , etrrep TTOV, aft

o/zoAoyTycret /cat TToXetos

avfjL^ovXov

re

avjJL^ovXov

/cat

OVK

erepav erepas rrpos dXy dv rrdvv roA/^crete (f>rjaai, a oV


olrjOeiao,
1

ooav

Tf6\is

avfjLtfiepovTa.

raura

/cat

avvoiaeiv
dSt/cots
x

avrfj, Travros aAA' eVet ou Aeyco, eV rot?


/cat

St/catot?

/cat

ocrtot?

/cat

avocrtot?,

eBlXovaiv la-^vpt^eadai cos OVK eori <f)vcri avr&v O'jSei^ ovaiav eavrov e^ov aAAa TO Koivfj So^-av TOVTO yiyverai aXrjOes rore orav So^ /cat ocrov av
/cat ocrot Tra.vrd7Ta.ai ye 17 //.i] So/C7y "^povov rov Upcorayopov Aoyov Aeyoucrtv, 3 cS8e TTCOS" r^v Aoyo? Se ^a?, <5 0eoSa>pe, e/c ao(f)iav ayoucrt. Aoyou jLtet^cov e' eAarrovo? KaTaXafjLJ3dvL.
2

0EO.
.

Ou/cow

Oau>o/ze$a.
ot

cr^oA^i' dyofjiev, d> /cat 77oAAa/ct?

^coKpares; /xeV ye 8i],


/cat

a)

ovie, /cat
et/corco?

aAAore /carevo^CTa, dra/9


ev
1

rat?

^tAoao^tats"

TroAi)^

et's

ra

St/cacrr^ta

tdvre?

yeAotot

pr/ropes.

0EO.
2n.

Tlcus" 817

o5if Ae'yet?;

KtvSyvejJOfcrty ot

ev

>

St/cao'TT7/)tots

/cat

rot?
eV

TOLOVTOLS

K
/cat

V.O)V

/CuAtvSoUjLteVOt
SiaTpi(3fj

77^0?

TOl)?

<f>iXoao(f)ia
1

T^ rotaSe

cus ot/ceVat 77/369

eXevOepovs reOpd^Qai.^

0EO.
2n.
cr^oA^,

11^
/cat

ST^;

'Ht rot?

ftev TOVTO o av eiTres del Trapecrrt, TGI)? Aoyou? ev cipiijvrj erri axoXijs
r^JLGlS

7TOLOVVTCLL'
1

COaTTCp

VVvi
2

TpLTOV
5r?

7JSr)
&i>

X6yOV

/ecu 3

om. BT. \6yov<nv Naber, with


dSkots
;

W
4

BT
;

Schanz.

Te0pd(f>6ai

inferior MSS.
;

X^wcrtf

BT.

rerpd^dac

BT.

114

THEAETETUS
tageous to the state, or the reverse, Protagoras again one counsellor is better than another, and the opinion of one state better than that of another as regards the truth, and he would by no means dare to affirm that whatsoever laws a state makes in the belief that they will be advantageous to itself are perfectly sure to prove advantageous. But in the other class of things I mean just and
will agree that

and impious they are willing to say with confidence that no one of them possesses by nature an existence of its own ; on the contrary, that the common opinion becomes true at the time when it is adopted and remains true as long as it is held this is substantially the theory of those who do not But, altogether affirm the doctrine of Protagoras. Theodorus, argument after argument, a greater one
unjust, pious
;

after a lesser,

is overtaking us. THEO. Well, Socrates, we have plenty of leisure, have we not ? soc. Apparently we have. And that makes me think, my friend, as I have often done before, how natural it is that those who have spent a long time in the study of philosophy appear ridiculous when they enter the courts of law as speakers. THEO. What do you mean ? soc. Those who have knocked about in courts and the like from their youth up seem to me, when compared with those who have been brought up in

philosophy and similar pursuits, to be as slaves in breeding compared with freemen. THEO. In what way is this the case ? the latter always have that soc. In this way
:

which you just spoke of, leisure, and they talk at their leisure in peace just as we are now taking up
;

115

PLATO
K Xoyov
CLVTOVS 6
T^ita?

fjiTaXa/j,^dvofjLV,

OVTCO

/cd/cetvot,

eav

TT\Oa)V TOV 7TpOKLjJLl>OV fJidXXoV


/cat

d/oecrry

Sta

/za/cpa)i'

ovoev XeyeiVy aV

[JLOVOV

TV^WQ-L TOV oVro?'


/careTretyet

ot Se ev

aa^oAta re aet Xeyovoi

yap vSajp peov


rovs

/<:at

ou/c

ly^ojpel rrepl ov av

eTnOv/JLijcraiai

Aoyou? TTOielaQai, aAA' avdyK^v e^a)V 6


<f)aTr)Kv
a)v
/cat

VTroypafirjv
1 ty avTCOfjLoaiav KaXovaw

6KTOS ov p7]TOV
oe

ot

Aoyot

aet ev

Trept
L

ofJioSovXov

Trpos

P^

TLVa

$tKTV

eoi^ra,

/cat

ot aya)ves

auroir
5

ouSeVore r^v aXXcos aAA' det r^ TroAAa/ct? Se /cat 77ept i/tv^s 6 Sp6fj,o$
aTravTCDV

173 ajar

TOWTCO^

evrovoi

/cat

ytyi^o^rat,

eVtcrra/xep'ot

TOV

SecrTroT^v
2

Aoyaj
Se

re
/cat

dajTrevaai /cat
ou/c op$ot

epya> ^apto-aa^at,

a/miKpol
/cat

ra? ^VXOL?3
9^

rfv yap av^fjv


e/c

ro

eu^i;

re

/cat

TO eXevOepov

vecov SowAeta

a(j)ri

dvay/ca^ovcra

rrpdrreiv

a/coAta,

/zeydAou?
e'm
/cat

vou?

/cat (f>6(3ovs eVt aTraAats- J/ff^at?

ou? ou SvvdfjicvoL

fjiera

TOV

St/cat'ou
/cat

dXr]9ovs

U770</epetv, evOus eVt TO ijjevoo? TC

TO dAA^Aoy?
/cat

dv'TaSt/cetv
1

Tpeno^voi

T)V

avTun-oaiav Ka\o\j<nv MSS.;

xaptcracr^ai
3

BT

TO t\evOepov

BT

TroAAa KOUJLTTTOVTCLI om. Abresch et al. vire\dt1v Cobet from Themistius.


;

ro eXevd^piov Themistius.

116

THEAETETUS
argument, already beginning a third, as in our case, the new one pleases them better than that in which they are engaged and they do not care at all whether their talk is long But the men or short, if only they attain the truth. of the other sort are always in a hurry for the water flowing through the water-clock urges them on and

argument

after

so can the}7 ,

if,

the other party in the suit does not permit them to talk about anything they please, but stands over them exercising the law's compulsion by reading the brief, from which no deviation is allowed (this is called the l and their discourse is always about a affidavit) fellow slave and is addressed to a master who sits there holding some case or other in his hands and the contests never run an indefinite course, but are always directed to the point at issue, and often the race is for the defendant's life. As a result of all this, the speakers become tense and shrewd they know how to wheedle their master with words and but in their souls they gain his favour by acts For they have been become small and warped. deprived of growth and straightforwardness and independence by the slavery they have endured from
; ; ; ;

their
acts

youth up, for this forces them to do crooked by putting a great burden of fears and dangers upon their souls while these are still tender and since they cannot bear this burden with uprightness and truth, they turn forthwith to deceit and to requiting wrong with wrong, so that they become
;

1 In Athenian legal procedure each party to a suit presented a written statement the charge and the reply at a preliminary hearing. These statements were subsequently confirmed by oath, and the sworn statement was called daofj-offia or di>Tw/xo<n'a, which is rendered above by "affidavit" as the nearest English equivalent.

117

PLATO
B
CTuy/cAtoi'Tat,
t?

aVSpa?

e'/c

waO* vyte? ovoev e^ovre? Trjs StaiWa? ^tetpa/ctco^ reAetrrcDcrt, SetiW re /cat

yeyovdre?, a>? otovrat. /cat OVTOL /xev ST) d) 0edSa;pe' rou? Se row ^/zerepou %opov TTOTCpov pouAet oteAc/ovTes' ^ eao'avTes' TiaAtv e?7t TOV Adyov TpeTrwfjLeOa, Iva fir) /cat, o vw 817 eAe^ Atav TroAu TT^ eXevOepia /cat /zeraATyj/fet TCOP' Adycov
cro</>ot

TOLOVTOL,

Sco/cpare?, dAAd etp^/cas , ort ou^ rjfJLel? ot ev TO) rotaiSe ^opeuovres" rcDv Adycov VTr^peVat, dAA'

@EO.

M^SajLtcDs",

a>

Travv

yap eu TOVTO
l

ot Adyot

rjfJLTepoL

(Zarrep

ot/ceVat,

/cat

e/

avraJv Trept/zeVet dTTOTeXeaOfjvaL OTCLV OVT yap St/cacT^? owre 9eaTr)s ojoTrep T KOL ap^OJV 7TL(JTaTL TTttp' 7TLTLfJLrjO-a)V 2H. AeyajfJLev 8^, aj? eot/cev, eTret crot ye 24. TL yap av rt? TOU? ye So/cet, Trept ralv Kopv^aitov (f)avXa)$ Starpt^ot'Ta? ev ^>tAocro(^ta Ae'yot; OVTOL Se
77ou
e/c ve'cov

D dSdv,

TrpaJTOv
1

fjLev

et?

dyopdv

ou/c tcracrt

r^v

ouSe OTTOU St/caoT^ptov T) fiovXcvTrjpLOV r\ TL KOIVOV d'AAo TT^S TToAeCOS CTVVOpLOV VOfJiOVS Se /cat i/fi7^tcr/xaTa Aeyd/>teva r) yeypaft/>teVa oure CTTTOfSat Se eVatptaiv CTT' opcoaLv OVT aKOVovvL" /cat crwoSot /cat SetTrva /cat cnV auA^rptO't
1

L,

o?5Se

^ Se

7}

/ca/cais"

e/c
',

6Vap Trpdrretv TrpocrtcrTarat aurot?. 2 rt? ye'yovev eV TidAet, ^ rt rco /ca/coV Tfpoyovojv yeyovo? ^ Trpo? dvSpajv ^ [JLaXXov avTov XeXrjBev T) ot rry? OaXaTTrjs
^de?.
1

E Aeyd/xevot

/cat

raOra

77avr'

ouS'

6Vt

ou/c

i)fJ.TepOL
2

ot

-rj/m^repoi
;

W,

Iambi., Clem.

BT. TI BT.

118

THEAETETUS
Consequently they pass from youth to manhood with no soundness of mind in them, but they think they have become clever and wise. So much for them, Theodorus. Shall we describe those who belong to our band, or shall we
let that go and return to the argument, in order to avoid abuse of that freedom and variety of discourse, of which we were speaking just now ? THEO. By all means, Socrates, describe them for I like your saying that we who belong to this band are not the servants of our arguments, but the arguments are, as it were, our servants, and each of them must await our pleasure to be finished for we have neither judge, nor, as the poets have, any spectator set over us to censure and rule us. soc. Very well, that is quite appropriate, since it is your wish ; and let us speak of the leaders ; for why should anyone talk about the inferior philosophers? The leaders, in the first place, from their youth up, remain ignorant of the way to the agora, do not even know where the court-room is, or the senatehouse, or any other public place of assembly ; as for laws and decrees, they neither hear the debates upon them nor see them when they are published ; and the strivings of political clubs after public offices,
; ;

greatly bent and stunted.

and meetings, and banquets, and revellings with chorus girls it never occurs to them even in their dreams to indulge in such things. And whether anyone in the city is of high or low birth, or what evil has been inherited by anyone from his ancestors, male or female, are matters to which they pay no more attention than to the number of pints in the
sea,

as the saying is. And all these things the philosopher does not even know that he does not

119

PLATO
otSev,
/ct/zetv

otSev
/cetrat

^apiv, dAAd ro>

ou8e yap OLVTOJV aTre^erai rov 6Wt TO acofjia /zoVov


/cat

rfj

77oAet

aurou

eVtS^/^et,
1

^ Se Stavota,
'

TCLVTCL TrdvTa riyrjaafjievri crfjuKpd /cat ou8eV, arifJLacracra


-

TTavraxfj

^e'oerat
'

/caret

IltVSayoov,

ra?

/cat TO, eVtVeSa yeco/xerpoucra, re ya? virevepQe ovpavov re yVe/o acfTpovo^iovaa, /cat Traaav 174 TTcivrrj <j>voiv TOJV ovrcov e'/cdorov epevvto/jievr]
'
'

6'Aou, et? raiv eyyi)?

ouSey avrrjv cruy/ca^tetaa.


c5

0EO.

rTaj?

TOVTO Aeyet?,
/cat

Haj/c/oare?;

Stope, /cat dVo) fiXerrovra , ireaovTa el? (frpeap, rt?


fjLp.Xrj?
cos*

parrd

/cat

^aptecrcra

OepaTraivls aVocr/caji/rat

Aeyerat,
ret

ra

/xev eV

S*

efJLTrpoaOev

avrov

ovpava) TrpoOvfjLOiro et'SeVat, /cat Trapa TroSa? XavOdvoi


cr/cai/z/^a
e?7t

CLVTOV.

r avrov 8e dp/cet

Trdvras oaoi

cV (f)L\oao(f)ia 8tdyou(Tt. ra) yap 6Vrt rov roiovrov 6 /ULV TT\r)oiov /cat d yetrcov XeXrjOev, ov /JLOVOV 6 TI t dV^pajTrd? CCTTLV r\ ri Trpdrret, dAA* dAtyou /cat
\\ aAAo

upefjifjia'

rt oe 77or

''

>'^"/D ccrrtv avupcoTTO?


re
/cat

/cat

rt

r)

Trdcr^etv

^ret

77pdy/zar'
a>

yap
>/

TTOU,

0ed8cope.

7?

ou; 0EO.
2H.
1

"Eycoye*

/cat

aXr)9fj Ae'yet?.

Totydprot,
faperai 2 ras

(6 <^>t'Ae,
2

tSta re afyyiyvd/ievos' o
Iambi., Clem., Euseb. T C ; TCI T. ;

BT

Tre'rerat

B W,

Campbell from Clement

120

THEAETETUS
for he does not keep aloof from them for the sake of gaining reputation, but really it is only his body that has its place and home in the city his mind, considering all these things petty and of no account, disdains them and is borne in all directions, as Pindar 1 says, "both below the earth," and measuring the surface of the earth, and "above the sky," studying the stars, and investigating the universal nature of every thing that is, each in its entirety, never lowering itself to anything close at hand. THEO. What do you mean by this, Socrates ? soc. Why, take the case of Thales, Theodorus. While he was studying the stars and looking upwards, he fell into a pit, and a neat, witty Thracian servant girl jeered at him, they say, because he was so eager to know the things in the sky that he could not see what was there before him at his very feet. The
; ;

know

jest applies to all who pass their lives in For really such a man pays no attention philosophy. to his next door neighbour he is not only ignorant of what he is doing, but he hardly knows whether he is a human being or some other kind of a creature ; but what a human being is and what is proper for such a nature to do or bear different from any other, this he inquires and exerts himself to find out. Do you understand, Theodorus, or not ? THEO. Yes, I do you are right. soc. Hence it is, my friend, such a man, both in 1 This may refer to Nem. x. 87 f.

same

xe TTV^OLS yatas virtvepdfv edv, ovpavov ev xpvtrtois db/j.o(riv, "Thou (Polydeuces) shalt live being half the time under the earth and half the time in the golden dwellings of
TJ/Mffv /JLev
'

TJfju&v

heaven," but

it

may be

a quotation from one of the

lost

poems of Pindar.
E

121

PLATO
TOIOVTOS

orrep a TTOV aXXoOi aVay/caSiAcaarrypitij r\ o6fi Trepl TCOV rrapd Trobas Ka.1 TO>V eV o(f)9aXfjiois

CKacrra)

KOL

Sr^/xoata,

eXeyov, orav eV

8iaAe'ye<7$a6, yeAtura Trap^ei ov JJLOVOV parrou? aAAa KOLL TO) a'AAto o^Aco, etV ff>peard re KOL
OLTTOpiaV
fJi7TL7TTOJV V7TO OLTTCLpLa?,

Kal

7]

v d/3eAre/3ias' Trape^o/zeV^ eV re yap rat? XoiSopiaLs t'Stov e^et ouSej^ ouSeVa AotSopetv, ' > * '5^ '^^ '<?< ar OUAC eioco? KCLKOV ouoev ofoej/o? e/c rou
>

arropaJv ovv yeAoto? ^atVerat.

eV

re rot? eTratVot? KCU rat? rtuv a'AAcov

^eyaAa
e

ou

TTpoaTTonJTO)?,
1

aAAa

TO;

6Vrt

yeAaiv

ytyvo/xep'os

Xrjpo'jSrjs

So/^et

eiVat.

Tvpavvov

re

fiaoiXea eyKO)fJLia,6 [JLCVOV eVa raw olov (jvficorrjv T) Troi/^teVa T}' rtva fiovKoXov, Ty a/<ouetv ei)8at/xovt^o/xevov TroAu /38aAAovra'

yap

?^

Sucr-

KoXwrepov Se
Se
:at

IKCWOJV

,a)ov

KCU

eVi/^ouAorepoi'

Trot/zaiVet^ re /cat fiSdXXeiv vo/JLi^a

avrovs, aypoiKOV aa^oAta? ouSev TJTTOV ratv rofjiecov TOV TOLOVTOV avayKdlov yiyvecrOat,, crrjKov eV opet TO rei^o? TrepifSe^Xrjpevov. yrjs Se orav
aTrai'SeuTOv U77O

TrXedpa

T)

ert

TrAetco

aKOvar)

a>s

Tt?

apa

Oavfjiaara 7rXr)0i KeKrrjrai

&OK6L aKOveiv
TO,

ts

aVacrav elojOcbs
cos

rrjv yrjv

8e

817

yevT]

vfjivovvrajv,

yewato?

rt?

eVra

TTOLTTTTOVS

TrXovcrLOVS
7?t

ecov aVovai,
opcovrcjv

TTavra.7TO.aLV

Kat 175
CTTCLiVOV,

afJiiKpov

V7TO

a.7TOLl&VoiaS

OV

OVVafJLCVCJV

6LS

TO

122

THEAETETUS
private, when he meets with individuals, and in public, as I said in the beginning, when he is obliged to speak in court or elsewhere about the things at his feet and before his eyes, is a laughing-stock not

only to Thracian girls but to the multitude in general, for he falls into pits and all sorts of perplexities

through inexperience, and his awkwardness

is

terrible,

making him seem a

fool

for

when

it

comes to

abusing people he has no personal abuse to offer against anyone, because he knows no evil of any man, never having cared for such things so his perplexity makes him appear ridiculous and as to laudatory speeches and the boastings of others, it becomes manifest that he is laughing at them not pretending to laugh, but really laughing and so he is thought to be a fool. When he hears a panegyric of a despot or a king he fancies he is listening to the
; ;

praises of some herdsman or a neatherd, for instance


his beasts
;

a swineherd, a shepherd, gets much milk from but he thinks that the ruler tends and

who

milks a more perverse and treacherous creature than the herdsmen, and that he must grow coarse and uncivilized, no less than they, for he has no leisure and lives surrounded by a wall, as the herdsmen live in their mountain pens. And when he hears that someone is amazingly rich, because he owns ten thousand acres of land or more, to him, accustomed as he is to think of the whole earth, this seems very little. And when people sing the praises of lineage and say someone is of noble birth, because he can show seven wealthy ancestors, he thinks that such

an altogether dull and narrow vision on the part of those who utter them because of lack of education they cannot keep their eyes fixed 123
praises betray
;

PLATO
det
/cat

fiXcTrew

ovoe

Aoyt'ecr$at

OTL

Trpoyovajv /zuptaSe? e/cacrra> yeyoVacm' dvapieV at? TrAoucrtot /cat Trrco^ot /cat /^acrtAei? 6fJir)TOi, /cat 8ouAot /3ap/3apot re /cat "EAA-^ve? 77oAAd/a?

pvpioL
etfcocrt

yeyovaaiv
AcaraAoyoj
et?

orcoovv
Trpoyovuiv

aAA'

eVt

Trei^re

/cat
KCLL

ore/JLVwofJievcjJv

'HpaicAea rov 'Aft^tTpuajvo? aroTra auraj /cara^atVerat T^? o^ti/cpoAoyi'a?, ort 8e o aTr' *A[Ji(f)LTpvcovos et? TO avtt> 7revTKaiet/COCTTO? TOtOUTO? ^V O t tt <JVV.fia.LVV OLVTO) TV^f}, KOL 6 7TVTr]KO<jTOS 0,77"' dVTOv yeAa ou Sui^a/xeVajv Aoytdva<f)6p6vTa)v
,

ea0at' re /cat

^auvor^Ta avo^rou

ev aVacrt
TO, 8'

ST)

ifjvxrjs a77aAAarretv. rouroi? o roiovros VTTO ra)v

/carayeAarat, ra /xev VTrep^avajs e^av, a>? ei> TToaiv ayvo&v re /cat eV e/cacrrc/t?
EO.
riavraTracrt

ra

ytyvo^teva

Aeyet?,
to

25.

2n.
/

"Gray Se ye rtva avro?,


\

</t'Ae,

TOV

\KVcrr) m rr
1

dVa>, /cat
>

rt

eyaj

^'Q ^ ere aot/ccu

eOeXrfcr-r] l
77

rt?
\

aura)

en;

>/

e/c^vat >
et?

e/c //

ejne;

cr/cej//tv

airr^s

avrolv
w
1^
'

$u<aLoavvr)s re /cat dSt/cta?, rt re eKa /cat rt rcov Trdvrajv r) dAA^Acuv


"
<c
-

e/c

TOU

'

et

"\

'

'

"

pacriAevs zvoaifjiaiv,
1

T*

au

770 A u

^puatov," ^acrtAetas

Trept

/cat

Trivrjs

oAcos"

(TKl}jLV }

/cat evSaLfJLOvia? TtV6 eCTTOV TTOLCO T

a^AtoT^TO?
/Cttt

dvdpcoeVt
TpOTTOV
2

TtVa

dvOptoTTOV (fivcreL TTpoatJKL TO avrotv, TO Se a.7TO^>vyelv --Trepl 6Vav au Se^ Aoyoy StSoVat TOV

fjiev

KrtjaaoOaL
aTra
e

TOVTWV
ofJLiKpov

T^V i^v^v
2

/cat 8pLp.vv /cat St/cavt/cov, TrdAtv


1

au Ta

TToXu

KTr]ffacr6ai.

Euseb., Iamb. ; om. BT. B 2 , Iamb., Euseb. ; KTr)<re<r6ai BT.

124

THEAETETUS
upon the whole and are unable to calculate that every man has had countless thousands of ancestors and progenitors, among whom have been in any instance rich and poor, kings and slaves, barbarians and Greeks. And when people pride themselves on a list of twenty-five ancestors and trace their pedigree back to Heracles, the son of Amphitryon, the pettihe laughs ness of their ideas seems absurd to him at them because they cannot free their silly minds of
;

vanity by calculating that Amphitryon's twenty-fifth ancestor was such as fortune happened to make him, and the fiftieth for that matter. In all these cases

the philosopher is derided by the common herd, partly because he seerns to be contemptuous, partly because he is ignorant of common things and is

always in perplexity. THEO. That all happens just as you say, Socrates. soc. But when, my friend, he draws a man upwards and the other is willing to rise with him above the level of " What wrong have I done you or you me ? " to the investigation of abstract right and wrong, to inquire what each of them is and wherein things, they differ from each other and from all other " or above the level of " Is a king happy ? or, on
"

to the the other hand, " Has he great wealth ? investigation of royalty and of human happiness and wretchedness in general, to see what the nature of

each

is

and

in

what way man

is

naturally fitted to

gain the one and escape the other when that man of small and sharp and pettifogging mind is compelled in his turn to give an account of all these

125

PLATO
avTLarpo<f)a aTroSt'Scoow
KpefJiaoOels
/cat

t'AtyytcDv

re drro

vifjrjXov

fi\7TO)v
/cat

/zereajpo?

dvcoOev

VTTO
l

drropwv yeXcora parrot? ^tev ou rrape^ei ouS' d'AAto a?ratSewroj ov^evi, ov yap aladdvovrai, rot? S' evavriajs 2 ouro? cos avS/3a77oSot? rpa^elaiv aVaatv. 17 r)
1

drjOeias dSrj/jLOvajv re

/cat fiarrapiiyOJV

e/care/oou

rpoTros,

t3

0eo8tope, o
cr^oATy

eXevdepia
<j)i\6(jo(f)ov
^t

re

/cat

reOpa^i/jLevov,

ov

KaXelSy

a> dvefJLearjrov einjOei 8o/cetv /cat

eiva.1

orav

els SouAt/ca e
fJLrj

otov

orpwfjiaroecrfjiOv

eTnarafjievov

avoKevo S'
/cat

cra<7$at /,tT]8e o?/fo^ rjSvvai

T)

OaJTras Aoyous"

au ra

/xev

rotaura rravra SuvajLteVoy roptos re

Sta/covetv, aVa/3aAAea$at Se ow/c eVtcrra/zeVou

ta

eXevOepws
6p9a)$

ouSe
5

176 Xafiovros

vfjivrjaai

y' ap^oviav Aoycuv Oeajv re /cat dvSpto^

ev&aifJLOVWv fiiov dXrjOrj. EO. Et Trdvras, d> Sco/c^are?, rreidois


ciMJirep
efJL,

a Aeyet?
eXdrraj

rfXeiojv
e'ir].

av

elprjvr]

/cat

/ca/cd

/car*

dvdpd)rrovs

2H.

'AAA' our' drroXeaOaL rd


vrrevavriov

/ca/cd

SwaroV,

a>

0eoScope*

>/

avayKTj'
6vr]rr)V

ovr
(jivaiv
1

>/>>/)/> ev ueois
/cat

yap

rt ra>

aura

dyaOa) del elvai *^ /) Lopvauac, riqv oe

^i^

rdi^Se

rov roTrov rrepLTroXel


; (3appapifai> BT. iraaiv T, Iamb., Euseb.

Barrapifav Themistius
aTracriv
3

B;

Tpa.<peiffL

6 5' t,
5

Iamb.
;

ofl 5'

BT.

4\ev6epus

BT

aXT?;??;

Athenaeus. om. Athenaeus.


\ev0eplus

126

THEAETETUS
dizzied by the things, then the tables are turned new experience of hanging at such a height, he gazes downward from the air in dismay and perplexity he stammers and becomes ridiculous, not in
;
;

of Thracian girls or other uneducated persons, for they have no perception of it, but in those of all men who have been brought up as free men, not as slaves. Such is the character of each of the two classes, Theodoras, of the man who has

the

eyes

truly been brought up in freedom and leisure, whom you call a philosopher who may without censure appear foolish and good for nothing when he is involved in menial services, if, for instance, he does

not know how to pack up his bedding, much less to put the proper sweetening into a sauce or a fawning speech and of the other, who can perform all such services smartly and quickly, but does not know how to wear his cloak as a freeman should, properly 1 draped, still less to acquire the true harmony of

speech and hymn aright the praises of the true life of gods and blessed men. THEO. If, Socrates, you could persuade all men of the truth of what you say as you do me, there would be more peace and fewer evils among mankind. soc. But it is impossible that evils should be done away with, Theodorus, for there must always be something opposed to the good and they cannot have their place among the gods, but must inevitably Therefore hover about mortal nature and this earth. 1 The Athenians regarded the proper draping of the cloak as a sign of good breeding. The well-bred Athenian
;

threw his cloak over the left shoulder, then passed it round the back to the right side, then either above or below the right arm, and finally over the left arm or shoulder. See Aristophanes, Birds, 1567 f. with Blaydes's notes.
first
,

127

PLATO
Sio
/cat

77etpaa$at
(f>vyrj

%pr)

eV0eV8e

e/cetcre

(frevyeiv

on

ra^icrra.

Se

O/JLOLCOOTL?

Oeco

Kara TO ovvarov
fjiera

o/xotcoai? Se St/catov

/cat

oaiov

(frpovijaeajs
l

ou

Trayi;

yeveaBai. dAAd yap, c5 d'ptoTe, paStov Trelaai co? d'pa ou^ c5v eVe/ca ot
,

aperrjv 8e

tva

/z ^

emTiyeuTcov, ro 8' oy, KaKos Kai Iva dya^o? OOKTJ eivai' ravra
T0
v

yap

ecrrtv

<f)aivT(U'
ovoafjifj
1

TO

Aeyo/xevo? ypaajv vOXos, c5? oe dXrjOes cooe Aeyaj/zev.


to? otoV re

e'ftoi

^eo?

ovoafJLOJS O.OLKOS, aAA*

St/cato-

Taros , /cat OVK eanv avTto o/^otorepov ouSev 7} o? dV rjfjiwv av yevrjrai ort St/catoraro?. Trept TOVTO 3
/cat /cat
-^

cos

dA^^co? Setvor^? cxvSpo?


rj

/cat

ouSevta re
o~o(f>ia /cat

dvavopia.

p,ev
r]

yap TOVTOV yvtocns


ayvota dfiaOia
Suvacrretats
1

ri,

Se

/cat

/ca/cta

at 8' a'AAat Setvor^re? re 8o/coucrat /cat


cro^tat

eV

jLtev

TroAtrt/cat?

<^o/3TtAcat,

eV

8e re^t'at? /3dVaucrot.
dvdcrta
/x,^

rai

ytyvo/xevat d8t-

ow

KOVVTI

/cat

Aeyovrt

r)

TrpdrTOVTi

/xa/cpa)

e^et TO

o-fy^aj/oetp' 8etva> UTTO

dydAAovTat yap TO) di^etSet "-s-v OTt ou ArjpoL etcrt, y^? aAAct)?

\/>

rravovpyias /cat ot'oimu

avopes OLOVS Set ev 77oAet TOU? cr XeKTeov ovv TaXrjOes, OTL TOCTOUTO) /xaAAdv otot ou/c otovTat, OTt o?5^t otovraf dyp'oouat yap doLKcas, o Set ^'/ctcrTa ayvoett'. ou yap
1

7rai>u

B
8

7rdi/u rt

T.
,

IVa
;

/ur?

iVa 5^

^ T.

ToOro Euseb.

Iamb., Stob.

rotf-rci;

BT.

128

THEAETETUS
we ought to try to escape from earth to the dwelling of the gods as quickly as we can and to escape is to
;

become become
and
all

like
like

God,

so far as this
is

is

possible

and to

God

to

become righteous and holy

wise. But, indeed, my good friend, it is not at easy to persuade people that the reason generally advanced for the pursuit of virtue and the avoidance of vice namely, in order that a man may not seem bad and may seem good is not the reason why the one should be practised and the other not that, I think, is merely old wives' chatter, as the saying is. Let us give the true reason. God is in no wise and in no manner unrighteous, but utterly and perfectly righteous, and there is nothing so like him as that one of us who in turn becomes most It is herein that nearly perfect in righteousness. the true cleverness of a man is found and also his worthlessness and cowardice for the knowledge of this is wisdom or true virtue, and ignorance of it is and all the other kinds folly or manifest wickedness of seeming cleverness and wisdom are paltry when they appear in public affairs and vulgar in the arts. Therefore by far the best thing for the unrighteous man and the man whose words or deeds are impious is not to grant that he is clever through knavery ; for such men glory in that reproach, and think it means that they are not triflers, "useless burdens 1 upon the earth," but such as men should be who are to live safely in a state. So we must tell them the truth that just because they do not think they are such as they are, they are so all the more truly for they do not know the penalty of unrighteousness, which is the thing they most ought to know. For
;

Homer,

Iliad, xviii. 104

Odyssey, xx. 379.


1

E 2

29

PLATO
loriv
r]v So/coucrt,

TTOicrxovaiv

ovbev

TzA^yat re /cat Odvaroi, c&v evtorc dSt/cowre?, dAAd rjv dSvvarov

e/c^uyetv.

EO.

TtVa

817

Aeyet?;

2n.
Tcoy,

napaSety/mrcov, a> </>t'Ae, Iv TO) oi^rt ear to TOU /xev ^etou euSat/zo^eo-raroy, rou 8e ddeov

)Tro ^ OVTOJS ^X L XavOdvovai dvota? T^? ecr^dTT]? 177 ra> yitev oyLtotoUjttevot Sid rd? dSiVou? Trpd^eis, TO) 8e dvoiJiOLOVfjLevoL. ov or] TLVOVOI oiKrjv ,tt)VTs rov OLV LKOra filOV d) OfJiOlOVVTOLL' 6OLV S' lTT(JJfJ,V OTl,

d^Atcorarou,

ou^

opajvres

on

>

TyAt^ior^To? re

/<rat

r]

a77aAAayd>at TT^? Set^OT^TO?, /cat reAeuT^CTavras' fS" tKelvos fjitv 6 TOJV KO.KUJV KaOapos TOTTOS ov eV^dSe Se rrjv avrols ofJLOLorrjra rrjs at,
rj

Siaycoyry?

ravra
0EO.

det t^ovai, KCLKOI KOLKOLS KOI TravrTraaiv )s 8etvo6 KCLL Travovpyoi


TLVOJV

dKovaovrai.
a>

Kat
'

fj.dXa or),
d)
1

OiSd TO i,

eratpe.
iSi'a

eV ^evroi ri avrois
oerj

orav

Adyov

Sowat re

/cat

/cat

</>uyeiV,

TToXvv ^povov VTrofjiclvai /cat rdre droTTa)?, co Sat^tdvte, reAeuraivTe? ou/c


irepi

dpeaKovaiv avrol avrois


prjTopLKr]
fjirjoev

&v

Aeyoucrt,

/cat

KLvri TTOJS dTTOfjiapaiveTai, cocrre SoKeiv oia^epeiv. irepl fJL6i> ovv TOVTUIV, e
et

/cat
ftT^,

Trdpepya ruy^dvet Aeyd/ze^a, dTroo-roj/xev


TrXeio)

8e

det
1

cTnppcovra,

/cara^cucjet
;

rjfjicov

TOP

6V &p
(pvyelv

W, Iamb.
;

0eu7ei^ BT,

on av BT. Iamb.

130

THEAETETUS
it is not what they think it is scourgings and death, which they sometimes escape entirely when they have done wrong but a penalty which it is impossible to

escape.

THEO.
soc.

set up in the most blessed, and the But these men do godless, which is most wretched. not see that this is the case, and their silliness and extreme foolishness blind them to the fact that

What penalty do you mean ? Two patterns, my friend, are


is

world, the divine, which

through their unrighteous acts they are made like one and unlike the other. They therefore pay the penalty for this by living a life that conand if we forms to the pattern they resemble tell them that, unless they depart from their "cleverness," the blessed place that is pure of all things evil will not receive them after death, and here on earth they will always live the life like themselves evil men associating with evil when they hear this, they will be so confident in their unscrupulous cleverness that they will think our words
the
;

the talk of fools. THEO. Very true, Socrates.


soc. Yes, my friend, I know. However, there is whenever one thing that has happened to them they have to carry on a personal argument about the doctrines to which they object, if they are willing to stand their ground for a while like men and do not
:

run away like cowards, then, my friend, they at last become strangely dissatisfied with themselves and
their arguments their brilliant rhetoric withers away, so that they seem no better than children. But this is a digression. Let us turn away from these matters if we do not, they will come on like
;

131

hoyov
aot So/cet.
EO.
'E/zot

PLATO >\O\\J/ be ra em

f\

>/

e^rrpoauev

tco/zev, et /cat

drjoeorepa

^tei; ra rotaura, c5 Saj/cpaTe?, aKovew' paco yap rrjXiKqjSe

OI)K:

ovri

26. 2n. QVKOVV ei>Tav9d TTOV r\\i.ev rov Aoyou, ev a) e^a/zev rows' T^V (fjepo/JLevrjv ovoiav Xeyovras, KCLL TO del So/cow e/cacrra) rovro /cat etvat TOVTCO a> So/cet, ey /xev rots- d'AAot? edeXeiv 8uaxvpi-

^eaOaiy

/cat

oy^

fjiaXXov a dv ecrrt St/cata TT^ 6e/jLevr), eojanep 5 5 O\ /D^l "^' ^ 1

^'/ctara vrept rd St/cata, co? Travrds OrjraL TidAt? Sofavra avrfj, ravra /cat

oe

rayauov

ouoeva

av /ce^rat' "
eu
"/]'

avopeiov
Ofjrai,

ovra)?

Trept

eivai,

d dV ai^eAt/xa ecrrt roaovrov Xpovov oaov av /cer^rat w^eXi/jia, TrXrjv et TI? TO rovro Se 77ou cr/ccD/z/^' dv etTj Trpd? oVo/xa Aeyof
ojcrre

roAftaV Sta/xd^eCT^at ort


TroXiS

/cat

olrideicra

eavrfj

/cat

o XeyojJLev.
EO.

OV%L;

IldVu ye.

2n. M-^ yap Xeyera) TO 6Vo/za, dAAd TO rrpdyp,a TO ovouat,6iJievov Oeaypeira). 2


EO.
.

M-^ yap. 'AAA' o dv rovro


/cat

ovo/Jid^r),

rovrov

OTJTTOV

ai vofjioOerov/JLevrj, /cat rrdvras rovs vop,ov$,


*

ooov ocerai re
rj

SwaTat,

co? (L

eavrfj riOerai'

rrpos d'AAo Tt jSAeVoucra

relrai;
O
2

BW
/irj

2
;

rd7a^a

TW.

rd

6vo/ji.a'6/u.ei>ov
. . .

^ewpeirw 7a/j om. T.

5 6voj.(.o.^6^vov ^ew/jetrat

132

THEAETETUS
an ever-rising flood and bury in silt our original argument and let us, if you please, proceed. THEO. To me, Socrates, such digressions are quite for they are easier for as agreeable as the argument
;

of my age to follow. However, let us return to our argument.


a

man

if

you

prefer,

were at about the point in soc. Very well. our argument where we said that those who declare that only motion is reality, and that whatever seems to each man really is to him to whom it seems, are in regard to other willing to maintain their position matters and to maintain especially in regard to whatever laws a state makes, because justice that seem to it just, are just to the state that made
;

We

they them, as long as they remain in force but as regards the good, that nobody has the courage to go on and contend that whatever laws a state passes thinking

them advantageous

to

it

are really advantageous as

long as they remain in force, unless what he means l is merely the name "advantageous" ; and that would I right ? be making a joke of our argument. THEO. Certainly. for he must not mean merely the name, soc. Yes but the thing named must be the object of his

Am

attention.

making laws, aims, of course, at advantage, whatever the name it gives it, and makes all its laws as advantageous as possible to or has itself, to the extent of its belief and ability it in making laws anything else in view ?
;

THEO. True. soc. But the state, in

The

legislator

name, if it is given them when they are enacted, to them, whatever their character may be.

may

call his

laws advantageous, and that will belong

133

PLATO
178 EO

Q
'H ovv KOI Twy)(dvL
dei,
r)

TroAAo, /cat 8ta-

EO.

Ot]u,at

"Ert

eya>ye /cat d roivvv evOevfte

aV

laAAov

Tra?

TI?

ravrd ravra,
eptoTtor),

et Trept

iravros rt?

ev d)
/cat

KCLL

TO

d)(f>e^LfJLOV

ov

eari Se rrov

77ept

roi^

/xeAAovra

orav yap ^o/zo^eraj/xe^a, tt? ecro/xeVou? VO/JLOVS Tiefjiea es rov evretra ^povov Se ^LteAAov 2 6p6d>$ dv Aeyot/zey.

TOVTO

ITavu ye. ovrojal zpCDTW/jiev Upojrayopav r) 8-^, aAAov rtva TCOV Kivo) ra aura Aeyovrtov vravrcov
EO.

2n.

"I^t

ITpcorayopa, ov^evos orov ov rd)v V CLVTO) TOLOVTOJV -X (jL>V y-P O-VTCOV TO KpLTTjpiOV old 77acr^et TOiavra otoju,i>os, dXrjdrj re oterar /cat 6Vra. ou^; OVTOJ;
dV^pajTros
,

eortv, cu? ^are, c5

fiapea>v y

KOV^OJV,

EO.
T

QVTCD.

/cat

TCUV

ITpcorayopa,

e'^et

TO Kpiri^piov eV avTO),

/cat

ota
TO)

aV

Oi7)6f} eaeadcLL,

ravra

/cat

yiyverai

e/cetVaj
t'

olov Qepfjid, ap' 6Vav Tt?


TTVperov
,

olrjOfj

/cat eaeaOai ravrrjv eVepos , larpos oY, avroLrjOfj, Kara r]v TTorepov So^av (f^wfjiev TO /xeAAoy drro fiacre a 60.1; KCLTa TTJV d/ji(j)OTpcov, /cat TO /Ltep' laTpa) ov r)

A^ea^at
1

/cat

W W
134

Kd(rry

yuaXXoV

BT. BT.

THEAETETUS
THEO. Certainly not. soc. And does it always hit the mark, or does every state often miss it ? THEO. I should say they do often miss it
!

Continuing, then, and proceeding from this to this point, every one would more readily agree assertion, if the question were asked concerning the whole class to which the advantageous belongs and that whole class, it would seem, pertains to the
soc.

For when we make laws, we make them with the idea that they will be advantageous in after time and this is rightly called the future. THEO. Certainly.
future.
;

then, on this assumption, let us quessomeone of those who agree with Man is the measure of all things, as your him. school says, Protagoras, of the white, the heavy, the for light, everything of that sort without exception he possesses within himself the standard by which to
soc.

Come

tion Protagoras or

judge them, and when his thoughts about them coincide with his sensations, he thinks what to him is true and really is. Is not that what they
say? THEO. Yes.
soc. Does he, then, also, Protagoras, we shall say, possess within himself the standard by which to judge of the things which are yet to be, and do those things which he thinks will be actually come to pass

for

him who thought them


;

Take, for instance,

heat if some ordinary man thinks he is going to take a fever, that is to say, that this particular heat will be, and some other man, who is a physician, thinks the contrary, whose opinion shall we expect Or perhaps the opinion the future to prove right ?
135

PLATO
ouSe TTVperrcuv
yevrjcrerat,,

eavraj Se d

repa;
0EO.
2H.

FeAotov

fjLi>r

oV
Trept

en?..

'AAA', ot/zat,

otVou

yAu/curTiTOS
rj

/cat

avarrjporrjros /xeAAoucrTis' ecreaOai

rov yecjpyov

8o^a, dAA' ou^ T^ rou KiOapiorov Kvpia. 0EO. Tt jU-^v;


2H.
Oi)8'

av av
*

Trepl

avap^oarov re KOL evap-

fjioarov eoo{JLvov

TraiSorpt^? av fieXriov /cat eVetra avraj

cvdpfJioorrov etvat.

0EO.

OUKOUV

/cat

TOU /xeAAovro?
1

eoTtdoreo-flat

oVro?, CT/ceua^o/xeVrys Qoivrjs, aKVporepa


rrjs

TOV
/uev
1

O^JOTTOIOV

Trepl

rfjs

arop,vrjs
1

rySov^s".
?}

7re/ot

yap rou
1

178^

oVros

e/cacrTa>

yeyovoros /XT^SeV TTOJ TOJ Aoya> dAAd Trept rou jLteAAovros e/cdcrra)
c5

/cat
1

/cat

eaecrdai Trorepov avros aura) d'ptcrros

cru,

rtpcoraydpa, TO ye
rjfJLtov

Trept

Aoyous

e/cdara)

ecro/Jievov
T)

et?

St/cacrT7]ptoi/

ay TrpoSo^dcrat?
0EO.

raiv tStcoraiv oariaovv ;


cu

Kat

jLtdAa,

Hcu/cpaTes",

rouro

CF(f)6$pa VTrbWxyelTO TTOLVTCOV

Sta^epeif auras'.

av avraj Ste2n. NT) Ata, a) fjieXeT] owSet? y' 179 Aeyero StSou? 77oAu dpyuptov, et /XT) rou? OVVOVTCLS .7TiQev ort /cat TO /xeAAov ecreaOai re /cat 2 TO rore BT. 6 om. T. >e 136
1

THEAETETUS
of both, and the man will become, not hot or feverish to the physician, but to himself both ? THEO. No, that would be ridiculous. soc. But, I imagine, in regard to the sweetness or dryness which will be in a wine, the opinion of the husbandman, not that of the lyre-player, will be
valid.

THEO.
soc.

a matter of discord or tunefulness in music that has never been played, a gymnastic teacher could not judge better than a musician what will, when performed, seem tuneful even to a gymnastic teacher himself. THEO. Certainly not. soc. Then, too, when a banquet is in preparation the opinion of him who is to be a guest, unless he has training in cookery, is of less value concerning the pleasure that will be derived from the viands For we need not yet argue than that of the cook. about that which already is or has been pleasant to but concerning that which will in the each one
;

Of course. And again, in

future

to each one, is he himself the best judge for himself, or would you, which Protagoras at least as regards the arguments wih be persuasive in court to each of us be able to give an opinion beforehand better than anyone whatsoever who has no especial training ? THEO. Certainly, Socrates, in this, at any rate, he used to declare emphatically that he himself

seem and be pleasant

excelled everyone. otherwise soc. Yes, my friend, he certainly did nobody would have paid him a high fee for his conversations, if he had not made his pupils believe that neither a prophet nor anyone else could judge
;

137

PLATO
OVT
>

(JidvTlS
/
i

OVT

TIS

Cxo?

^eiVOV

KplVlV

O.V

Tl

avros.
0EO.
2n.
rrepl

OVKOVV Kal at vopoOeaiai


TO
1

/cat

TO

(L

fjieXXov eaTt, /<rat Tras av OjLtoAoyot TTO\LV TroXXaKis avdyKrjv elvai TOV

EO.
2fi.

MaAa

ye.

Trpo? TOV StSaovcaAoV avrco ofjioXoyelv crocfxJL)repov Te aAAov a'AAou zlvai Kal TOV /zev roiovrov oe TOJ dvemaTruJLOvi [Jirjoe eivat, [Jierpov efjiol

MeTpico?

apa

7^/ztv

crou

Lpr](jTai,

on

di'dyKirj

OTraxjTiovv

dvdyKriv

elvai

fmerpco

apri

fji

r)vdyKa,ei> 6 inrep eVetVou etVe tT roiovrov elvai.

yiyveaOai, oj$ Xoyos, etV

0EO.

'E/ceiV^ j^ot 8o/cet, cu StoKpaTes, fj,dXio~ra

a\iaK<jBoiL 6 Aoyo?, dXiOKOfjievos Kal ravrrj, f) rds TQJV dXXcov So^a? Kvpias Trotet, avrai Se efidvrjcrav

rovs eKeivov Aoyous" ouSa/x^ dXrjOels

rjyovjJLevat,.

2n.
eivai'

noAAa^^,
dXoir]
rrepl oe

c5
fjir)

0eoSajpe,
Trdcrav

/cat

a'AA^

dv TO ye

roiovrov

Travros

dXrjOfj
e

ooav
ojv at

TO rrapov e/caaTO) rrdOos,


at

alo~0ijais

Kal

Kara ravras ooai yiyvovrai,

XaX7TO)Tpov

ov$v Aeyw
of,

w$ OVK dXrjOelS' LO~OJS Se avaAcDTOt yap, et TV%OV, elaiv, Kal (f)daKovTs avrds evapyeis re eivai Kal emoTi^ua?
eXeiv

rd^a dv ovra
O7CO77OU

Aeyotev, /cat
atarOrjaiv

eiprjKev

Oefjievos.
1

Trpocrireov
airros at/ry MSS.;

eatV^TO? oe oi)/c (1776 Kal eTnaTTJfJL^v ravrov ovv cyyvrepaj, w? 6 ai/ry om. Schleiermacher.

138

THEAETETUS
better than himself what was in the future to be and seem. THEO. Very true. soc. Both lawmaking, then, and the advantageous are concerned with the future, and everyone would agree that a state in making laws must often fail
to attain the greatest

advantage

THEO. Assuredly.
soc. Then it will be a fair answer if we say to your master that he is obliged to agree that one man is wiser than another, and that such a wise man is a measure, but that I, who am without knowledge, am not in the least obliged to become a measure, as the argument in his behalf just now tried to oblige

me

to be,

whether
is

would or

no.
I

THEO. In that respect, Socrates,

think that the

most clearly proved to be wrong, and it is proved wrong in this also, in that it declares the opinions of others to be valid, whereas it was shown that they do not consider his arguments true

argument

at

all.

soc. In many other respects, Theodoras, it could be proved that not every opinion of every person is but it is true, at any rate in matters of that kind
;

more

prove that opinions are not true in regard to the momentary states of feeling of each person, from which our perceptions and the opinions
difficult to

But perhaps I am quite impossible to prove that they are not true, and those who say that they are manifest and are forms of knowledge may perhaps be right, and Theaetetus here was not far from the mark in saying that perception and knowledge are identical. So we must, as the argument in behalf of
concerning them
;

arise.

wrong

for

it

may be

139

PLATO
YlpcoTayopov X6yo$ eTrerarre, /cat aKerrreov rrjv 1 ravrr^v ovaiav Sta/cpouovTa, etVe vyies L ^ v 7T P^ etVe aaQpov (f)9eyyTa.i' f^d^rj &VTYJS ov
(frepofjLevrjv
<f>a.v\j]

01)8'

dAtyots" ye'yovev.

27.

0EO.

IToAAoi;

A<rat

8et

(f>av\rj

etvat,

dAAa
ol

TTfpt jLtev

r^

'IcDvtav feat e77tSt8ajcrt TrdfJLTroXv.


e

yap TOV 'HpaKXeiTOV iralpoi ^opr^yovai TOVTOV


TOV Xoyov /xaAa
2H.

/cat

e'

To) rot, a) ^t'Ae 0eo8a>pe, jLtaAAot' dpxfjs, tjaTrep avrol


IlavTaTTacrt
yLtev

0EO.
Trept
1

ovv.

/cat

yap,

c5

TOI;TCOV

TOJV

'Hpa/cAetreta>v

17,

tooTrep

cru
1

Aeyets , '0/x7ypeta>v /cat ert TraAatorepcov, /xev rots 77ept TT)V "E^eaor, oaot 2 e/x77etpot eti^at, oi)8ev fjidXAov olov re
1

aurots

are^yaj? yap /cara ra avyypdfju8' eTrtyLtetvat em Adya> /cat epcor^jLtart /cat ^au^tco? eV /xepet a77O/cptVaa^at ISO /cat epeoBai rJTrov aurot? eVt T) TO p,rjoev /xaAAov o / ^^ '^* "? ?> S\ V7TppaAAL TO QUO OfOCV TTpOS TO /XT^Oe (JfJilKpOV evewai rols avftpdaw ijcru^ta?. dAA' aV Ttva T:
^ rots olcrrpaJcnv.
(frepovrai,
1

fjiara

TO

'

<

6/0^,

OHJirep
Tt

e/c

^apeVpa?

p-^/uaTtcr/cta
,r]Tfjs

dTToro^evovcn, /caV TOVTOV

B Aouy,

eprjKev, eepa) TreTret /catva? 8e oi5SeVa a^TcDv ou8e ye e/cetvot auTOt 77po?

dAA' eu Travy
1

</>uActTTOUcrt

TO

jLt^Sev /5e)8atoi'

diaKpovovra
2
2/u.ireipoi fli>at

TW

dfcot^oi'Ta

B.

Vindob. 21

fyireipot

BT, Euseb.

140

THEAETETUS
us, come up closer and motion as the fundamental essence, rapping on it to see whether it rings sound or unsound. As you know, a strife has arisen about it, no mean one, either, and waged by not a few

Protagoras

enjoined upon

examine

this doctrine of

combatants. THEO. Yes, far from mean, and it is spreading far and wide all over Ionia for the disciples of Heracleitus are supporting this doctrine very vigorously. soc. Therefore, my dear Theodorus, we must all the more examine it from the beginning as they themselves present it. For it is no more THEO. Certainly we must. possible, Socrates, to discuss these doctrines of Hera;

you say, of Homer or even earlier with the Ephesians themselves those, at than least, who profess to be familiar with them with madmen. For they are, quite in accordance with their text-books, in perpetual motion but as for keeping to an argument or a question and quietly
cleitus (or, as

sages)

answering and asking in turn, their power of doing that is less than nothing or rather the words "nothing at all" fail to express the absence from these fellows of even the slightest particle of rest. But if you ask one of them a question, he pulls out puzzling little phrases, like arrows from a quiver, and shoots them off; and if you try to get hold of an explanation of what he has said, you will be struck with another phrase of novel and distorted wording, and you never make any progress whatsoever with any of them, nor do they themselves with one another, for that matter, but they take very good care to allow nothing to be settled either
;

See 168

B.

141

PLATO
lav ctvai
/-t^r*

rjyovfjievoi,

to?

eV Aoyco /x^r' eV rat? So/cet, ai)ro ardoi^ov ejitot


/cat /ca$' ocroi>

eivai'

rovro) Se TroW TroAe/noucrtv,


"Icrco?, co

Swavrat

eoScope, rows' aVSpa?

crot

elprjvevovcriv Se aAA', eratpot etatv

ou (jvyyeyovas' ov yap otftat, ra roiavra rots'

eVt cr^oA^? (frpd^ovoiv, ovs av fiovXaivrcu uTot? TTOifjaai.

ouSe ytIlotot? ^Lta^rats', c5 Sat/z,ovte; rcDy Totourcov erepos erepov yverat fjiaOr^mj?, aAA* dva^vovrai, oTroOev av T^T? e/caoros
EO.

IvQovoidaas, Kal TOV erepov 6 erepos ovSev 7]yetrat et'SeVat. Trapa (j,ev ovv TOVTCDV, orrep fja
pa>v,

OVK av

avrous
2n.

TTOTC Aa/3ot? Aoyov cure eKovrajv our' Se Set TrapaXafiovras


1

Kat

fjLeTpiojs

ye

Ae'y^t?.

TO ye

ST)

aXXo

TL 77apetA^</>a/xev Trapa /zev ra>v dp^aicuv /Ltera


TTLKpV7TTOfJLVCJt)V

77Ot7^Crea)S'

TOVS

TToXXoVS,
1

CO?

yeVecrt? TCOV d'AAcoy TrdvTCov 'O/ceayos re /cat TrjOvs pVf.tara rvy^dvei /cat ouSev ecrrrjKe, Trapd Se

varepaiv are ao(f>a^repa)V dva<f)av8ov ciT tva /cat ot crKVTorofjioi avra)V rrjv ',
dhcovcravres /cat Travacuvrai
fjiVOL TO, /^ev eordvaiy

ao<j>iav

At^tco? oto-

rd Se KiveioOai TOJV OVTOJV,

fjiaOovres Se

oAt'you Se

ort rrdvra Kivelrai TifJicjcnv avTOVs ; 7TXa66f.irjv J co OeoScope, ort d'AAot


a7T(f)r)i>avTO,

rdvavrla TOVTOIS 142

THEAETETUS
an argument or in suppose, that this is wage bitter war against they can, they banish it
in
I

their

own minds, thinking, being stationary but they


;

the stationary, and, so far as


altogether.

soc.

when them when they


friends

Perhaps, Theodoras, you have seen the men they are fighting, but have not been with
;
;

for they are no are at peace but I fancy they utter such of yours peaceful doctrines at leisure to those pupils whom they wish to make like themselves. THEO. What pupils, my good man ? Such people do not become pupils of one another, but they grow up of themselves, each one getting his inspiration from any chance source, and each thinks From these people, the other knows nothing.

then, as I was going to say, you would never get an argument either with their will or against but we must ourselves take over the question it and investigate it as if it were a problem of mathe;

matics.
soc.

Yes, what you say

is

reasonable.

Now

as

for the problem, have we not heard from the ancients, who concealed their meaning from the multitude by

their poetry, that the origin of all things is Oceanus and Tethys. flowing streams, and that nothing is at and likewise from the moderns, who, since rest they are wiser, declare their meaning openly, in order that even cobblers may hear and know their wisdom and may cease from the silly belief that some things are at rest and others in
;

motion, and, after learning that everything is But, motion, may honour their teachers ? Theodorus, I almost forgot that others teach the opposite of this,
in

143

PLATO
E
oibf a.K.ivt]Tov reXe^etv
/cat a'AAa ocra
1 o>

TTO.VT

Me'Atcrom re

/cat

HapfJieviSai evav-

rracrt

TOVTOIS Stto-ut^ovrai, a*? eV re


ecrrrjKev

77ra
%tOpOV

ecrrt

/cat

avTO ev aura
O)

ou/c
7TO.GL

fl

KiVelTCLi.

TOVTOIS OVV,

Talp,

TL %pr]cr6[jLe9a;

/cara afiiKpov
etV

yap

Trpo'CovTes AeAi]-

^a/xev
I

d^OTepcov
777^

TO

JJLCO-OV

TTtTTTCjOKOTes,

KOL

SI

ai^

/z^

a.fjivv6^voi oia^vycofjLev, St/c-^v Swao/Jtev

oi
,

eV

rat?

TraAatarpats'

Sta

OTCLV VTT* OL[Ji(f)OTCpCJV Ar)(f)6eVTS

LS

TavaVTLO,.

OOK6L OVV

fJLOL

TOVS

TpOVS

<JK7TTOV, </' OVO~7Tp WpfjUJaajJieV, TOVS pOVTCLS' /cat eav /xeV rt <f>a.iva)VTai Aeyo^re?, aweX^opei' /iter
CJLVTOVS, TOVS Tepovs eav Se ot rou 6'Aou crracrtcDTat dXrjOecrTepa (JL6VOL2 Aeyetv 8o/ccDcrt, (f)6V^6p,Oa Trap* avTOVs aV au ra d/ctV^ra KLVOVVTUJV. d/x^orepot 8* aV

fJiTpiov XeyovTes, yeAotot eao/xe^


itv TL Aeyetv <j)O.v\ovs oVraj, TtafJiTfaXaiovs 5e
/cat 7Tao~a6<f>ovs
a>

OeoScope,
EO.

et

aivopas drrooeSoKL^aKOTesAucrtreAet et? TOUOVTOV

opa ovv

TTpo'ievai,

K.iv'oVVOV.

OuSev

/xev

om' dvtKTov,

c5

Soj/coar
TOJV

ou
2

Stacr/ceJ/facr^at rt

Aeyouatv
;

e/ccxre/oot

Stallbaum
/a'

reX^^et

BT.
;
;

ai)roi)j

r&v

aTr'

OTT'

a& TWV Schleiermacher avT&v r&v wap ai)roi)s B

TTO/)'

ai/roi)s
Tra/)'

aTr'

rwi'

auroi)s

T.

144

THEAETETUS
So that
it is

motionless, the

name

of which

is

the All, 1

and all the other doctrines maintained by Melissus and Parmenides and the rest, in opposition to all these they maintain that everything is one and is stationary within itself, having no place in which to move. What shall we do with all these people, my friend ? For, advancing little by little, we have unwittingly fallen between the two parties, and, unless we protect ourselves and escape somehow, we shall pay the penalty, like those in the palaestra, who in playing on the line are caught by both sides and 2 I think, then, we dragged in opposite directions. had better examine first the one party, those whom we originally set out to join, the flowing ones, and if
;

we find their arguments sound, we will help them to pull us over, trying thus to escape the others ; but " the whole " seem if we find that the partisans of to have truer doctrines, we will take refuge with them from those who would move what is motionless.

But if we find that neither party has anything reasonable to say, we shall be ridiculous if we think that we, who are of no account, can say anything worth while after having rejected the doctrines of very ancient and very wise men. Therefore, Theodorus, see whether it is desirable to go forward into so great a danger. THEO. Oh, it would be unendurable, Socrates, not to examine thoroughly the doctrines of both parties.
Parmenides, line 98 (ed. Mullach). In its context the necessary but Plato may have quoted carelessly and may have used the indicative.
1

infinitive is
2

In the game referred to (called 8ie\KvcrTiv8a by Pollux, ix. 112) the players were divided into two parties, each of which tried to drag its opponents over a line drawn across the palaestra.

145

PLATO
28.
"SO,.

Z/CeTT

Lr)

GOV ye OVTU)
efvat rfjs

8o/cet

ovv

fjiOL

apx^
TTOT&

Kivrjcrea)? Trepi,

Trolov rt

dpa Xeyowcs
f\,

c^acrt

ra

TTOLVTO.

KiveloOai.

fiovXofjiai 8e Aey^ti'

TO rotoi^Se
axjTrep e/xot

Trorepov eV rt etSo? avrrj? Xeyovaiv


,

8uo; ^,17 /^-eWot (Jiovov e/zot dAAa o-fLtxeree Krac CTU, ta KOLv 7ra.ax a} lJLV Kal ^Tj. /cat ^Ltot Aeye* apa Kiveladai orav rt -^i^pav CK ^CLJpa? /zera^aAA^ ?} /cat eV TOJ
>

0EO.
2n.

rr-i

lofTO

"Eycoye. ^

>/

jLtet'

TOIVVV ev ecTTO) etoo?.

TIJ

orav oe
e/c

"

T)

/^e^ ev rai avra), yrjpdaKr) Se, ^ /xeAav

aK\r)pov

dAAotcoo-tv dAAottDrat,
<j)dvau Kivr/crecos;

CK /maXaKov yty^rat, i] rtva a apa oi)/c a^tov erepov etSos

EO.

1 "E/zotye So/cet.

2n.
EO.

'Avay/catov
ivijcreajs,

/>tev

ow. 2 Suo

817

Aeyco rovra)

dXXoioxjiv, rr^v Se

'QpOajs ye Aeytov.

2n.
^'S7y

Tovro roivvv OVTO>


TO, TrdvTOL fidcrKOVcriv

rot?

KivzlaOai

TOJfJiev'

TTorepov nav

<f>a.T

dfjL(j)OTpaj?
r)

/cat epcoKiveloBo.1.

(f)p6fj,v6v r
re'pa)?,

/cat dAAotou/zevoi',

TO
ou/c

jLteV
/

rt dyu^o-

TO
'

EO.

erepws; >A\\\ \A/>>/ AAAa /za At eycoye


ai^ (f>dvai

S'

e^;a

emziv
4

a/x^oWpcD?.
co

Et Se ye
2

/XT^,

eratpe, /ctvou/xeva re aurots*

AvayKa'iov
3

fj-ev

(popdv
4

doKel om. Stobaeus. ovv given to Theodorus


;

Trepi(popa.v

a rots
i'

eai'ro?s

by B. BT, Stobaeus. BT.

146

THEAETETUS
soc.

Then they must be examined,

since

think the starting-point of our examination of the doctrine of motion is this Exso urgent.
I
:

Now

you are

actly

what do they mean,


all
:

after

that
is

is only one kind of motion or, as I believe, two ? But it must not be my belief alone you must share it also, that if anything happens to us we may suffer it in common. Tell me, do you call it motion when a thing changes its place or turns round in the same place ?

this

things are in motion ? Do they mean to say that there


;

when they say What I wish to ask


all,

THEO. Yes.

Let this, then, be one kind of motion. Now a thing remains in the same place, but grows old, or becomes black instead of white, or hard instead of soft, or undergoes any other kind of
soc.

when

alteration, is it not proper to say that this is another kind of motion ? THEO. I think so. soc. Nay, it must be true. So I say that there " are these two kinds of motion alteration," and " motion in space."
:

THEO.
soc.

And you are right. Now that we have made

this distinction, let

us at once converse with those who say that all " Do things are in motion, and let us ask them, you mean that everything moves in both ways, moving
in space

both

and undergoing ways and another

alteration, or one thing in in one of the two ways


!

only ?" THEO.

But I think they By Zeus, I cannot tell would say that everything moves in both ways. soc. Yes otherwise, my friend, they will find that things in motion are also things at rest, and it will
;

147

PLATO
/cat ecrrcora

^ayetrat,

/cat

ov^ev {idXXov op0a>s


T)

L7TLV OTt /CtVetTttt TO.

TTOLVTCL

OTl

CTTr)KV.

0EO.

'AA^^ecrrara Ae'yet?. Ou/cow> eVetSi] KivelaQai avra Set, TO Se Kiveladai evelvai 1 LtSevt, Travra 81 77acrav

182 KLvrfaiv aet /avetrcu. 0EO. 'AvayKT^.


2fi.
rj

S/<:o7ret
"x)

XevKorrjTOS

rdS 17 />tot OTOVOVV yivzGiv

ov)( ovra> 7760? eAe-

yofjiev (jxivac

avrovs,

(frepecrOai e/cacrrov

rovrwv a^ta

KOI TTaO^OVTO? , 2 /cat TO /xev Trda^ov alaOrjriKov aAA' OT)/C ataOrjCFLV s aAA' 01) TTOLo yiyvzoBai, TO 8e TTOLOVV TTOLOV dAAo/coTov Te tcrcos" ow 77 TTOiorrjs a/u,a
GLia9ij(JL

JJLTav TOV TTOLOVVTOS T

6Vo/za /cat

OT)

/>te/3^

ow
/)
*/

a/couc.

Kara ^avBdvei? aOpoov Xeyofjievov TO yao TTOIOVV ovre OepjjLorrjs


Qtpf-Lov Se /cat Aeu/cov yiyvzrai, /cat
fj,fj,vrjarai
>\
/

ovre Aeu/coTT^?,

TaAAa
/

ouVar
r/

yap
e\

TTOV
^
r)

/cat
\

e*>
X

Tot?
/)'

Trpoauev OTt owTa)? eAeyo/zei',


etvatj
ft^S'
77/30?

ei^

fjirjoev

avro

/cat/

au TO TTOLOVV

Trda^oVy

aAA'
TO,?

TTOLOL

aAA^Aa avyyiyvo^ievajv /cat TO, aladrjrd aTTOTLKTOVTCL rd aTTa yiyveaOai, rd Se alaQavo^va.


MfJ,V7jfJ,ai'
77CO? 8'

fJiV

0EO.
2n.

OU;

To, /zev TOIWV aAAa ^atpetv e'aoxo/xei', etVe ' eVe/ca Aeyo/xeu, aAAco? etTe OWTCU? Xeyovcrw ov

rovro

IJLOVOV

<f>vXaTTa)/jLV,

epairaJvTes
rj

/cat pet, co? <f>are,


1

rd Trdvra;
BT.
;

yap;
alffdyjT^v
4

eVeti/eu

^^ efyai

2
ai<rd-r}TtK&i>

Burnet
;

aiffdrirbv

BT

Buttraann
;

alffdai'Ofj.ei'ov
3

Heindorf.

atidrjaiv

ahOrjaiv In

BT.

7ro(a

bt

Trot

BT.

148

THP:AETETUS
be no more correct to say that motion than that all things are at
THEO.
soc.
all

things are in

rest.

What you say is very true. Then since they must be

in

motion, and

since absence of motion must be impossible for anything, all things are always in all kinds of motion.

THEO. Necessarily.
soc.

Then just examine


find that

this point of their doctrine.

they say that heat or whiteness or anything you please arises in some such way as this, namely that each of these moves simultaneously with perception between the active and the passive element, and the passive becomes percipient, but not perception, and the active becomes, not a quality, but endowed with a quality ? Now perhaps quality seems an extraordinary word, and you do not understand it when used with general application, so let me give particular examples. For the active element becomes neither heat nor whiteness, but hot or white, and other things in the same way you
;

Did we not

probably remember that this was what we said earlier in our discourse, that nothing is in itself unvaryingly one, neither the active nor the passive, but from the union of the two with one another the perceptions and the perceived give birth and the latter become things endowed with some quality while the former become percipient. THEO. I remember, of course. soc. Let us then pay no attention to other matters, whether they teach one thing or another ; but let us attend strictly to this only, which is the Let us ask them, "Are all object of our discussion.
things,

and

flux

to according " Is that so

your
?

doctrine,

in

motion
149

PLATO
EO.

Nat.

2n.
EO.

QVKOVV

d/JL^orepa? a? StetAo/ze#a
reAe'co?

<f>p6jjievd re

Kal dAAotou/ieva; Ila)? S' ou; elnep ye


fjiev

$r)

aerat.
2n.

Et

Toivvv e(f)epero \LQVOV, rjXXoLovro Se

aV 77ou ei7Tu> ota arra pet ra


TTCOS

0EO.

QVTOJS.
'ETietSi^

2H.

Se

oi)Se

rovro

fievet,

TO

Aeu/cov

petv ro peo^, aAAa /zcra/ftaAAei, ware Kal OLVTOV TOVTOV elvai poijv, rrjs AevKorrjTOS, Kal
et? aAAi^v xpoctv, Iva jjir) ctAaj ravrrj fjievov, Trore olov re ri Trpoaenrelv xpwfJLd, ware

dpd
Kal

0EO. Kcu rt? /xr^^av^, co TiWKpares; TTJ aAAo ye Tt rcov rotourcov, e'lirep del \eyovros VTre^epverai, C / \

are

tl

or)

peov;

Tt Se Trepl alaOrjcrews epov/JLev OTTOLacrovv, olov rrjs rov opav r) aKoveiv; [Leveiv Trore eV aura)
2n.

TO! cjpav

0EO.
2n.

OVKOVV Set ye, etVep Trdvra Kivelrai. Owre apa opav Trpoapr^reov TL /xaAAov ^

opdv, ovSe TIV* aAXrjv aladr}GLV ftaAAov ^ ye Trdvrajs Kivov^evajv.


EO.

Ou yap
Kat
/z^i'

ouv.

2H.

aiaOrjais ye e'mcrr^it^, aiy

e(f>afj.V

cyc6 re /cat

0EO.

*Hv ravra.
B
;

\tyofj.fv

T.

150

THEAETETUS
THEO. Yes.
soc.

Have they then both kinds


? ?

of motion which
in space

we
also

distinguished

Are they moving


;

and

undergoing alteration
that

THEO. Of course perfect motion.

is,

if

they are to be in

soc. Then if they moved only in space, but did not undergo alteration, we could perhaps say what qualities belong to those moving things which are in flux, could we not ? THEO. That is right. soc. But since not even this remains fixed that the thing in flux flows white, but changes, so that there is a flux of the very whiteness, and a change of colour, that it may not in that way be convicted of remaining fixed, is it possible to give any name to a colour, and yet to speak accurately ? THEO. How can it be possible, Socrates, or to give a name to anything else of this sort, if while we are speaking it always evades us, being, as it is, in

flux?

But what shall we say of any of the percepsuch as seeing or hearing ? Does it perhaps remain fixed in the condition of seeing or hearing ? THEO. It must be impossible, if all things are in motion. soc. Then we must not speak of seeing more than not-seeing, or of any other perception more than of non-perception, if all things are in all kinds of motion. THEO. No, we must not.
soc.

tions,

soc. And yet perception Theaetetus and I said. THEO. Yes, you did say that.

is

knowledge,

as

151

PLATO
.

Ovoev apa
'Eot/care.

eTTLorrijfJLrjv

/xaAAof

?}

/XT)

[ir\v OLTreKpivdfJLeOa

eptorco/xeyot 6 TL

eanv
TO

183

0EO.

KaAov dV
dVo/cpurecos',

Ty/xty

CTU/x/JatVot

77po0LyxT7$etcrti>
ST)

aTroSettfat

on

Kivelrai,

Iva

eKeivr)
6(f>di'7] t

rj

aTTOKpicns op9rj

TO

o* , a)s eoiKev,

et TTOWTCL

ciTTOKpiais,

OTOV av TIS aTfOKpivr^ 6p9rj elvai, OVTCD T* ^X lv ^^vai /cat


Trepl

OVTCO, el oe ^ovXec, ylyvf.aQa.iy


ai>Toi>s TO)

Iva

jj,r)

'Qp9aj$ Aeyet?. TT\/ tt ? f\ ' T ourco co (yeoowpe, ort re enrov ye, llA^v w " >> ^ > " * "^^ KOLL O6i O OVO TOVTO OVTOJ OV% OVTOJ. f ^ " \ ~ tt >o> '^^ B\/ ouoe yap av ert KLVOLTO OVTOJ ovo Aeyeiv j> tt f tt 'O> au OVTO) ovoe yap TOVTO /XT) Kivr)0t,s' dAAa TIV* aXXrjv (frcovrjv OeTeov rot? TOV Aoyov rourov Ae'youCTtv, a? vvv ye rrpos TTJV avT&v VTfoQeaiv OVK H / > ouo OTTOJS. 1 e^oucrt prjfjLaTa, ei ^T) apa ro
tr

0EO.
2fl.
\ t f

OO\

>

<>

\V

\O>W
1

S'

OVTCDS

ai^

aurot? dp/xdrrot,
StdAe/cros am-?} avrot?.
roi7

0EO.
2H.

OiVetordr?]
Ou/coi7v, cu
TTOLVTOJV

yow

0edSape,

re

crou

era/pou

aTr^AAay/zefla, /cat OVTTCO cruy^cupou/xev aj)rcu TraVr*

dVSpa

xprjfjLaTOjv
CTnaTrjfjirjv

/xerpov

eivai,

av

re a*crOr]crw ov pr)o-6{ji0a /card ye r?yv rou Trdvra Kiveladai


(frpovifjios
3
)Lt7y

TIS

fj'

et

rt TTCU? aAAcos*

0eatr^ro?
c5

6'8e

Aeyet.

0EO.

"Aptcrr*
1

eip^/ca?,
/cat
6'7rwj

Scu spares"
Set

rourcov
crot

yap
2
5'

TrepavOevTOJV
otfrws

e/ze
;

aTnyAAd^at

BT

oiirws
3

W.
et>?7

om.

W.

ei

^ BT.

152

THEAETETUS
soc.

Then when we were asked " what


"

is

know-

we answered no more what knowledge is ledge ? than what not-knowledge is. THEO. So it seems. soc. This would be a fine result of the correction of our answer, when we were so eager to show that all things are in motion, just for the purpose of making that answer prove to be correct. But this, I think, did prove to be true, that if all things are in motion, every answer to any question whatsoever is equally correct, and we may say it is thus or not thus or, if you prefer, "becomes thus," to avoid giving them fixity by using the word "is." THEO. You are right.
soc. Except, Theodorus, that I said "thus," and " " not thus " but we ought not even to say " thus " would no longer be in motion for " thus nor, " " For there is no motion in " this again, not thus." either but some other expression must be supplied for those who maintain this doctrine, since now they
; ; ;
;

have, according to their own hypothesis, no words, unless it be perhaps the word " nohow." That might be most fitting for them, since it is indefinite. THEO. At any rate that is the most appropriate form of speech for them. soc. So, Theodorus, we have got rid of your friend, arid we do not yet concede to him that every man is a measure of all things, unless he be a sensible man and we are not going to concede that knowledge is perception, at least not by the theory of universal motion, unless Theaetetus here has some;

thing different to say. THEO. An excellent idea, Socrates for now that this matter is settled, I too should be rid of the duty
;

153

PLATO
a7TOKpw6[jLVov Kara ras avvO-qKas,
7Tiorj

TO

TOV Tlpajrayopov Aoyou


29.
0EAI.

reAos" CT^OITI.

KpaT7]$ re

/cat en)

A ITJ, Trpiv y civ, c5 eoScope, Zcorou? <f>d<JKovTo.s av TO TTOV ecrraa>

yat oidX6r]T, co&Trep aprt TTpovOeaOe.

0EO.

Neo?

cov,

eatV^re, rov? npeafivrepovs


>

a&iKelv Oiod(7Kis o/LtoAoyta? 77apa/3atVovras

aAAa

Trapao~Kvd,ov
Aoyov.
EAI.

OTTCOS

TWV

67TLXoi7ra>v

aFTrep

ye jSouA^rat.

178

terra

jLteW

oV

TJKOVcra Trepl ajv Aeya>.

0EO.
1

'iTnreas et? TreStov TrpoKaXei

Aoyous 7rpOKaAov[jLvos'
2n.

pa>Ta ovv
cu

'AAAa
Tt

jitot
1

So/cai,

0eoScope,

rrept

ye

KreAevet

eatr^ros ou
817

Tretcrecr^at aura).

0EO.
2il.

ow

01) Treicrecr^at ;

MeAiacrov /zev /<:at rou? aAAou?, ot cV e'crro? Ae'youo-t TO ?rav, atcr^y^o^e^o? /XT) (f)OpTiKa>s CTKOTTOJ/JLev,

T]TTOV atcr^wo/zat

7^

Hap/J.evior]s

Se

aiooiosTe fjioi
efjii^a

>O>/

jitot ?

^atVerat,
r/

eu>aia/za

eVa ovra Tlapp,vir]v. ' TO TOU " ' ^ oeivofTe.

yap

or]

TO) avSpt 77avu

yeW

vravu

/cat //,ot

<f)dvrj

fid9os Tt ^'x LV TTavrdrraai yevvalov.


/XT)

184

</oj8oi}jLtat

ow

ouVe

TO, Aeyo/xei^a

vvia>]uiv, Tt

Siavoovfjicvos et?re TroA?) TrXeov AetTrai/xe^a, /cat


a>pfJLr]Tai } e
i5?ro

TO /xeytaTOV, ov eVe/ca o Aoyo?


Tt
TTOT*

eartV,

ao~K7TTOV yeV^Tat

154

THEAETETUS
of answering your questions according to our agreement, since the argument about Protagoras is ended. THEAET. No, Theodorus, not until you and Socrates have discussed those who say all things are
at rest, as

you proposed just now. young man like you, Theaetetus, teaching your elders to do wrong by breaking their agreements No prepare to answer Socrates yourself for the rest of the argument. THEAET. I will if he wishes it. But I should have
THEO.
!

liked best to hear about the doctrine I mentioned. THEO. Calling Socrates to an argument is calling 1 Just ask him a cavalry into an open plain.

question

and you
soc.

shall hear.
I

not comply think, Theodorus, with the request of Theaetetus. THEO. Why will you not comply with it ? soc. Because I have a reverential fear of examining in a flippant manner Melissus and the others who teach that the universe is one and motionless, and because I reverence still more one man, Parmenides.
Still

I shall

Parmenides seems to me to be, in Homer's words, "one to be venerated" and also "awful." 2 For I met him when I was very young and he was very
old,

and he appeared to me to possess an absolutely


I am afraid we may not may be still farther from
;

noble depth of mind. So understand his words and

understanding what he meant by them

but

chief fear is that the question with which we started, about the nature of knowledge, may fail to be investigated, because of the disorderly crowd of
proverbial expression. An open plain cavalry desires. 2 Iliad, iii. 172 ; Odyssey, viii. 22 ; xiv. 234.
1

my

is

just

what

155

PLATO
Xoyaiv, et
d'AAcos"

ns

aurot?
rrXr^dzi

Treicrerat*

re

/cat

6V vvv eyeipo/jiev
cr/ce't/'eTat,

d^in-^avov ,

etre Tt? eV rrapepya)


IKCLVCOS,

dmt'

av rrdQoi,

/JLrjKVv6[ll'OS

TO

Set

Se

ouSerea, aAAd
T]/xa?

/cuet 77ept

eVtcrTTy^? TretpdaOcu
'

0EO.
2n.

'AAAd

X/37?' et SoACet, OL)T6D


a>

"Ert ToivvVy

eatrre,
CLLo9r]<JLV

rocroj-'Se

67TL(JKl(jCU.

yap

817

a.TTKpiva)'
EAI.

TI

yap;
/

Nat.
T 17 > h.t ot>v

2n.
/cat

rt?
'

ere

T^> wo

'

epojTO)7j'
/cat

fji&ava

opa avQpamos
etVot?

ra)

fiapea
EAI.

d/couet;

dV,

o?/xat,

\ ra) ra Aeu/ca rd o^ea /cat 6'ft/xacrt T


'

~.

/cat ajoiv.

2H.
jLtdrcoy

To
/cat

Se
JU,T]

ei>XpS
St'

TO>V

ovofjidrcov

re

/cat

p^p,ev

d/cpt/Seta? e^era^o/Jievov

rd

TroAAd ou/c dyevveV, aAAd /xdAAov TO rovrov ivavriov dveXevOepov, ecrrt Se ore dvay/catov, otov /cat i>w

dvdyKrj eiriXafiecrOai rfjs aTTOKpiaeuJS fy dvro/cptVet, OT)/C OKOTTCL ydp, drroKpiaLS Trorepa dpOr}. dpOorepa, a> dpco/uev, rovro etfat d<pBa\p.ovs, r)
St'

ou 6paJfjiV,

/cat

a)

d/coyo/zep',

a)ra,

T)

St'

ot5

0EAI.

At' cSv e/cacrra aloQ avowed a, e/zotye So/cet,

co 2c6/c/3are?,

/zaAAov ^ ot?.
TTOU,
c5

2n.
cv

Aetyoy yd/a
ojoTTep

vrat,

et

TroAAat

rti/e?

"TIP* iv,

ev

8ovpeioLs

LTTTTOLS,

156

THEAETETUS
will burst in upon us if we let especially as the argument we are now proposing is of vast extent, and would not receive its deserts if we treated it as a side issue, and if we treat it as it deserves, it will take so long as to do away with the discussion about knowledge. Neither of these things ought to happen, but we ought to try by the science of midwifery to deliver Theaetetus

arguments which

them

in

of the thoughts about pregnant. THEO. Yes, if that


to

knowledge with which he


is

is

your opinion, we

ought

do

so.

Consider, then, Theaetetus, this further point said. Now you answered that perception is knowledge, did you not? THEAET. Yes. soc. If, then, anyone should ask you, " By what does a man see white and black colours and by what " does he hear high and low tones ? you would, I
soc.

about what has been

By his eyes and ears." THEAET. Yes, I should. soc. The easy use of words and phrases and the avoidance of strict precision is in general a sign of good breeding indeed, the opposite is hardly worthy of a gentleman, but sometimes it is necessary, as now
fancy, say,
;

"

it is is

necessary to object to your answer, in so far as it Just consider which answer is more correct, that our eyes are that by which we see or that through which we see, and our ears that by which or that through which we hear ? THEAET. I think, Socrates, we perceive through, rather than by them, in each case.
incorrect.
;

if

soc. Yes, for it would be strange indeed, my boy, there are many senses ensconced within us, as if 157

PLATO
,

dAAd

/ZT)

els

piav riva

tSe'av,

etT

Tt ^ e ^ KaAetv, Trdvra

ravra

^vvreivei,

Std

TOVTOJV

olov

opydvaiv

alaO avowed a

oaa

0EAI.

'AAAa

/zot So/cet

ovra> /xaAAov

-^

Kiva>s.

2n.
t

TouSe rot
rjfjLtov

eVe/ca

aura

crot

Sta/cpi/foifyzai,
jLtet'

rtvt

avraJv rai avro) Std

6<f)6aX[jLcJi)v

<f)iKvovfjLe9a

AevKwv re Kal
av TLV&V, et? TO

jLteAavcov,

Std Se TOJV
epajrcjfjievos

d'AAcov

4repa)v

/cat

e^et?

rrdvTCL TO,

rotaura

crto/xa

dvacfxEpeLV.

taco?

8e jSe'Artov ae Aeyetv aura dnoKpivo^vov fjidXXov


7}

e/>te

TJTre/3

crou

TroAurrpay/zoj'eti'.
/cat /cat

/cat

jitot

Aeye*
coi^

Kov^a yAw/cea St' oK\r]pd alaOdvei, apa ou rou CTcoftaros e/caCTra riOrjSi
Bep/Jid
/cat
1

aAAou rtvos ;
1

EAI.

OiJSevos' aAAou.
T

2n.
/->>
J/
I

/cat

e^eA^o-et? ojuoAoyetv,
y

185 SiW/xea>?

aladdvi
C>

raur
t S>

> ? n / /i ctLOueaUau,, OLOV

a St' erepa? aSwaroy efvat St' aAA^s M \c>>> ^ 5 '"/ a ot a/co^?, ot o//eaj?, r/ a
1

>

>

oifJO)S, ot

a/co^?;

EAI.

rials'

yap
apa

ou/c edehrjcra);
77ept

2n.

Et

rt

a/z^orepcDV Stavoet, ov/c av


oi)S'

8ta ye TOU erepov opydvov,


Trept dfjL(f>orepa)v

au

Std,

TOU erepov

alaOdvoC av.

0EAI.

Ou yap ow.
Ilept
ST) (bujvfis

2n.

Kal

Trept

^poa? Trpajrov

fj,ev

158

THEAETETUS
many wooden horses of Troy, and they unite in one power, whether we should call it soul or something else, by which we perceive through these as instruments the objects of perception. THEAET. I think what you suggest is more likely than the other way. soc. Now the reason why I am so precise about the matter is this I want to know whether there is some one and the same power within ourselves by which we perceive black and white through the eyes, and again other qualities through the other organs, we were
do not
so
all
:

will be able, if asked, to refer all But perhaps it is better such activities to the body. that you make the statement in answer to a question than that I should take all the trouble for you. So tell me do you not think that all the organs through which you perceive hot and hard and light and sweet are parts of the body ? Or are they parts

and whether you

of something else

THEAET.

soc. agree that it is impossible to perceive through one sense what you perceive through another for instance, to perceive through sight what you perceive through hearing, or through hearing what you perceive through
;

Of nothing else. And will you also be ready to

sight

THEAET.
soc.

Of course I shall. Then if you have any thought about both

of these together, you would not have perception about both together either through one organ or through the other. THEAET. No.
soc.

Now in

regard to sound and colour, you have, 159

PLATO
avTO TOVTO
0EAI.
Trepl dp,(f)OTpa)v
rj

Stavoet,

on

"Eya>ye.

2H. Tepov,

QVKOVV
Tt

/cat

art

e/cdVepov

eKarepou

/xet>

avTO> oe TOLVTOV;
/x-^v;

EAI.

2n.
0EAI.

Kat

6Vt

a^OTepaj
Krai

Suo, eKoirepov Se eV;

Km
1

TOVTO.
etre avo^oia) etre
o/Ltotco

2H.

OUKOW
"Icraj?.

aAA^-

Aotv, Suvaros et eTriaKei/jaaOai;

0EAI.

2n.
voet;

Taura S^
oure yap

TrdVra Sta rtVo?

Tic/at

aurotv 8taolov re TO

St* d/co^s"

ovre

St' 6i/Ja)s

Xa.p,f3dvw 7Tpl avTwv. eVt Se /cat roSe el yap OVVCLTOV eit] TK[Jiijpiov rrepl ov Xeyo^ev

KOIVOV

d(ji(f)OTep(ju

OLGU OTI eget? etTrety to eTriOKeyei, KCU, TOVTO OVTC OVT6 aKorj ^atVerat, dAAa TL a'AAo. W ^ O> > O \ /\ \ rp It o ov /xeAAet; ^ ye ota rr^? EAI.
/

f\t

oKei/jaaOai, w>

>*?*

dp*

<JTOV
//

dXfjLVpaj \ *

r)

ov,
if

i.

TO

TOVTOLS orjXol croi, ecrTtv ov/c ecrTt," a> TO eVovo/xa^ets /cat TO /cat a vw ST^ rjpajTcofjLev Trepl OLVTOJV; TOVTOIS Tfdai
'
' '
1

T* eVt Traat

KaAcDs' Aeyet?. 17 8e KOIVOV /cat TO

897

Sta

em

Trota

aTToScoo-ets'

opyava

St*

coi^

aloOdveTO.i rj^Lwv

TO ala6ai>6iJLVov e/caaTa;
EAI.

Ovcriav Aeyet?

/cat

TO /x^ etvat,

/cat o/xoto-

160

THEAETETUS
in

the

first

place, this thought about both of


?

them,

that they both exist

THEAET. Certainly. soc. And that each is different from the other and the same as itself? THEAET. Of course. soc. And that both together are two and each
separately
soc.
is

one

THEAET. Yes, that

also.

are you able also to observe whether they are like or unlike each other ?

And

THEAET.
soc.

about them

you think all this impossible to grasp that which is common to them both either through hearing or through sight. Here is further evidence for the
?

May be. Now through what organ do


For
it is

point I am trying to make if it were possible to investigate the question whether the two, sound and colour, are bitter or not, you know that you will be able to tell by what faculty you will investigate it, and that is clearly neither hearing nor sight, but
:

something

else.
it
is,

THEAET. Of course through the tongue.


soc.

the

faculty

exerted

faculty

Very good. But through what organ is the exerted which makes known to you that

which is common to all things, as well as to these of which we are speaking that which you call being and not-being, and the other attributes of things, about which we were asking just now ? What organs will you assign for all these, through which that part of us which perceives gains perception of each and all of them ? THEAET. You mean being and not-being, and likeF 2

161

PLATO

DW erepov,
avr<w.

Kal TO TCLVTOV re Kal TO rrjra /cat avo^LOiorrira, > &\ J/\ \ U f\ ert oe ev re /cat TOV aAAov apw^ov Trept
tt \
\

S^Aov 8e ort /cat apnov re /cat TfepiTTOv epajra?, /cat raAAa oaa Tourot? eVerat, 3ta TWOS TOJV rou CTaj/zaTo? T7y ^XT? aloBavo^eQcL. 'TTrepeu, c5 eatr^re, (X/coAou^ets , /cat eartv
1

a cpajTOJ avTa raura. EAI. 'AAAa /xa Ata, cS Sco/cpares , eycoye OT)/C aV e^ot/xt etVetv, TrA^v y* ort ftot So/cet ri]v apxty
1

ovS'

elvai

TOIOVTOV ovoev TOVTOIS opyavov

'LOLOV

O)O-7Tp 6K6WOIS, dAA' ttUTl) 8t' OLVT7]$ r) $V)(r) /cotva /xot ^atVerat Tre/ot TTOLVTOJV emaKOTrelv.

TO.

2H.

KaAo? yap

ef,

cu

eatTryTe,

/cat

01;^;,

cos

o yap /caAaj? Aeycov e'Aeye eoScopo?, atcr^pos" /caAo? re /cat aya$o?. 77po? Se rai /caAw eu eTroirjad?
/Lte

/xaAa ovxyov Aoyou aTraAAa^a?,


/.tev

et

^atVerat
ret
*

crot

ra

Sta o /cat
Sd^at.

auTT) 8t* avTrjs TCOV rou crwiJLaros

r)

J/fu^' ?

e77tcr/co7retv,
/

8e
>

\?^, avTO)
2n.

><>/

ovvd/JLecov.

/xot

eoo/cet,

'o^

TOVTO yap ^v
oe
^^
/cat
crot

epovAop,rfv

186

EAI.

'AAAct

30.

^atVerat ye. nore'pcov ouv ri^ry? TT)V ovcjLav ;

^v

TOVTO

yap

/xaAtcrra e77t TTOLVTCDV 0EAI. 'Eya>


/

77Ope yeTat.
2.Q.

'H
/cat

/cat

TO

ofJLOLOV

/cat

TO avofjLOLOv

/cat

TO

raurov
0EAI.
2fl.

Nat.

Tt

Se';

/caAoi' /cat

ala^pov
8o/Cet
TT)V

/cat

dya^ov

/cat

ica/cdv;

EAI.

Kat TOUTOJV

/LtOt

eV

TOtS"

jJidXlO-TOL

Trpos

d'AA^Aa

o*/co77eta#at

ouatW,

dvaAoyt-

162

THEAETETUS
and unlikeness, and identity and difference, unity and plurality as applied to them. And you are evidently asking also through what bodily organs we perceive by our soul the odd and the even and everything else that is in the same
ness

and

also

category.
soc.

Bravo, Theaetetus
just

you follow

me

exactly

that

is

what

mean by my

question.

THEAET. By Zeus, Socrates, I cannot answer, except that I think there is no special organ at all for these notions, as there are for those others but it appears to me that the soul views by itself directly what all things have in common.
;

and not, he who speaks beautiBut besides being fully is beautiful and good. beautiful, you have done me a favour by relieving me from a long discussion, if you think that the soul views some things by itself directly and others through the bodily faculties for that was my own opinion, and I wanted you to agree. THEAET. Well, I do think so. soc. To which class, then, do you assign being for this, more than anything else, belongs to all
soc.

Why, you

are beautiful, Theaetetus,

as

Theodorus

said,

ugly

for

things

THEAET. I assign them to the class of notions which the soul grasps by itself directly. soc. And also likeness and unlikeness and identity

and difference
soc.

THEAET. Yes.

And how about


?

beautiful

and ugly, and good

and bad

THEAET. I think that these also are among the things the essence of which the soul most certainly

163

PLATO
ev
eavrfj
ra,

yeyovora
re

KOI ra Trapovra
rrjv TOT;

77/90? TO. /Lte'AAoi'ra.


2fl.

"E^e
rr)i>

817*

8td TT^?
EAI.

jttey aKXrjpov ata^creTat, /cat fJLaXaKorrjra dxjavTOJs;

d'AAo

rou

eVa^?

Nat.
8e ye ovoiav
/cat

o rt ecrrov

/cat

r^r

Trpos dXXrjXoj /cat r^v ovaiav av rfjs auri) 07 'A^'X''? eVai^toucra /cat ovfjifidX-

Xovaa
2n.

EAI.

Trpos dXXrjXa Kpiveiv Tretparat Ilavu /xev ouv.

7^/xtv.

Oi)/cow ra /xev ev9vs yevo/zeVot? Trdpecm aladdveadaL dvdpa)7TO(,s re /cat dypiois, ocra Std rou o-aj/zaTos" TraOij/jiara eVt r^v i^v^v retVef ra Se 77pt TOUTCOV avaAoytcr/xara TTpos re ovolav
(f>vor6L

jjidrajv

/cat cu</>eAetav /xoyt? /cat /cat TratSet'as


1

eV \povco 8td TroAAcD^ TTpayTrapaytyverat of? av /cat

?rapay iyvr^roa ; EAI. IlavTaTraat /xev ovv. 2n. Ofov re ow dXrjOeia? TV^elv, EAI. 'ASvVarov.
2fi.

a>

jU^Se ovart,as;
TTOTC

Ou

8e dXrjOeias TLS
ecrrat;
TTO)? aV, ai

aru^aet,

TOVTOV

EAI.

Kat
'Ev
ev

jLtev

apa rot?
TO>

7ra.9rnJLa.aiv
e'/cetVcov

OVK

eVt

e?7t-

Se

Trept

cruAAoytcr/j,a>'

ovcrias yap /cat dXrjOeias evravOa /xeV, to? eot/ce, Suj^arov difjaaOaL, e/cet Se aSwarov.
EAI.

OatVerat.
T

2n.

H ow
1

raurov

e'/cetvo

/cat

TOVTO

/caAets ,

roaavTas
164

$La<f>opds e^ovre;
ToCro] TO.VTO

ravrbv B.

THEAETETUS
views in their relations to one another, reflecting within itself upon the past and present in relation to the future. Does it not perceive the hardsoc. Stop there. ness of the hard through touch, and likewise the softness of the soft ? THEAET. Yes. soc. But their essential nature and the fact that
1

they exist, and their opposition to one another, and, in turn, the essential nature of this opposition, the soul itself tries to determine for us by reverting to

them and comparing them with one

another.

THEAET. Certainly. soc. Is it not true, then, that all sensations which reach the soul through the body, can be perceived by human beings, and also by animals, from the moment of birth whereas reflections about these, with reference to their being and usefulness, are acquired, if at all, with difficulty and slowly, through many troubles, in other words, through education ? THEAET. Assuredly.
;

soc.

Is

it,

who cannot even get as far as "being ? THEAET. No. soc. And will a man ever have knowledge of ? anything the truth of which he fails to attain THEAET. How can he, Socrates ? soc. Then knowledge is not in the sensations, but for it is in the process of reasoning about them
;

" truth then, possible for one to attain "

"

possible, apparently, to

apprehend being and truth

by reasoning, but not by sensation. THEAET. So it seems. soc. Then will you call the two by the same name, when there are so great differences between them ?
165

PLATO
EAT.
2fl.

QVKOVV
Tt ovv
817

ST)

StfcatoV ye. eKeiro) d77o8iSa>? 6i>o/za, TO> opaV,

OiKoveiv, 6a<f>pa{vea9ai,, ijJvxeaOai', 0ep/zaiVecr$at; EAI. Aloddv<j9ai eya>ye' ri yap d'AAo;

2n.
0EAI.

Su^tTrav

d'p'

auro /caAet? a'io9r)aw;

'Ai/ay/ci).

2H.
EAI.

^Dt ye, </a/,teV, ou ouSe ya/o ovaias.


^ Uuo
/
v

Ou yap
1

>

>/

2n.
EAI.

a/3

Ou

yap.
a)

Ou/c ap* av etry Trore, re Kal eVtCTTx rawrov.

QeaiTrjTe, aicrOrjcris
jLtaAtcrra

^ac EAI. Ou </>aiVerai, c5 2c6/cpare9. ye i>w /cara^ave'cTTaTov ye'yovev aAAo 6V 187


2n.

'AAA* ou rt juep' 87) TOVTOV ye eVeK'a rjpxoa StaAeyo/zevot, tva eupco/xev rt TTOT' OUK ear* dAAa Tt ecrrtv. ofJLOJS 8e rocrovrov ye
,

TO

cocrre /LIT) ^retv avrty ev atcr^^oret TrapctTrav, aAA' ev e/cetVaj TW ovo/xaTt, o Tt TTOT' e^et -^ ^X^l> OTOLV avrr] Kad* avrrjv

Trept TO,

ovra.

EAI.
cos
1

'AAAa

/>tr)v

TOVTO ye /caAetTat,

a)

\w v >' o\ />' '/"v fJ'X 2n. (Jpua)$ yap otet, a> 0tAe. /cat opa 01) 77aAty e^ dpx^?, rravra ra rrpoaOev e^aXeiifsas, et Tt /taAAo^ Kadopas, eVetSo) evravOa TrpoeXij
Kal Ae'ye avOis ri
31.
EAI.

eyaijLtat, V

So^d^etv.

Aofav

TTOT' earlv e-TTiarr^Jir]. Trdcrav etTretr, /itev

a>

166

THEAETETUS
THEAET. No, that would certainly not be right. soc. What name will you give, then, to the one which includes seeing, hearing, smelling, being cold, and being hot ? THEAET. Perceiving. What other name can I
give
it ?

soc.

THEAET.
soc.

Collectively you call Of course.


say,

it,

then, perception

By which, we

we

are quite unable to

apprehend truth, since we cannot apprehend being,


either.

THEAET.
soc.

No

certainly not.
either, then.

Nor knowledge

THEAET. No.
soc. Then, Theaetetus, perception and knowledge could never be the same. THEAET. Evidently not, Socrates and indeed now at last it has been made perfectly clear that know;

something different from perception. But surely we did not begin our conversation in order to find out what knowledge is not, but what it is. However, we have progressed so far, at least, as not to seek for knowledge in perception at all, but in some function of the soul, whatever name is given to it when it alone and by itself is engaged
ledge
is

soc.

directly with realities. THEAET. That, Socrates,

is, I

suppose, called having


friend.

opinion.
soc.

You suppose

rightly,

my

Now

begin

again at the beginning. Wipe out all we said before, and see if you have any clearer vision, now that you

have advanced to this point.

Say once more what


is

knowledge

is.

THEAET. To say that

all

opinion

knowledge

is

167

PLATO
Kpares, aSvvarov, erreiorj Kal favors ecrrt 8oa* Kiv$vvVL oe rj dXrjdrjs So^a emor?]/^ etvat, /ecu TOVTO d,77O/ce/cpicr#a>. edv 'yap /ZT) (f>avfj rrpoIJLOL
iovatv, a)o~7Tp TO vvv, d'AAo

77etpaao/ze$a Aeyetv.

2n.
fJLOJS

Oura) fjiVTOi XP*1> & ecttV^re, Aeyetv TrpodvjLtaAAoV, ^ CO? TO TTpWTOV O)KV61S OL
r) 7}

cav yap ovra> Spto/xev, Suotv Odrepa,

e^>'

o epxofJieOa,
'

rjrrov ot^cro/xe^a elBevai o


e'irj

Kairoi OVK av
/<:at

/ze/ZTrros'

fiiaOos 6 TOIOVet'Seotv

/cat ST)

vw

rt 9^7]?;

Suotv ovrotv

TOU
v dXr)9fj

jitev

dATy^tvou, ijjevSovs Se rou ere/oou,


eTncrTrjjJLrjv

So^av

opt^et;

0EAI.

2H.
TraAtv

T
;

"Eycoye*

rouro yap au
er*

vw

/zot

Ap*

ow

aftov Trept

So^?

0EAI.
2fi.

To

77Otov 817 Aeyet?;

XOLKLS,

pdrrei, /xe TTCOS" war* V drropiq

vw

re

/cat

d'AAore

87)

TroA-

Trpo? d'AAov yeyoveVat,


ecrrt

rroXXfj rrpos e/jiavrov /cat OUAC e^ovra elrcelv ri TTOT*

TOVTO TO rrdOos

Trap*

T^AV

/cat

rtVa rporfov

0EAI.

2H.

To Tfolov Stj; To So^d^etv rtvd

ifjv$fj.

O-KOTTOJ

Sr)

/cat

ert Storrd^cov, TroTepov edaco/zev ayro d'AAov Tporrov r) oXiyov rrporepov. ijja)jJL60a

eVta/ce-

0EAI.

Tt

ft 17^,

to

Sco Kpares,
ctprt

e'irrep
01)

ye

/cat

07777cry

TIOVV
1

^atVerat Setv;
Burnet
;

yap
SB-T?

/ca/cal?

yc

oTTTjriouJ'

bicriyovv

700^

biryovv T.

168

THEAETETUS
impossible, Socrates, for there is also false opinion ; but true opinion probably is knowledge. Let that be my answer. For if it is proved to be wrong as

we proceed, given this.

I will

try to give another, just as

have

It is soc. That is the right way, Theaetetus. better to speak up boldly than to hesitate about For if we act in this answering, as you did at first. will of two one happen either we shall things way, find what we are after, or we shall be less inclined
:

we know what we do not know at all and that would be a recompense not to be even surely Well, then, what do you say now ? Asdespised. suming that there are two kinds of opinion, one true and the other false, do you define knowledge as the
to think
;

true opinion ? THEAET. Yes.


correct.

That now seems

to

me

to be

soc. Is it, then, still worth while, in regard to ? opinion, to take up again THEAET. What point do you refer to ? soc. Somehow I am troubled now and have often

so that I have been much perplexed in my own reflections and in talking with others, because I cannot tell what this experience

been troubled before,

is

which we human beings have, and how


THEAET.
soc.

it

comes

about.

What

That anyone has false opinions. And so I am considering and am still in doubt whether we had better let it go or examine it by another method than the one we followed a while ago. THEAET. Why not, Socrates, if there seems to be the least need of it ? For just now, in talking about
169

experience

PLATO Km
E
QeoScvpos eAe'yere o^oA^?
rrepi,

01?

ouSev eV

rots' rototcrSe /careTret'yet.

2n.

'QpOajs

VTrefjiVYjcras.

LCTCOS

yap

OVK

aV6

a)CT7Tp

t^O? fJLCTeev.
TToXv
p,r)

KpLTTOV

yap

TTOV afjLLKpov

rj

iKavws Trepdvai.

EAI.

Tt
ncDs" ovv;

2n.
/

ri
^
/

Srj

/cat /cat

Aeyo/uev;
/

TOV o av

>O>^'\/1^f a)S
aArjUT],

etvat

>

oo^aj^,

rtya

iffevSrj '^

> / // (pvaei OVTCDS ey^o

T)/XO>V "

EAI.

188

2fl.

Oa/iev yap Ou/cow ro8e

y'

e'cr0'

7ztv 77et Trdvra


etSeVat;

/cat

/ca$* e/cacrrov,

^Vot etSeVat

T) /ZT^

yap
\ /

/cat

TTi\a.v9dv(j6ai /xera^u rourcov co? 6Vra


ev rai Trapovri'
50. /

^atpetf

Afi'yco
\

vvv yap

r^i^l

Aoyov eorw ouoev. 0EAI. 'AAAa ft 7]i^,

c5

Sco/cpare?, aAAo y*
/XT)

AetVerat vrept e/cao-rov TrA^ eiSevai ^


rt otSev

etSeVat.

EAI.
2fl.

Kat

/x^v et'Sora

et'Sora etSeVat
EAI.

ye aSwarov.
ou;

/XT)

etSeVat TO auro

Hco?
^Ap'
01)

S'

2n.
oterat
/cat

o ra i/feuS^ Soaa>i', a ofSe, ravra ravra efvat aAAa ere pa cirra &v otSe,
oi;v
etScbs"

aju-^orepa

ayvoet a

170

THEAETETUS
you and Theodorus said very truly that there no hurry in discussions of this sort. soc. You are right in reminding me. For perhaps this is a good time to retrace our steps. For it is better to finish a little task well than a great deal
leisure,
is

imperfectly.

THEAET.
soc.
it

of opinion there is a false opinion, and one of us has a false, and another a true opinion, because, as we believe, it is in the nature of things that this should be so? THEAET. Yes, we do.
soc. Then this, at any rate, is possible for us, is it not, regarding all things collectively and each thing separately, either to know or not to know them ?

that

Of course. How, then, shall we set about it ? What we do say ? Do we say that in every case

is

For learning and forgetting, as intermediate stages, leave out of account for the present, for just now they have no bearing upon our argument. THEAET. Certainly, Socrates, nothing is left in any particular case except knowing or not knowing it. soc. Then he who forms opinion must form opinion either about what he knows or about what he does not know ? THEAET. Necessarily. soc. And it is surely impossible that one who knows a thing does not know it, or that one who does not know it knows it. THEAET. Certainly. soc. Then does he who forms false opinions think that the things which he knows are not these things, but some others of the things he knows, and so, knowing both, is he ignorant of both ?
I

171

PLATO
EAI.

'AAA' O&VVCLTOV,
A \ \ AAA

to

2n.

apa, a

rt

TO
/<rat

>

p,tj

oioev, 7)yetTat

aura

erepa arra tu^ ^77 otSe,


Xafielv a)$

TOVT* cort TO)

eis T-^V Stavotav /x^re ^coKpdrrj 6 ^a)Kpdrr)s eatr^rosr -^ o


ct'Sort

0EAI.
5fl.
^

/u,7y

\T oioer aura earn,


TO

Kat TTOJ? aV; / >A-\\J> AAA ov fJ<r]V, a ye


fi

ris*

otoev, oterat TTOU


X

?<$

ouo au a

O.

TO

/AT)

otoev,

TO otoep'.

EAI.

Tepas yap earat.


ricu?

2H.

ow

ai^

ert

ifrevbfj

So^acretev;

e/cro?
TTOLVT

yap TOVTOJV dSvvarov TTOV So^a^etv, eTretVep OVK lafjiev, Iv Se TOWTOts" ov^a/jiov rj icrfjiev r]
Suj^aroy i/Jv$rj So^acrat.
EAI.

Acara TO eioevai /cac

\5<>/

/LIT)

\5o/ etdevat

o
>/

tovra?,

'^^ aAAa /cara


v v

ro etvat Kal
EAI.

\J.TII

2H. MT) avrAow ovv So^d^cov OVK

T\T\f-v^-?" ort
rj

floj? Ae'yets*;

o ra

e>

JU.T)

\v ovra

Trept

<* OTOVKav

.08*

ays

ov

ifsevorj

So^acret,

OTTOJOOVV aXXojs TO, rf]$


EAI.

EiVo? y* au,
rtcas*

a>

2n.

ow;

rt e'pou/xev, a>
'

eatr^re,

eai^ rt?

^/xa? dvcLKpivri/cat

rt?

avOp(.o7TO)v

ovvarov Se orcoovv o Ae'yerai, TO /z^ 6V So^acret, eiVe


/cat

OVTOJV TOV etVe auTo /ca^' auTO ";

172

THEAETETUS
THEAET. That
soc.
is

impossible, Socrates.

Well then, does he think that the things he does not know are other things which he does not know which is as if a man who knows neither
Theaetetus nor Socrates should conceive the idea that Socrates is Theaetetus or Theaetetus Socrates ? THEAET. That is impossible. soc. But surely a man does not think that the things he knows are the things he does not know, or again that the things he does not know are the things he knows. THEAET. That would be a monstrous absurdity. soc. Then how could he still form false opinions ? For inasmuch as all things are either known or unknown to us, it is impossible, I imagine, to form within opinions outside of these alternatives, and

them

it

is

clear that there

is

no place

for

false

opinion.

THEAET. Very true. soc. Had we, then, better look for what we are seeking, not by this method of knowing and not knowing, but by that of being and not being ? THEAET. What do you mean ?

soc. may simply assert that he who on any subject holds opinions which are not, will certainly think falsely, no matter what the condition of his mind may be in other respects. THEAET. That, again, is likely, Socrates.
if

We

soc. Well then, what shall we say, Theaetetus, " Is that which is assumed in anyone asks us, common speech possible at all, and can any human being hold an opinion which is not, whether it be concerned with any of the things which are, or be

entirely independent of

them

"

We,

fancy, shall

173

PLATO
E
'

877,

CO?
aXr]0rj

OIKV, TTpOS

TOLVTOL
'

(f)T]aOfJLV
rj

OTCLV

0EAI.
T
211.

ot^rat oto/zevos" OuTO)?.

TTCOS epou/zev;

ovv Kal aXXoOi TTOV TO roiovrov ecrnv;


TTOLOV;
<
**.

EAI.

To
TTH/
Jjjt

2H.
EAI.
.

Tts*

opa
TTOJS;
/XT^V

/xev rt,

$ >^/ opa be ovoev.


f
<

Kat 'AAAa
CTI)

et

T^

otet Trore

eV ye rt opa, ra>y oVrcov rt TO eV ev rot? {j,r) ovaiv eivai;


<
**

EAI.

C/~\

2H.
EAI.

Oi)/c eycoye. W >/ /

apa ev ye
o

rt opcov ov rt o/oa.

**

OatVerat.

189

2n.

Kat

apa

rt OLKOVOJV eV ye' rt d/couet fcai 6V

a/<:oyet.

EAI.
2fl.

Nat.

Kat o

drrTOfjievos 817 rou, eVo?

ye TOU aVre-

rat

/cat

ovros, etTrep eVo?;

EAI.
2fl.

Kat rouro.
'0 8e
'0
Si)

So^a^ajv oup^ ev rt
So^a^ajv ou/c 6V rt;

EAI.

'Avay/o^.
8' eV rt

2n.
EAI.
2il.

Suy^copai. '0 apa /^ 6V


Oi) ^>atVerat.

EAI.

2n.

'AAAa

^T)V

6'

ye

jLt^Se^

8ofaa>v ro

7ra.pa.7Tav

ovSe
EAI.

A^Aov, a? eou<ev.
1

tv TI

BT

eV 76'

n W.

174

THEAETETUS
reply, "Yes, when, in thinking, he thinks what is not true," shall we not ? THEAET. Yes. soc. And is the same sort of thing possible in any other field ? THEAET. What sort of thing ? soc. For instance, that a man sees something, but

sees nothing.

THEAET.
soc.
(t

How

can he
if

Yet surely
is

sees something that "

one

among
I

any one thing, he you, perhaps, think the things that are not ?
a
sees
is.

man

Or do

THEAET. No,
soc.

do not.
sees

Then he who

any one thing, sees some-

thing that is. THEAET. That


soc.

is clear.

therefore he who hears anything, hears some one thing and therefore hears what is. THEAET. Yes.
soc. And he who touches anything, touches some one thing, which is, since it is one ? THEAET. That also is true. soc. So, then, does not he who holds an opinion hold an opinion of some one thing ? THEAET. He must do so. soc. And does not he who holds an opinion of some one thing hold an opinion of something that is ?

And

THEAET.
soc.

agree.
is

Then he who holds an opinion of what

not

holds an opinion of nothing. THEAET. Evidently. soc. Well then, he who holds an opinion of nothing, holds no opinion at all. THEAET. That is plain, apparently.

175

PLATO
2fl.

OVK apa

otoV re ro

ov Sodeti', ourz

rrepl

r&v ovrwv ovre avro Kad* avro.

0EAI.
L. \ \

Ov
ovra
v

(fraiverai.

"AAAo

Tt

dp'

eort TO

iftevftfj

So^d^etv TOU

ra

UT
EAI.

"AAAo

OLKV.
OVTCDS

2n.

Ou yap

ovre

ws
1>

oXiyov Trporepov
rjfJLW.

(JKO7TOV{JLl>, l/JV^TJS

CTTt 817.

Sd^a
c58e

0EAI.

Ou yap ow
2H.

32.
EAI.

'AAA'

dpa

ytyvd^evov

TOVTO

IIcD?;

2n.

'AAAoSo^tW
1

Ttva,

ovaav

ifjevSrj

(frafjiev

elvai

Sd^av, 6Vav Tts Tt

TOJV OVTCDV d'AAo aw TO)V ovraiv


"

dvTaXXadfjivos
aet

Stavota '^A ooga^et, eTepov


rfj
/ *'

^7y

oe

?v'/3''/ av#

eivai.

ovrca

yap
<

erepou,

/cat

ov evKOTrei
0EAI.

BLKCLICOS

ov KaXolro
OTO.V

yap

'QpOoTCLTOi fJLOL VVV $OKIS 6ipr]KVai. Tt? OLvri KaXov ala^pov 7} dvTt alcr^pov

KaXov

TOTe
/cat

Co? dXrjOcos

So^d^et

et

EAI.
2il.

Tt

/uaAtcrra;

0?^/c dv, ot/xai,

act
el

Sou?

dimAa/3e'cr#ai,
T)

ep6fj,vos
rj

ofdv

Te

^SpaSeco?

Kovfiov fiapeajs
(frvoriv
1

d'AAo Tt evavriov
rrjv

Kara ryv avrov


176

dXXd Kara
om. BT.

rov evavriov

rt

THEAETETUS
soc. Then it is impossible to hold an opinion of that which is not, either in relation to things that are, or independent!}^ of them.

THEAET. Evidently. soc. Then holding false opinion is something different from holding an opinion of that which is not. THEAET. So it seems. soc. Then false opinion is not found to exist in us either by this method or by that which we followed a little while ago. THEAET. No, it certainly is not. soc. But does not that which we call by that name arise after the following manner ? THEAET. After what manner ? soc. We say that false opinion is a kind of inter-

changed opinion, when a person makes an exchange mind and says that one thing which exists is another thing which exists. For in this way he always holds an opinion of what exists, but of one thing instead of another so he misses the object he was aiming at in his thought and might fairly be said
in his
;

to hold a false opinion.

THEAET. Now you seem to me to have said what For when a man, in forming an perfectly right. opinion, puts ugly instead of beautiful, or beautiful instead of ugly, he does truly hold a false opinion.
is

soc. Evidently, Theaetetus, you feel contempt of me, and not fear. THEAET. Why in the world do you say that ? soc. You think, I fancy, that I would not attack

your
or

for a thing to

by asking whether it is possible become slowly quick or heavily light, any other opposite, by a process opposite to itself,
truly false

"

"

in accordance,

not with

its

own

nature, but with that

177

PLATO
eavrco
evavricos.

rovro

fjiev

ovv,

Iva

[jidrrjv Bapprjarjs, d(f>ir)/Jii.

TO

TO,

i/Jv8rj

dpevKei 8e, tbs ^fai Sofa^etv dAAoSo^eu' ivai;

EAI.
2fl.

"E/totye.

"Eortv apa Kara


1

rrjv

or^v

MS

erepov KO!
r//"v

fjirj

cos e/cetvo rfj

86ai' erepov Tl Sta^ota riOeaQai.


'

0EAI.

"EcrTt /xeVrot.

2H.

Urav ovv rovu


TJTOL

-?

<-./)>

rj

oiavoia TOU opa, ov


r)

'

?"

>

KCti

avdyKrj avrrjv
EAI.

a^orepa
ovv
8e
7JTOL

TO

erepov

Sta-

2n.

KaAAtara.

'AvdyKT) fjL^ TO

afjio.

ye

rj

lv

fJLepai.

Sta^oetcr^at

a/3*

6Vep

EAI.

Tt KO\0)V;

2n.

Adyov
?7ept cSv

ot'

auTj) 77^0? cwrrjv

av o~K07rf}. ws ye etSaj? crot 0,710rovro yap fJiOL tVSaAAeTat Siavoou/zeV-^ </>cuVo;zat. ou/c aAAo Tt ^ StaAe'yecr&u, auT^ eavrrjv epajrajo-a 190 KCH OLTTOKpLvo/Jievr), Kai <>daKovo*a /cat OT) (f)dcrKovo~a. orav Se opuaaaa, eire ftpaovrepov etVe /cat o^vrepov 7rdacra, TO a^TO ^'87] 0^ /cat /XT) io~rd,r], Sdfar Tavrrjv ri0[JLv avr-fjs. war* eycoye TO So^a^etf Aeyetv /caAcD /cat TT)V Sd^ay Adyov etpTy/xeVov, ou ^evroi Trpos a'AAov ovSe (fxjjvfj, aAAa crtyTy 77/30?

^Tat

afTov ov
EAI.
f

oe Tt;

'

Kay c6.
'OTav apa ns TO erepov erepov So^a^, /cat cos eot/ce, TO erepov erepov etvat 77/30? eavrov.

2n.
(firjo-LV,

B
178

EAI.

Tt

THEAETETUS
of
its

opposite.

But

may

not

fail.

You

I let this pass, that your courage are satisfied, you say, that false ?

opinion is interchanged opinion THEAET. I am.


soc.

mind what

It is, then, in your opinion, possible for the to regard one thing as another and not as
it is.

it is.

THEAET. Yes,
soc.

one's mind does this, does it not necessarily have a thought either of both things together or of one or the other of them ? THEAET. Yes, it must either of both at the same
;

Now when

time or in succession.
soc.

Excellent.
?

And do you

define

thought

as

do

do you define it ? which the soul has with itself about any subjects which it considers. You must
THEAET.
soc.

How

As the

talk

not suppose that I know this that I am declaring to But the soul, as the image presents itself to you. me, when it thinks, is merely conversing with itself, asking itself questions and answering, affirming and denying. When it has arrived at a decision, whether slowly or with a sudden bound, and is at last agreed, and is not in doubt, we call that its opinion and
;

define forming opinion as talking and opinion as talk which has been held, not with someone else, nor yet aloud, but in silence with oneself. do you define it ?
so
I

How

THEAET. In the same way. soc. Then whenever a man has an opinion that one thing is another, he says to himself, we believe, that the one thing is the other. THEAET. Certainly.

179

PLATO
Srj

et

TTOJTTOT'

ef^e?

TT/DOS

treaurov 6Vt Travro? />taAAov TO rot /caAov ato^/ooV

eanv

77

TO aSiKov

oY/catov,

7}

/cat,

TO TrdvTWV

/ce</>a-

crKOTrei et TTOT' eTre^et/oTicras' creavTov

fJidXXov

TO erepov zrepov earLV,

7)

TOVVCLVTIOV Ol5S' 6^ V7TVO) TTO)7TOT


cu? TravraTraaiv
rj

apa ra Trepirra aprid

TI a'AAo TOLOVTOV.
1

EAI.

*A\r]6rj Aeyeis

fjivov
\

otet vyiaivovra rj /zatvoarrovofj irpos ICLVTOV elrrelv avaTrei9ovTCL CLVTOV, tus" dvayK7^ Toy jSouv TTTTTOV etvat

2n.

"AAAov 8e Ttva

ToA/z^om
/

T^

Ta ouo
EAI.

O>

w ei^;

Ma
*

At"
et
'

o?'/c

eya)ye.
v

TO Aeyetv Trpo? ICLVTOV Sofa^etv r s j ^ / ?'<fa/ ^i A tv, ouoet? ajji(f>OTpa ye Aeyco^ /cat ooga^wv /cat ^^Vot av /cat 8ofaa/x^otv TT] ^XV eaTeov 8e /cat co? TO eTcpov eTepov ecrTtv. 2 crot TO p'rjfjLCL vrept TOV eTepov. Aeyco yd/) auTo Trjoe, fjirjoeva So^a^etv a*? TO ala^pov /caAov ^
2H.
/

OI)A:OW

'

5'

a'AAo Tt TOJI^ TOtOUTOJV.


EAI.

'AAA',

c5

Saj/cpaTe?, eto T

/cat /xot So/cet

Aeyet?. 2n. "A/ji^aj p,V


3

apa

ood,ovTa

dSvvaTOV TO

ye

erepov eTepov
0EAI.
"Eot/ce^.

2ri.
1

'AAAa
om. T.

fj,r)i>

TO eVepov ye JAOVOV So^a^cov, TO


tirl

/cat

After p^^a

B adds

T&V

iv v.tpei, tireiS^ TO pij/na 'trepov TO)

Tavrbv fariv, applied to things in succession, " " since the word " one is, as a word, the same as " other " one " and " (i.e. the Greek uses 'trepov for other").
^re/)y /card, p^/xa
5

TO ye

Heindorf

rare

B;

r<5

** T.

180

THEAETETUS
soc.

Now

call

to

mind whether you have ever

said to yourself that the beautiful is most assuredly and this is the sum of ugly, or the wrong right, or

the whole matter

consider whether you have ever

tried to persuade yourself that one thing is most assuredly another, or whether quite the contrary is

the case, and you

have never ventured, even in

sleep, to say to yourself that the

odd
sort.

is,

after

all,

certainly even, or anything of that THEAET. You are right.


soc.

Do you imagine

that anyone else, sane or

insane, ever ventured to say to himself seriously and ox must necessarily try to persuade himself that the

be a horse, or two one ? THEAET. No, by Zeus,


soc.

do

not.

Then if forming opinion is talking to oneself, no one who talks and forms opinion of two objects and apprehends them both with his soul, could say
and have the opinion that one is the other. But you will also have to give up the expression "one and other." This is what I mean, that nobody holds
the opinion that the ugly that sort.
is

beautiful, or anything of
it

THEAET. Well, Socrates, I do give agree with you in what you say.

up; and

soc. You agree, therefore, that he who holds an that opinion of both things cannot hold the opinion one is the other.

THEAET. So
soc.

it

seems.

But surely he who holds an opinion of one


181

PLATO
Se

erepov fjLTjSafjLr} , erepov elvau.


0EAI.
'AXrjOrj
/cat

ovSeVore Soa<7t TO

erepov

Ae'yets"

dvay/cd^otro
>/

yd/o
A" ' 5*

dV

ou
<

S ap afji<poTpa ovre ro erepov oogaL,ovri CUCTT' et rt? optetrat So^av eyxcopeu aAAoSo^eiv. >/> >O\^\\/ /(>^\< ^i'''^ etvat yjvorj TO eTepooogeLV, ovoev av Aeyot' our apa ravrrj oure Acard rd rrporepci ^atVerat iftevSrjS > ? ey 7)jLttv of era ooga.
!

/-\>/>J/55// Uur

>

<

<>

0EAI.

Oi)/^ zoixev.

2H.

'AAAd
6V,

fteVrot,

c5

0eatT7]re,

TOVTO

<f>av)jcrTaL
/cat

TioAAd

dVoTra.
TTOta

0EAI.

Td

Oi)/c epcD

aot

77/otv

dV Travra^ TreLpaOco
vrrep ^/xa)v, eV (S
-

CT/CO-

Qlo~^\)voi^if]v
,

yap av

191 edv

dAA' dvay/ca^o/zeVcov d/xoAoyetv ota Aey 60 /cat TOT* Vpa>[JL6V eXevdepoi yevwfjieOa, rjSr] Trepl
co?

rcov aXXcov ipov^ev TOU yeAotou ear cores'

Tracr^ovrajv

avrd

e/cros"

edv Se Trdvrrj
TO)

aTroprjaaifjiev,

ot)itat,

Aoya>

rrape^ofjiev

co?

Trareiv re /cat ^pi^aOai 6 ri av


fl

ovv ert rfopov rivd evpiaKO) rov


EAI.

O.KOV6.

Aeye

p,6vov.
rj/Jids

2n.

Ov

(far/era)

opOcos 6p,oXoyrjcrai,

(l)fjLoXoy7Jaap,V

otSev etvat
rov.

a avrd

rt? otSev, dftvvarov


/cat
i/sevcrOrjvai,'

Sodcrai a dXXd TTTJ Svva-

182

THEAETETUS
and not of the other at all, will never hold the opinion that one is the other. THEAET. You are right for he would be forced to apprehend also that of which he holds no opinion. soc. Then neither he who holds opinion of both nor he who holds it of one can hold the opinion that
only,
;

And so anyone who sets a thing is something else. out to define false opinion as interchanged opinion
would be talking nonsense. Then neither by this method nor by our previous methods is false opinion
found to exist in us. THEAET. Apparently not. soc. But yet, Theaetetus, if this is found not to exist, we shall be forced to admit many absurdities. THEAET. What absurdities ? soc. I will not tell you until I have tried to For I should be consider the matter in every way. ashamed of us, if, in our perplexity, we were forced to make such admissions as those to which I refer. But if we find the object of our quest, and are set free from perplexity, then, and not before, we will

we we

speak of others as involved in those absurdities, and But if ourselves shall stand free from ridicule. find no escape from our perplexity, we shall, I
fancy,

low-spirited, like seasick people, and the argument to trample on us and do to us anything it pleases. Hear, then, by what means I still see a prospect of success for our quest. THEAET. Do speak. soc. I shall deny that we were right when we agreed that it is impossible for a man to have opinion that the things he does not know are the things But which he knows, and thus to be deceived. there is a way in which it is possible.

become

shall allow

183

PLATO
Aeyet? o /cat eyco rore V TOIOVTOV etWxt, on evioT* eya> yiyvcbaKtov Sco/cpar^, TroppcoOev oe opajv aXXov 6V ov yiyva)aKO), (Lrjdrjv elvai Saj/cpar^ 6V otSa; yap 8rj ev TO> TOLOVTCV olov Aeyet?.
EAI.
T

Apa

)VLK

avro

efia/jiev

QVKOVV
EAI.

oLTTearrjfjLev
1

avrov,

ort

t'o/^ev

?]/>ta? et'Soras"

ju, ))

et'SeVat;

Havu

/xev

ow.
nOajfiev,

5n.

Mi) yap

OVTCD

dAA'

c58e'

tcrco?

7^2?

?At "'

cruy^ajpr^o-eTat, taajs' Se

dyrtrei/et.

dAAa

yap

eV TOLOVTCO e^o/ae^a, ev

arp(f>ovra \6yov
Aeyco.
EAI.

apa

a> avdyKr) TTOLVTCL /zeraGKOTrei ovv ei rt fiaaavl^ziv. ecrrtv jU7^ et'Sora rt rrporepov vcrrepov

"ECTT6 [JLEVTOL.

2n.

OUACOUV
T*
.

/<:at

avOi? erepov

KOLI

crepov;

0EAI
2H.

1 I

<^y

OU ;

>r

rj/jicov

0e? S^ /lot Aoyow eVe/ca ev rat? Ivov KTjpivov eKfjiayelov, rco fjiev /zet^of, TO) 8' eXarrov, /cat TO) jitev KaBapcorepov KTjpov, TO) e KO7Tpa)ocaTpov, /cat CT/cA^porepoy, eviois oe
vyporepov,
EAI.
ecrrt 8'

of? ^terptcos e^ovro?.

TiOrjJjLL.

2n.

Acopov roivvv avro

MOUCTCOV lATjrpos MvrjfjLoavvrjs,

<^co/xev /cat

etWu

riy?

TCOP'

e? TOVTO, o rt
1

aV /3ovXr)6a)tJiv
2

aKOvacofJiev

rj

l cbv av {JLvrjfJiOvevaai ioa>/JLi> 7} avrol eVvo^acu/zev, VTre^ovras auro

rat? ata^crecrt
Sa/crvAtcov
1

/cat ervotats", aTrorvTrovaOat,,

(jj

CTT^/zeta

eVcr^/xatvo/zevous"
2

/cat

eldu/j-ev

B.

&Kov<j}fJt,ev

BT.

184

THEAETETUS
THEAET. Do you mean what I myself suspected when we made the statement to which you refer, that sometimes I, though I know Socrates, saw at a
distance someone
it

was Socrates

whom I did not know, and thought whom I do know ? In such a case
because
it

false opinion does arise. soc. But did not we reject that,

resulted

in our

knowing and not knowing the things which


?

we know

THEAET. Certainly we did. soc. Let us, then, not make that assumption, but another perhaps it will turn out well for us, perhaps the opposite. But we are in such straits that we must turn every argument round and test it from all
;

sides.

Now

see if this

is

sensible

Can
it

man who
?

did not

know a thing at one time THEAET. To be sure he can.

learn

later

soc. Again, then, can he learn one thing after another ? THEAET. Why not ? soc. Please assume, then, for the sake of argument, that there is in our souls a block of wax, in one case larger, in another smaller, in one case the wax is purer, in another more impure and harder, in

some cases
THEAET.
soc.

softer,
I

and in some of proper assume all that.


then, say that this
is

quality.

Let

us,

the gift of

Memory, the mother of the Muses, and that whenever we wish to remember anything we see or hear or think of in our own minds, we hold this wax under the perceptions and thoughts and imprint them upon it, just as we make impressions from seal rings
;

185

PLATO
av av
eKfjiayfj,
evfj

^ivrjfjioveveLV

re

/cat

eVtcrracr^at
l

TO etStoAov avTOV'
re

o 8* av

H,TI

olov

yeV^rat

eKfjbayfjvai,

einXeXfjaOai

re

/cat ^u)

emoracr&u.
"Earco OVTCOS. '0 TOLVVV emcrrd/zej'os' oV So^dcrat.
Ilotaj 817 rtvt;
rt

EAI.
2fl.

yLtev

aura, GKOTTCUV
rotaiSe rpo77O)

oe rt cSv opa ^ d/couet, dOpeL


i/feuS^

et d'pa

0EAI.

2H.

otSev,
/AT^.

olrjOels

elvai

rore

/xev

otSe,

rare Se a
0EAI.

raura

yd/? eV rot? rrpoaOev

ov KaXa>s

tofJLoXoyrjO~afjLV

o^oXoyovvTes d8wara.
Tcepl

NuV

Se 770)? Ae'yet?;

192

^n.

Aet cSSe \eyeadai

avTOjv
8e

e'^
2

StopL^ofJievovs, ort o /xeV rt? ot8ez^ p.V7)[jLLOV ev Trj ^v^f) > alaOdveTaL

CT^O>V

auro
e^ovra

fir),

TOVTO

olrj67Jvai

ere/oov rt cov

otSev,

/cat

e'/cetVou

alaOavofJLevov 8e /xTy, /cat o ye otSev au, olr]6rjvai elvai o otSe fjirj /cat o e^et avTOV afipaylSa' /x^ ot8ev, o fj,rj av' /cat o fjirj ot8ev, 6 otSe* /cat o ala9dveTai ye, Tpov TL a)v alaOdveTai olrjOrjvat, etvat* /cat o
TVTTOV,
X

atcr^dverat,

c5v

rt

ft^

aloQdveTai'
alaOdveTai"
/cat

/cat

ata^dverat,

cov
c5v

/ZT^

/cat

au7$cu>erat,

atV^dyerat. 4
/cat

ert

ye au

otSe

/cat

aladdveTai
1

e^et ro arf^lov
o'rai'

Kara
al.

&
;

8'

av
.

ffx^f

BT
4

e'xw
/cat

B2 W.
.
.

OTOJ/ 5e
3

T.

roOro

B om.
;

&v

aiffda.vtTa.1.

om. B.

186

THRAETETUS
and whatever
is

imprinted we remember and

know

as long as its image lasts, but whatever is rubbed out or cannot be imprinted we forget and do not know. THEAET. Let us assume that.
soc.

Now
;

take a

man who knows

the things

which he sees and hears, and is considering some one of them observe whether he may not gain a false opinion in the following manner. THEAET. In what manner ? soc. By thinking that the things which he knows are sometimes things which he knows and sometimes For we were wrong things which he does not know.
before in agreeing that this is impossible. THEAET. What do you say about it now ? must begin our discussion of the matter soc. by making the following distinctions It is impossible for anyone to think that one thing which he knows and of which he has received a memorial imprint in

We

but which he does not perceive, is another thing which he knows and of which also he has an And, again, imprint, and which he does not perceive. he cannot think that what he knows is that which he does not know and of which he has no seal nor that what he does not know is another thing which he does not know nor that what lie does not know nor can he think that what he is what he knows perceives is something else which he perceives nor that what he perceives is something which he does not perceive nor that what he does not perceive is something else which he does not perceive nor that what he does not perceive is something which he
his soul,
;

perceives. And, again, it is still more impossible, if that can be, to think that a thing which he knows and

perceives and of which he has an imprint which accords

187

PLATO
f

olrjOrjvcu

av

erepov
/cat

n
n
'

wv
TO

otSe

KOLI

alo-ddverai
KCLTOL rrjv
?

KOI
\
\

e\ei av
TO

e/cetVou

o'Tr/xetoi'

ataOrjonv, dovvarcbrepov eVt e/cetVcoy, el


>

OLOV

re.

/cat

otoe
o

/cat

i A

"

atac/a^erat
otrj^^vat

e^a>v

TO

fjivrjiJieiov

6p9tos,
/cat

otSev

aSwarov
raura, o

/cat

o otSe

aicr^dVerat

\a)V
ofSe

/caret

ala0dvTai'
o

e\\T otoe
/XT)

/cat

o au
x

/X7]0e

atcrc/averat, o
i/erat,

/)/

/XT)

\c\\-?O 5^'/J /cat o aiavaverai" otoe /XT) \<\\TO \TO ^^'/D/ /cat o otoe' otoe aiac/a/XT)

/x-))

/Lt^Se

/xTioe

Travra ravra vrrepfidAXci rou ev Aetaurots" iffV()rj riva So^acrat. aSwa/xta Trerat ST) ev rot? rototaSe, etVep TTOU a'AAo^t, TO
o
/XT)

atcr^dVerat

TOtouTOV yeve'a^at. >T-i o/


/

0EAI.

h/v Ttcrt OT);

eav apa eg CLVTOJV TL /xaAAov

>\

>>

>^

^\\

fjLa9a>'

vvv /xev yd/) ou^; eVo/xat.

2n.
etvat

'Ev ot?
c5v

otSep',
/cat
T)

olrjdfjvcu

avra erep
f)

arra
ofSe^,
<Lv

otSe
Se'

alaOdverai,'
cuv

&v

/XT)

aladdverat,

otSe

/cat

alaOdverai,

olSev av
0EAI.
34-

/cat

alaOdverai.
T^

Nui> TToA?) 7T\OV a7TeAet^>^T]V

TOT6.
eya)
et3a>?
ecrTt,

2n.

QSe

ST)

ctraTraAtv a/coue.

0oSa>pov
/cat

/cat

ev e/j,avTa> /xe/xv^/xeVo? oto?

QeaLTrjrov Kara ravrd, aAAo Tt eviore /xev o eviore Se ou, /cat aVro/xat TTOT'
1

After
3

/cat

the MSS. read


.
.

6,

rd

fj.vrj/ji.e'ioi'

e'xwf
.

om.
fj.rj

BT

expunged by Bonitz.
;

add.

B aT

in

marg.

IJ.TI

olde

a.iffda.vtTCU.

om. B.

188

THEAETETUS
with the perception is another thing which he knows and perceives and of which he has an imprint which And he cannot think accords with the perception. that what he knows and perceives and of which he has a correct memorial imprint is another thing which he knows nor that a thing which he knows and perceives and of which he has such an imprint is another thing which he perceives nor again that a thing which he neither knows nor perceives is another thing which he neither knows nor perceives nor that a thing which he neither knows nor perceives is another thing which he does not know nor that a thing which he neither knows nor perceives is In all another thing which he does not perceive.
;

these cases it is impossible beyond everything for false The possiopinion to arise in the mind of anyone. if anywhere, in the bility that it may arise remains,
following cases.

THEAET.

What

cases are they

?
;

hope they may

help

me

to understand better

for

now

cannot

follow you.
soc. The cases in which he may think that things which he knows are some other things which he knows and perceives or which he does not know, but perceives or that things which he knows and perceives are other things which he knows and
; ;

perceives.

THEAET. Now than before.

am even more

out of the running


a different way. I within myself what

soc. Then let me repeat it in know Theodorus and remember

sort of a person

he
I

but sometimes

is, and just so I know Theaetetus, see them, and sometimes I do not,

189

PLATO
Tore
Trept
8'

ov,

/cat

OLKOVCO
8'

77

TWO.

aXXrjv

aia9r)aiv

alo9dvofjLaL )
VIJLWV,

rore

aiaOrjcrw

fJLev

/jLefJLvrj/jLaL

8e

vfJLas

ouSe/xtW ovoev ^rrov

em'crra/zat auro? eV e/zaurai; EAI. Jlavu /xei' ow.

Touro TOLVVV irpwrov fJLa.de &v /3ouAo/zai J ecrrt /zev a ot8e ^17 ala9di><j6ai, ecrrt
8e
EAI.

2H.
EAI.

OUKOW

/cat

/XT)

otSe, 77oAAa/<:t? /zev eart

e alcr6dveo6a,i, TroXXaKis 8e

aloOdveoOai ^ovov;

"Ecrrt /cat TOUTO.


'

2H. 'ISe Sr) eai^ rt /zaAAov vvv emcTTTT^. Sco/cpa193 TI^? et ytyvcua/cet 2 0eo'Sapoy /cat SeaLrrjrov, opa 8e /LtTjSerepo^, /X7]8e aAAr^ aiardrjcris OLVTO)

7Tpl aVTOJV, OVK

CtV

77OT6 eV

O.VTO)

od<Jl.l>
r)

6 0eatVi]Tos' eart 060860/309. 0EAI. Nat, dXr]9rj ye.


2H.
EAI.

Aeyco rt

ou8eV;

ToUTO

jLtei'

TOIVVV

KWO)V

TTpOJTOV

fy

COV

v yap.

Aevrepop' TOLVVV, on rov {JLV rov 8e ai L*vcoo*KO)v, alaQa.v6evo? Se ttU IVCU fJL-T]06TpOV, OVK OV 77OT olfjdeiTJV OV OLOOL
2n.
t\
\

oi^

/u,7)

otoa.

T^

EAI.

*Qp9a)S.

B>n/

2n.

TpLTOV

Se,
>

jjLrjoerepov

aLcruavo/jLevo? OVK etmt a>v /XT)


f/-~
'
J*

av

'/O'

rt

oii]U.if]v otSa. /cat


/-

ov
x

yiyv&OKWV f
>
1

[Li]

otoa erepov

"

fJLr^Se
'

e^T]? vofJLL^e TraAiv a/c^/coei/at, ei> ot? ouoeTror 1 tVrt yU7?5e alaOdveadai below om. B
.
. .

\'
W
;

rdAAa ra 77porepa

>r'O/>
BT.

2 et yi.yi>u<rKei

tTTiyiyvucrKei.

190

THEAETETUS
I touch them, sometimes not, sometimes hear them or perceive them through some other sense, and sometimes I have no perception of you at all, but I remember you none the less and know you in my own mind. Is it not so ? THEAET. Certainly. soc. This, then, is the first of the points which I wish to make clear. Note that one may perceive or not perceive that which one knows. THEAET. That is true. soc. So, too, with that which he does not know he may often not even perceive it, and often he may
I

sometimes

merely perceive it ? THEAET. That too is possible. if you soc. See follow me better now. If Socrates knows Theodorus and Theactetus, but sees neither of them and has no other perception of them, he never could have the opinion within himself that Theaetetus is Theodorus. Am I right or

wrong ?
THEAET.
soc.
I

You

Now

are right. that was the

first

of the cases of which

spoke.
:

THEAET. Yes, it was. soc. The second is this knowing one of you and not knowing the other, and not perceiving either of you, I never could think that the one whom I know is the one whom I do not know. THEAET. Right. soc. And this is the third case not knowing o and not perceiving either of you, I could not think that he whom I do not know is someone else whom I do not know. And imagine that you have heard all the other cases again in succession, in which I
:

191

PLATO
yo> Trepl
crov
/cat

Seoowpov

TO,

favor}

ovre yiyvtbaKOJv ovre ayvoajv d'/z^tu, cure rov TO> 8* ot) yiyvwGKOiv Kal Trepi alcrOijcrecov Kara

raura,
EAI.

et

apa
J/reuS^ So^acrat ev raiSe,

"E-77O/XCU.

2n.

AetVerat roivvv ra
ere

orav yiyvwcTKUJv Kiva) ra> K

/cat

0eoSa>pov,

/cat

ra

cr^/xeta, Sta /xa/cpou /cat /x^ t/cavcu? opcav

oifji<f)a>

TO OlKeloV
OLKeia
oi/ret,

KO,TpOV

ar){JiiOV OL7TOOOVS et?

efjifiiftdaas

Trpooap/jioaaL

TO

tva yeV^rat ava.'yvcjpLGris, etra rou/cat wcrTrep ol

efiTraXw VTToSovfjievoi

TrpoafidXco TTJV

Karepov

OIJJLV

Trpos TO

dAAor/otov

cr^/xetot',

T)

/cat

ota rd e^ rot? KaroTTrpois

TTJS oe/feco? 7rd6r),

Seta
TO

ctj

TOLVTOV

TraQajv
/cat

Sta/xdprco'
ijjevorj

apiGTepa fJL6Tappovo-r)$, rore 87) cru/z/?atVet

Tepoooia
0EAI.

"Eot/ce

yap,

c5

TT]? oor]s 7rd6os. "ETt Tolvvv /cat OTav dp,(f)OTpov5

TO

yiyvw-

rov

fjiev

rrpos

TO>

ytyvcua/cetv

ator^dvco/xat,
/mrj

TOV Se

/u,^,

T^V Se

yvaicrtv

TOU irepov

KCLTO, Tr)i>
/cat

aicrOrjcrw e^a>, o er Tot? TfpoaQev OVTOJS

eXeyov

TOT

oz)/c

192

THEAETETUS
could never form
of you, or the same " know."
false
I

opinions

about

you and

Theodorus, either when

know

or do not

know both

I know one and not the other ; and true if we say " perceive" instead of Do you follow me ? THEAET. I follow yOU. soc. Then the possibility of forming false opinion remains in the following case when, for example, knowing you and Theodorus, and having on that block of wax the imprint of both of you, as if you were signet-rings, but seeing you both at a distance

when

is

indistinctly, I hasten to assign the proper imprint of each of you to the proper vision, and to make it fit, as it were, its own footprint, with the l but I may fail in purpose of causing recognition

and

this

by interchanging them, and put the vision of one upon the imprint of the other, as people put a shoe on the wrong foot or, again, I may be affected as the sight is affected when we use a mirror and the sight as it flows makes a change from right to left, and thus make a mistake it is in such cases, then, that interchanged opinion occurs and the forming of
;

false opinion arises.

THEAET.

think

it

does, Socrates.

You

describe

what happens to opinion marvellously well. soc. There is still the further case, when, knowing both of you, I perceive one in addition to knowing him, but do not perceive the other, and the knowledge which I have of that other is not in accord with my
This is the case I described in this way perception. before, and at that time you did not understand me.
1 Aeschylus, Choeph. 197 ff., makes Electra recognize the presence of her brother Orestes by the likeness of his footprints to her own.

G2

193

PLATO
0EAI.
2fl.

Ov yap ovv. Tovro p,r)v eAeyov,


/cat

on
KO!

yiyvuivKoiv
rrjv

rov

erepov

atcr^ayo/zevo?,

yv&oiv Kara

aiaBirjaw avrov e^cuv, ovSeVore ot^crerat elvai avrov erepov TWO, ov ytyvcocr/cet re KOLL /cat rrjv yv&aw av /cat e/cetVou e^et /cara
CTtv.

T^V

yap rovro;

EAI.
.

Nat.

riapeAetVero 8e ye TTOU TO vvv Xeyo^evov, TO a 877 (^a/zef r^v i/jevSfj So^av yiyveaQai yiyvajaKOvra /cat ajuco opojvra TJ riva
ev

194 aladr^aiv e^oyra a^olv TOJ OT^etco x ^,7) /cara avrov aiaOiqcrLV eKarepov e^etv, dAA* ofo^ (fravXov teVra TrapaAAa^at rou CTKOTTOV
/cat djLtapretv,

Si]

/cat tfjevoos

apa

covo/xacrrat.

EAI.

Et/corcos" ye.

Kat orav roivvv


,

ra>

/Ltei^

napf)

aicrOijcris

T&

TO) 8e

^u,^,

TO Se

TT^? o.7rovcrr)s

r)

Trapovar) Trpoaap/jioar), Trdvrrj ravrrj oidvoia. /cat eVt Aoyaj, Trept tSv /zev /ZT) otSe Tt?
2

B ^7;Se

vjarOero

TrcuTTOTe,

ou/c

eWtv,

ws

eot/cev,
7]ftet?

tpevoeaOai ovre

ifrevorjs

ooa,

el Tt

yw

/cat alaOavoeyofjiev Trepl oe (hv tcr/zev T eV auTOt? TOVTOL? arp(j)eraL /cat

So^a
/cat

ijjevSrjs

/caTa TO

/cat dXrjOrjs yiyvo^evr], i5^t TO, ot/ceta ovvdyovaa

0,7:0-

rvTTcofjiaTa /cat TVTTOVS dXr)6r/s, els TrAayta 8e /cat

ovcoAta
EAI.
1

ijjevoins.

Ou/couv /caAcD?,

cS

Sco/cpaTes , Ae'yeTat;

rw

ffri^dd} al.

Heusde

T<

o-Tj/ue/y

TW

2
;

r6 o-^etov

BW.

2
/i?;5^ -fiffdeTo

TW;

/ti/S^ tirfLdero twrjaffero

/ui;5'

2
.

194

THEAETETUS
THEAET. No, I did not. soc. This is what I meant, that if anyone knows and perceives one of you, and has knowledge of him which accords with the perception, he will never think that he is someone else whom he

knows and perceives and his knowledge of whom accords with the perception. That was the case,
was
it

not

THEAET. Yes.
I believe, the case of which the case in which we say the false opinion arises when a man knows both and sees both (or has some other perception of them), but fails to hold the two imprints each under its like a bad archer he shoots proper perception beside the mark and misses it and it is just this

soc.

But we omitted,

am

speaking

now

which
soc.

is

called error or deception.

THEAET.

And

properly

so.

perception is present to one of the imprints but not to the other, and the mind applies the imprint of the absent perception to the perception which is present, the mind is deceived in In a word, if our present view every such instance.
is sound, false opinion or deception seems to be impossible in relation to things which one does not know and has never perceived but it is precisely in relation to things which we know and perceive that opinion turns and twists, becoming false and true true when it puts the proper imprints and seals fairly
;

Now when

and squarely upon one another, and applies them sideways and aslant.
THEAET. Well, then, Socrates,
is

false

when

it

that view not a

good one

195

PLATO
C
2H.

"Ert TOIVVV KOI Taoe aKovcras p,dXXov avTo TO fjiv yap raXrjOes oo^d^ecv KaXov, TO oe
ala^pov.
ITa)? S' ov;

0EAI.

2n.

Taura

TOIVVV

(f>aalv

evOevSe
$V)(f]

OTOLV fJLV 6 KTIpOS

TOV

V Tfl

/3cL0VS

yiyveaQai. T KCLl
l
fj,

TToXvs Kal Aeto? /ecu (JLTpLO)$ wpyaa/jievos


IOVTCL OLOL TOJV alo~6r]O~tL>v,
"

ra

evcn^cui/o^iem et? TOVTO

TO

T7J$ i/JVXTJS

KO.p, O

(f)7]

TOV Krjpov o/xotor^ra, rare

fjiev

Kal TOVTOLS
LKavajs

Kadapa ra
fidOovs

cr^/zeta

eyyiyvofieva

/cat

TOV
etcrtv

yiyveTaL Kal Ot TOLOVTOL TTpOJTOV fACV eVfJiaOels, 7TLTa etra ov TrapaXXaTTOVVL TO>V alo-Orjaeaiv ra

%ovTa TroXvxpovid T

dAAa Sofa^oucrtv dXyOrj.

aa(f)-rj

yap KOI

V evpv-

%<jopia ovTa Ta%v Siavefjiovcnv em ra avTwv eVaara eKyLtayeta, a 8^ 6Vra /caAetrat, /cat cro</>ot 81) OVTOL

/caAowrat.
0EAI.

01)

So/cet crot;

'Y7Tp<f)Va)S fJ.V OVV.

sn.

"Orav TOIVVV \daiov TOV TO

Keap y, o

eTrfjvecrev 6 TrdvTa o~o(f)6s' TroirjTTJs, rj OTQ.V KOTrpa Kal /x^ KaOapov TOV Krjpov, TJ vypov o*<f)6opa

rj

vypov, v^a9els fteV, ernXtj amoves oe yiyvovTai, d)V Se aKXrjpov, TavavTia. ol oe or) Xdaiov Kal Tpa%v Xi6a)Os TL f) yrjs r) Korrpov
/J.6V
1

GKXrjpov, aJv

wp-yaa^pos Suidas, Timaeus


2

dpyafffj.ei>os

BT.

TOV rb] TOVTO TO B.

196

THEAETETUS
After you have heard the rest, you will be more inclined to say so. For to hold a true opinion is a good thing, but to be deceived is a
soc.
still

disgrace.

THEAET. Certainly. soc. They say the cause of these variations is as follows When the wax in the soul of a man is deep and abundant and smooth and properly kneaded, the images that come through the perceptions are imprinted upon this heart of the soul as Homei
:

calls it in allusion to its similarity to wax l ; this is the case, and in such men, the imprints, clear and of sufficient depth, are also lasting.

when
being

And

men

place quick to learn, and secondly they have retentive memories, and moreover they do not interchange the imprints of their perceptions, but they have true opinions. For the imprints are clear and have plenty of room, so that such men quickly assign them to their several moulds, which are called realities ; and these men, Or do you not agree ? then, are called wise.
first

of this kind are in the

THEAET. Most emphatically. soc. Now when the heart of anyone is shaggy (a condition which the all-wise poet commends), or when it is unclean or of impure wax, or very soft or hard, those whose wax is soft are quick to learn, but forgetful, and those in whom it is hard are the But those in whom it is shaggy and rough reverse. and stony, infected with earth or dung which is mixed 1 The similarity is in the Greek words Ktap or /c%>, heart, and Kijpos, wax. The shaggy heart is mentioned in the Iliad, The citation of Homer, here and below, xvi. 554. ii. 851 in reference to the practice of some is probably sarcastic of the sophists who used and perverted his words in support
;

of their doctrines,

197

PLATO
c^ovres daa^Tj rd e/c/zayeta Kal ol ra yap OVK evL. doacfrrj 8e /cat ot TO, vypd' vrro yap 195 TO avyxelo-Qai Ta^u yiyverai d/xu8pd. lav 8e rrpos rracn rovrois evr' dAA^Acov crv/jLTTeTrrajKora rj vrro crrevoxcopias, lav rov tr/xt/cpov 7^ TO Ti do~a(f)6O~Tpa Kiva>v. Trdvrcs ovv ovroi yiyvovrat ofot So^a^etv 06u8ry. orav yap opaiaiv r) aKovtoaiv T) eTrt^oajcriv, eAcaara 1 aVove/zeiv ra^v e/cacrrot? ou $vi>d/JLVOi fipaoels re etcrt /cat dAAorpLovoaovvre? Trapopwai r /cat TrapaKOvovai /cat Trapavoovai TrAetara, /cat /caAowrat ay ourot e^eucrjLteVot re 817 TCOV OVTOJV /cat djcta^et?.
[JiTrXecov
do~a(f)rj

8e

EAI.

'Op^orara
v

dvOpairrajv

Ae'yet?,

c5

apa

ei>

oyjittv

J/feuSet?

So^a? efvat;

EAI.

2H. 0EAI.

2<o8pa ye. Kat dA^^et?


Kat
"HSi7
dXrjdels.

ow oto^Oa
%

LKavats co/zoAoy^cr^at ort

jLtaAAov

earov dfjifiorepa TOVTOJ TCJ So^a;


/u,ev

QEAI.

'Y7rep</>ucDs
2fl.

ow.
cu

350EAI.

Aetvov re,
/cat

eatr^re,

cu?

d^Se? et^at dv-^p d


rt TOUT'

Tt 8e; Trpo?

2ft.
cos"

T^v

ep,avTOV

SvafjiaOiav
.

Sucr^epd^a?
Tt? d'AAo

/cat

dXrjOajs

dSoXea^iav

Tt

yap dV

orav dvoj Kara) rov? Xoyovs eXity Tt? vwdeias ov Svvduevos rreLad^vai, /cat
ovofjia,

Aa/CTO? d<^' e/cdo-Tou Aoyou; EAI. 2i) Se 817 Tt Sfcr^epatVets ; 1 e/cacrra] e/ca<rrot BT.
1

198

THEAETETUS
in
it,

So

also

lack

receive indistinct imprints from the moulds. do those whose wax is hard for the imprints And imprints in soft wax are also depth.
;

because they melt together and quickly become blurred but if besides all this they are crowded upon one another through lack of room, in some mean little soul, they are still more indistinct.
indistinct,
;

So all these men are likely to have false opinions. For when they see or hear or think of anything, they cannot quickly assign things to the right imprints, but are slow about it, and because they assign them wrongly they usually see and hear and think amiss. These men, in turn, are accordingly said to be deceived about realities and ignorant.
THEAET.
soc.

You are right as right could be, Socrates. Shall we, then, say that false opinions exist

in us

THEAET. Assuredly.
soc.

THEAET.
soc.

And true opinions, no doubt ? And true ones also. Then now at last we think we

have reached

a valid agreement, that these two kinds of opinion incontestably exist ? THEAET. Most emphatically. soc. Truly, Theatetus, a garrulous man is a strange and unpleasant creature THEAET. Eh ? What makes you say that ? soc. Vexation at my own stupidity and genuine For what else could you call it when garrulity. a man drags his arguments up and down because he is so stupid that he cannot be convinced, and is hardly to be induced to give up any one of
!

them

THEAET. But you,

why

are you vexed

199

PLATO
2n. Ov ova^epaiva) fiovov, dAAd Kal " d> o TL aTTOKpivovp,ai, av TLS eprjrai p,e' Za>/<:pares, rjvprjKas or] ifjvofj So^av, on ovre ev rat? OUT' cv rat? Stavotats , aicrdrjaecrtv eari 77po? dAA^Aa? aAA' ev rfl avvdijjei atcr^creaj? Trpos Stavotav ;
1

'

<f>ijoa)

8e eyco, olftai, /caAAwTri^o/xevo? to? rt


KCtAoi'.
<S

TO)V

rjfJLO)V

0EAI.
elvai TO
f

"E/zotye SoAcet,
/~v

ScoAcpares",

ou/<:

"Sfl.

ITTTTOV

(JVKOVV, Aeyet? art au rov (prjcrei, ov tavoov/jiea \LOVOV, opwfjiev S' ov, OVK av rrore olrOeiyfJiev eivai, ov au ovre
'

^)>

//

;t\/

6pa>/jiv ovre airTOfjieda, Stavooiyze^a 8e fjiovov

aAA'

ouSev

alaOavofjieOa

Trepl

avrov;

ravra,

EtfT
2il.
1

5 a {irjoev ra evoeKa, aAAo -^ StayoetTcu rt?, aAAo rt e/c TOVTOV rov Adyoy OVK av TTore olrjOeir) oa)OKa eivaL, a povov av Wi ovv oij, av OLTTOKPLVOV. Stavoetrat;'
1

ot/xat, (firjcraj Aeyctv. EAI. Kat opdajs ye.


/

oui^,

T"//

1"

c\

0\

tprjaei,*

EAI.
>
/

'AAA'
/

CLTTOKplVOVIJiai, OTL 6pO)V fJLV

ocooe/ca zivai, a p,VTOL ev rfl oiavoia e^et, ou/c dV TTOTC Trepi CLVTWV ravra oodo~eiev OVTCDS.
ry

'/3'

6(pa7TTO[ji6VO5 oit]uiri

vr/o ra evoeKra

OV Tt?
f

<?'<?

2ii.

Tt

ow;

ot'et

rtvct

Trcjirore
jLt?)

avrov ev avraj

196 Trevre Kal eTrrd, Aeyco 8e


Trevre

TrpoOefJievov aKorreiv aAA' airrd Trevre Kal eTrrd, a (fiajjiev e/cet /jiv^/jLela ev TO) eV/myeia* eivai Kal tjjevor} ev avrois OVK

av9pa)7rov$ eVrd rat aAAo TOLOVTOV, /Lt^S'

elvai So^dcrat,
1

ravra avra
Stephanus
;

el TLS dv6pa)7Tajv

rjorj

0Tj<rei

0?js

0??cri

Burnet.

200

THEAETETUS
soc. I

for I

me

am not merely vexed, I am actually afraid do not know what answer to make if anyone asks " Socrates, have you found out, I wonder, that
;
'

opinion exists neither in the relations of the perceptions to one another nor in the thoughts, but in the combination of perception with thought ?
false

we had made

I suppose, and put on airs, as if a fine discovery. THEAET. It seems to me, Socrates, that the result we have now brought out is not half bad. I

shall say

"

yes,"

assert, then," he will could imagine that the man whom we merely think of, but do not see, is a horse which also we do not see or touch or perceive by I suppose any other sense, but merely think of ? I shall say that I do make that assertion. THEAET. Yes, and you will be right.
soc.

"Do

you go on and

say,

"that

we never

'

" Then," he will say, according to that, ever imagine that the number eleven which number twelve which is merely thought of, is the " also is merely thought of? Come now, it is for you
soc.

"

could

we

to answer.

THEAET. Well, my answer will be that a man might imagine the eleven that he sees or touches to be twelve, but that he could never have that opinion concerning the eleven that he has in his mind. soc. Well, then, do you think that anyone ever considered in his own mind five and seven, I do not mean by setting before his eyes seven men and five men and considering them, or anything of that sort, but seven and five in the abstract, which we say are imprints in the block of wax, and in regard to which we deny the possibility of forming false opinions taking these by themselves, do you imagine

201

PLATO
eaKiffaro Ae'yon' 77/36? CLVTOV KOI 77ocra TTOT* ea-riv, /cat 6 fJiV etTrev olrjOel? eVSe/ca
7ra)7TOT

ns

aura, eti'at, o Se ScuSe/ca, rj Trdvres Ae'youcrt re /cat o'iovrai SaJSe/ca aura eivai;
EAI.

8e/ca*

Ou //.a rov Ata, aAAa TioAAot 817 eav 8e ye ev TrAetow apiO/jLO) rt?
cr^aAAerat.
ot/xat

/cat

ey-

yap

ere

rrept

2n.

ytyverat aAAo
EAI.

'QpOws yap olei' aura TO, T)


"Eot/ce' ye.

/cat

evdv^ov

/JLT^

rt

Tore

Scu8e/ca TO, eV ra> e'/c/xayeta)

cVSe/ca olrjdrjvcu.

Ou/cow et? ror)? Trpcorovs TraAtv ayTy/cet Aoyou?; o yap rouro TraOayv, o olSev, erepov auro oterat etvat c5v au ofSev o e'</>ap,ev aSwarov, /cat
2H.

Tovra) avra) ?}vay/ca^o/i,ev ^17 etrat ifjevftrj So^ay, tva /x^ TO. avra o auras' avay/ca^otro et'Sa)? M^ /
?/

etoevat a/aa.

^AXrjOearara. Oi)/cow a'AA' OTLOVV Set aTro^atVetv TO ra So^a^eti^ T) Stavota? Trpo? ata^crti^ TrapaAAaet yap TOUT' -^v, ou/c aV 770Te eV a^TOt? Tot? $iavorjfjiOL(nv eiftevftofjieOa. vvv Se ^Vot ou/c ecrTt i/Jv$r)s So^-a, a Tt? otSei/, otov Te /x^ et'SeVat. 7)
.

EAI.

/cat Toirrcov

Trorepa

atpet;

"ATropov al'peaiv rrporiOrjs, a> sn. 'AAAa fjievToi a^u</>oTepa ye /ctvSuveuet Aoyo? ou/c eacretv. oyacos" Se, Trdvra yap
Tt et
EAI.
1

0EAI.

/iaXAoi'

om. W.
3

7r6re/)a

r6re

TTOTC

BT.

Tror^pav

BT.

202

THEAETETUS
that anybody in the world has ever considered them, talking to himself and asking himself what their sum is, and that one person has said and thought eleven, and another twelve, or do all say and think that it is twelve ?

THEAET. No, by Zeus you take a larger number


;

many

say eleven, and

if
is

for consideration, there

For I suppose you are greater likelihood of error. speaking of any number rather than of these only. soc. You are right in supposing so and consider whether in that instance the abstract twelve in the block of wax is not itself imagined to be eleven. THEAET. It seems so. soc. Have we not, then, come back again to the beginning of our talk ? For the man who is affected in this way imagines that one thing which he knows
;

is another thing which he knows. This we said was impossible, and by this very argument we were forcing false opinion out of existence, that the same man might not be forced to know and not know the same things at the same time.

THEAET. Very true.


is

soc. Then we must show that forming false opinion something or other different from the interchange of thought and perception. For if it were that, we should never be deceived in abstract thoughts. But as the case now stands, either there is no false

opinion or

it is

possible for a

man

not to

know

that

which he knows. Which alternative will you choose ? THEAET. There is no possible choice, Socrates. soc. And yet the argument is not likely to admit both. But still, since we must not shrink from any risk, what if we should try to do a shameless deed ?
THEAET.

What

is it ?

203

PLATO
elrrelv rrolov ri TTOT*

earl TO

EAI.

Kat

2H.

"Eoi/ca? OVK Ivvoelv


,TJTY]aLs

ri TOVTO avaio")(VVTOV ; on rrds

6 Aoyo?
ri 77or'
EAI.

yeyovev eVtcm^it^?, to? OVK

et'Soat

'Ewoto
"E77etr' OUAC avatSe? So/cet, /x^ et'Sora? eT

E aAAa
TO
\

aTTO^aiveaOai TO
yet/),

eniaTaadac olov IGTLV;


TraAat
ecr/xev

to

0eatT7]re,

oLaXeyeaOai. nvpidKis yap Ka9apa>s " " " o?) /cat Ka/jiV TO yiyvtjoaKo^zv / <( > / n > >
/ZT^
>

>

/cat

67naTafj.eUa

/cat

ov/c

/)

eTrtCTTa/xet/a,

to?

Tt crwteVres- dAA^Atov eV a) ert eVtcrr^/x^v cl 8e /3ouAet, /cat ei^ TO) TrapcWt

ayvoov^ev

av TO) o.yvoelv T /cat cruvteVat," aurot? ^p^cr^at, CLirep aTepo/meOa


0EAI.

"

"

vw

"

to?

'AAAct rtVa TpoiTOV StaAe^et,


/^k'^'

to

,_ 197

TOUT toy
tov ye o? et/zf et Aoyt/co?, oto? dv^p et /cat yw Traprjv, TOVTCOV T* aV 5/ ^fx^ J'^ 5 ^ aTre^eac/at /cat T^^Lttv acpoop av a eyto Aeyto
2fl.
/)

Uwoe^a

"

rt

>

C\>\/

eV/xev (f>avXoi, jSouAet eVetSi) L7TiV OLOV tOTt TO 67TLO~TaO~6ai ; (j>aiVTai

ow

yap

/xot

EAI.

rrpovpyov Tt aV yeveaOai,. ToA aa TOLVVV vr) Ata.


f

TOVTCOV
1

8e

JLIT)

a7re^o/u-eVto aot

36.
EAI.

2fl.

TroAA^ avyyvcofjirj. ow o vui Ae'youcrtv 'A/c7y/coa?

eWat

TO

"Icrto?'

ou

/JL6VTOL ev

ye TOJ rrapovTi

sn.

'ETTtcrT^/x^? 77Oi e^tv (f>aalv

avTO

et^at.

204

THEAETETUS
soc.

To undertake

to tell
is

what

it

really

is

to

know.

that shameless ? soc. You seem not to remember that our whole talk from the beginning has been a search for knowledge, because we did not know what it is.

THEAET.

And why

THEAET.
soc.

Oh

yes,

remember.

not shameless to proclaim what it is to know, when we are ignorant of knowledge ? But really, Theaetetus, our talk has been badly tainted with unclearness all along for we have said over and over again "we know" and "we do not know" and "we have knowledge' and "we have no knowledge," as if we could understand each other, while we were still ignorant of knowledge ;
is it
;

Then

and at this very moment, if you please, we have again used the terms "be ignorant" and "understand," as though we had any right to use them if

we

are deprived of knowledge. THEAET. But how will you converse, Socrates, if you refrain from these words ? soc. Not at all, being the man I am but I might if I were a real reasoner if such a man were present at this moment he would tell us to refrain from these terms, and would criticize my talk
; ;

But since we are poor creatures, shall I scathingly. venture to say what the nature of knowing is ? For it seems to me that would be of some advantage. THEAET. Venture it then, by Zeus. You shall have full pardon for not refraining from those terms.
soc.

Have you heard what they


is ?
;

say nowadays

that

knowing

THEAET. Perhaps
just at this
soc.

however,

don't

remember

moment.
say
it is

They

having knowledge.

205

PLATO
'

EAI.

roivvv
L7TCO/JLV

cr/JLLKpov

fJieraOwfJieda

Kal

0EAI.

Tt ovv
>/T

8rj <j>rjais
\

2H.
EAI.
.

iaa>s

fjiev

ovoev

>

rovro eWtVou 8ia</>e'/5eti>; / T 5.5 o o ovv OOKZL, aKovaas


rt

>

Ou
TO

'Eav77ep ye oto? T* a>. roivvv [JLOL raurov ^atVerat TOJ KKrfja)v


2
fjir)

(fropo'i,

e^ety juev OVK av avrov


3

avro, KKTrjcr6ai ye p,r]v ^at/zei/. EAI. 'QpOaJs ye. 2n. "Opa orj Kal Tno~Tij[jir]V ec
KKTr}jJiVOl>
fJirj

Suvarov OUTOJ
t

%LV,
rj

ClAA'

60CT77ep
ct'AAo,

Tt9 OpVlOo.?
O'IKOI

aypta?,

TrepicrTepas

TL

Orjpevaas
1

KaraaKvaad/jLVos Trepiarepf.cova rpe'^ot. rpoTrov fjiev yap av TTOV TLva (fraifjiev avrov auras aet e^et^, art 817 KKTr)Tai. y yap;
EAI.
2fl.

Nat.
T/ooTToy

Se y* a'AAov oi'8e/xtW e^etv, aAAd aura) ?7e/3t aura? TrapayeyovevaL,

^ eV ot/cetaj Tve/ot^oAco UTT-o^etptou? eVoti^aaro, Aa^Setv Acat cr^etv, eTretSctv jBovXrjrai, Oypevaa^evoj rjv av del edeXr), Kal TrdXiv d(f)ievaL' /cat rovro ^LvaL TTOLCLV, oTroaaKis av ooKrj avra). EAI. "Eart raura.
Tt

2n. IlaAty Si], a)o-7Tp ev rot? rrpooQev Krjpivov ey rat? /ffX a ^ ? KareaKevd^ofjiev OVK 018' o rt

au
1

ev

Kaarrj
b

e/

vulg. ex emend, apogr.

0opot vulg.
3

7e

/y.V

<f>opuv
;

;
;

0o/?uJ

^e

STJ

76

P om. BTW. B 0opa5 T W.


;
; ;

5^ 76 vulg.

206

THEAETETUS
THEAET. True.
soc. Let us make a slight change and say possessing knowledge. THEAET. Why, how will you claim that the one differs from the other ? soc. Perhaps it doesn't but first hear how it
;

seems to
view.

me

to differ,

and then help

me

to test

my

THEAET.
soc.

I will if I can.

me the For instance, if a man bought a cloak and had it under his control, but did not wear it, we should certainly say, not that he had it, but that he possessed it. THEAET. And rightly. soc. Now see whether it is possible in the same way for one who possesses knowledge not to have it, as, for instance, if a man should catch wild birds pigeons or the like and should arrange an aviary
Well, then, having does not seem to

same

as possessing.

at

assert that

in it, we might in a way he always has them because he possesses them, might we not ?

home and keep them

THEAET. Yes.
soc. And yet in another way that he has none of them, but that he has acquired power over them, since he has brought them under his control in his

own

enclosure, to take them and hold them whenever he likes, by catching whichever bird he pleases,

and to

let

them go again; and he can do

this as

often as he sees fit. THEAET. That is true.


soc. Once more, then, just as a while ago we contrived some sort of a waxen figment in the soul, so now let us make in each soul an aviary stocked

207

PLATO

oW
oAtya?,

KOLT' aye'Aa? oucra? ^cupi? TOJV d'AAcov,

TWO, TravroSaTTajv opvi9a)V, ra? ra? 8e /car


//.oVa?

ena? 8e

Sta Traaajv

07777

av

EAI.

IIe7rot7]CT^co 87^.

aAAa ri rovvrevOev;

OVTCJV (f>dvai %pr) eivai TOVTO TO ayyeTov KZVOV, avri 8e TCOV opvlBaiv e

2n.

FlatStaJv

/JL6V

vofjcrai'

TJv

8*

ay

eTncrTTJfjirjv
$><ivcLi

KTr)ad[jLvos

el?

rov

TTpifio\ov,

avrov
77

TO Trpay/xa oy -^v auVi^ TO eTriaraadai TOUT* etvat.


fjvprjKcvai,

emcmy/z^,

EAI

"EcTTO)

TOLVVV TTaXiV
crTr}/JLO)v

O.V

Qrjpeveiv /cat cr/coTret TIVOJV

Xafiovra

tcr^etv

/cat

au$t?

Semit ovodraiv,
ore

e'tVe

OLVTOJV

&v TO
8'
[Jiev

Trptorov

eKrdro etVe r

yap

Aeyets*

0EAI.

Nat.

2H. TauTT^v 8?) VTToXafie Qripav CTncrrrj/Jiwv dpTiOV T /Cat 7TplTTOV TTOVTOS.
EAI
.

2n.

TauTT^
TCLS

817,

ot/zat,

B %ipiovs
EAI.

67TL<JTr)fJL,as

T&v

dpi6{Jia)V

e'^et

/cat

aAAaj 77apaSt8acrtv o TrapaStSoJ?.

Nat.

2n.
<jKiv,
Si)

Kat

KaXovfjLev

ye

TrapaXafjifldi'ovTa

TiapaStSdp'Ta Se fjuavOdveiv,

/zev

St8a-

^ovra Se

TO)

KKTrj<j9cu

eV

TO>

TTepicrrepeajvt,

tvreudev B.

208

THEAETETUS
of birds, some in flocks apart from the small groups, and some solitary, flying hither and thither among them all. THEAET. Consider it done. What next ? soc. We must assume that while we are children

with

all sorts

rest, others in

this receptacle is

empty, and we must understand

that the birds represent the varieties of knowledge. And whatsoever kind of knowledge a person acquires and shuts up in the enclosure, we must say that he has learned or discovered the thing of which this is the knowledge, and that just this is knowing.

THEAET. So be it. soc. Consider then what expressions are needed for the process of recapturing and taking and holding and letting go again whichever he please of the kinds of knowledge, whether they are the same expressions as those needed for the original acquisiBut you will understand better by tion, or others. an illustration. You admit that there is an art of arithmetic ? THEAET. Yes. soc. Now suppose this to be a hunt after the kinds of knowledge, or sciences, of all odd and even numbers. THEAET. I do SO.
soc. Now it is by this art, I imagine, that a man has the sciences of numbers under his own control and also that any man who transmits them to another does this. THEAET. Yes. soc. And we say that when anyone transmits them he teaches, and when anyone receives them

he

learns,

has

them

and when anyone, by having acquired them, in that aviary of ours, he knows them.
209

PLATO
0EAI.

w
Ta> oe

JJL6V

OVV.
07817

2n.

877

evTevOev
reAe'co?

Trpocrcr^es'

TOV vovv.

dpLOfjirjTLKOs

ydp wv
TrdvTOJV

aAAo

rt TrdvTas dpi9[j,ovs

emoTarat ;
0EAI.

yap

dpiOjJL&v etcr> aura)

Tt

ouv o rotouro? dpi9fj,OL dv TTore rt o u * ti> >\ *< \w\\ auro? rrpos avrov avra i] aAAo TL TOJV egco ocra e
2fl.
\

*H

?}

EAI.

Ilai?

2n.
0EAI.

To

8e

yap ov ; dpiO^lv y
TTOcros

OVK aAAo

rt
a>v.

TOU crKO7TLaOai
a/oa
OUAC
et'SeVat.

ns diOos Tvdv^i

t8a?,

oj^

a/cowetj

coyitoAoy^Aca/xey aVavra yap TTOU ras" rotaura?

0EAI.

"Eycoye.
2H.
KTTJaei T
77

37'

7TplGTp)V
r)v
77

KO.L Orfpa

dijpa,
77

/xev

77ptv

pOVfJLV OTi eKrrjodai TOV KeK

rat? x
o-raTO

Se KKrr)[j,va) TOV Xafielv KOI e^etv eV TrdXcii KKTrjTO. OVTCDS 8e /cat c5v x TraAat eVtcrr^at Tyaap' aural /zafloVn /cat ^m-

V6Ka'

P~w &
aura,

irdXiv

ecrrt

KaTafJLav9dviv
eTrtCTT^/x^v
/xev

raura
e/cacrrou

raura
/cat

dvaXa^dvovTa
771^

Trjv

t'cr^ovra, 8' oi)/c et^e T77

e/ce/CTTyro

TraAat,

Trpo^ipov

Stavota;
a/ort
Kai

EAI.
.

'AA^^.
Toj7ro
1

877

ypcoTtuv,

OTTOJS

\pj]

rots

/u.a.86vTi

^a.B6vn

BT.

210

THEAETETUS
THEAET. Certainly. Now pay attention to what follows from this. Does not the perfect arithmetician understand all numbers for he has the sciences of all numbers in
soc.
;

his

mind
soc.

THEAET.

a man ever count anything either any abstract numbers in his head, or any such external objects as possess number? THEAKT. Of course.
soc.

To be sure. Then would such

But we

shall affirm that

counting

thing as considering question is. THEAET. We shall.


soc.
all

how

great

is the same any number in

Then he who by our previous admission knows number is found to be considering that which he knows as if he did not know it. You have doubtless
heard of such ambiguities. THEAET. Yes, I have.
soc. Continuing, then, our comparison with the acquisition and hunting of the pigeons, we shall say that the hunting is of two kinds, one before the

acquisition for the sake of possessing, the other carried on by the possessor for the sake of taking and holding in his hands what he had acquired long
before.

And
came

learning

just so when a man long since by to possess knowledge of certain things,

and knew them, he may have these very things afresh by taking up again the knowledge of each of them separately and holding it the knowlege which he had acquired long before, but had not at hand
in his

mind ?
is

THEAET. That
soc.

true.

This, then, was

my

question just

now

How
211

PLATO
oVd/zacrt xpa)jj,vov Aeyetv rrepi avrojv, orav CTOJV ir) 6 dpiOfjirjriKos TJ Tt avayvojaofievo? 6
Tt/cds",

cu? eVtcrra^evo? apa eV TO) roiovrco TTQL\IV epxerai /za^crd/zeyo? 77ap' eavrov a emaTcmu; EAI. 'AAA' O.TOTTOV, c5 2 to /cpa/re?. 2n. 'AAA' a ou/c eVtcrrarat <f>)p,V avrov avayva)<jeo9ai Kai apiOfjiijcreiv, SeScoAcdre? aurto vravra
/Liey

ypa/xftara,
EAI.

TTOLVTO,

199

'AAAa

/cat

8e apiQ^ov 7riaraa6aL; TOUT' aAoyov.

BouAet ouv Xeyaijjiev OTL ra)v /xey 2il. ovbev rjfjiiv /ze'Aet, 0777^ Tt? ^cupei e'A/ccov TO eTTi adai /cat ^avOaveiv, 67761817 Se cuptcra/xe^a erepov 6 TO eV Tt TO KKT7Jo6ai T^V ETTiar^ JJL7JV , TpOV
,

//.ev

Tt? e/cT^Tat /x^

KKTrja6ai a^vvarov

elvai,
rj

ware

et'SeVat, ifjevbrj

ovSeTrore ovfjifiaiveL 6 TLS olSev ^4vroi Sd^av otdv T' etvat ?r/ot

B avrov
TLVOL

Aa^etv; /XT) yap e^etv TT^V 7TL<jTTJfJir)v TOVTOV otdv Te, cxAA' erepav avr' e/ceiv^?, 6Vav 6r)peva)v
TTOV
TTOT*
2

erepav a^aprajv Aa/3^, TOTC

apa

TO,

eVSe/ca

aWt

T-^s"

TCOV

etvat, St68e/ca Aaf3d>v rrjv

ev eauTco

<f)OLTTav

aVrt TrepicrTepa?. 0EAI. "E^et yap ow Adyov. 8e ye 771; eVt^etpet

So^a^etv TOTe, /cat ovra) So^ay, /cat c5v eV Tot? rrpoaQev e'Sucr^epatVo^ep' ouSev efJLrroSwv yiyvetcra;? ouv jitot au/z</>TJo-ets" ; r) TTCO?
/cat TO,
8r)

Te

6Wa

efvat dXr}97J re /cat

ijjevSfj

irou TTOT'
2

r6re

W W

;
;

aTr'
6're

aurou BT.

BT.

212

THEAETETUS
should we express ourselves in speaking about them when an arithmetician undertakes to count or a man In such a case shall of letters to read something ? we say that although he knows he sets himself to learn again from himself that which he knows ? THEAET. But that is extraordinary, Socrates. soc. But shall we say that he is going to read or count that which he does not know, when we have

granted that he knows all letters and all numbers ? THEAET. But that too is absurd. soc. Shall we then say that words are nothing to us, if it amuses anyone to drag the expressions "know" and "learn" one way and another, but since we set up the distinction that it is one thing to possess knowledge and another thing to have it, we affirm that it is impossible not to possess what one possesses, so that it never happens that a man does not know that which he knows, but that it is about it ? For possible to conceive a false opinion it is possible to have not the knowledge of this thing, but some other knowledge instead, when in hunting for some one kind of knowledge, as the various kinds fly about, he makes a mistake and catches one so in one example he thought instead of another eleven was twelve, because he caught the knowledge of twelve, which was within him, instead of that of eleven, caught a ringdove, as it were, instead of a
;

pigeon.

THEAET. Yes, that


soc.

is

reasonable.

But when he catches the knowledge he intends to catch, he is not deceived and has true opinion, and so true and false opinion exist and none of the things which formerly annoyed us interferes ? Perhaps you will agree to this or what will you do ?
;

213

PLATO
EAI.

QvTOJS.

2n.

Kat yap TOV

fjiev

araaOai

aV^AAay/xe^a*
nrf.
{JLOI,

a eVtcrra^rat ft 17 ema yap KKTTJ/jida (JLTJ


ovre
ifrevadelcri
fjievroi

KKTrjo*0ai ovoa/jiov ert

cru/a,/3aiVet,

OVTC
0EAI.

SeivoTepov
8o/<:et.

naQos

aAAo

aivadai

To
Et
TI

TTOLOV;

5H.

yevrjaerai Trore
EAI.

ITa)?

TO rtvo? e^ovra e /u,ev rovro avro ayvozlv, /XT) dyvajfjioavvr] aA lavrov 7nartjiJirj' eVetra erepov av TOVTO TO 8' eYepov TOVTO, TTtos ov TroXXrj aXoyia,
2fl.

ripcDrov

7rapay>vofjLvr)s yvtovai IJLCV T^V ifjv%r]v ayyo^aat Se TrdWa; e/c yap TOVTOV TOV Aoyou /cajAuet ouSev /cat ayyotav Trapayevo/xey^v
t

Tt

TTOLrjaai

KCLL

TV(f)XoTrjTa

tSetv,

etVep

^ dyvor]<jai TTOTG Tiva

TTOiijoei.

EAI.

"Icrco?

yccp,

co

Sco/cpaTe?, ou K-aAcu?

Ta?

/<rat

veTfLUTTif-Loavva.?
Trj
ijjvxf],

evas ev
Tno*Tr][Jir)v

Tievan o/xou al TOV drjpevovTa TOTC

Aa/x/^dVovTa, TOTC 8'

Gvvr), dXrjOfj Se

Oi) paStov ye, c5 6 fJLevTOi eiTTes 7raAtv

2n.

eatV^Te,
e7rtcr/<:ei/fat
.

/xi^

enaivelv

cre

eVrco /xev

yap

214

THEAETETUS
THEAET.
soc.
I will

agree.

rid of our difficulty that which they know for we no longer find ourselves not possessing that which we possess, whether we are deceived about anything or not. However, another more dreadful disaster

Yes, for

we have got

about

men not knowing

seems to be coming
THEAET.
soc.

in sight.
?

What

disaster

If the interchange of kinds of should ever turn out to be false opinion.

knowledge

THEAET.
soc.

HOW

SO

not the height of absurdity, in the first place for one who has knowledge of something to be ignorant of this very thing, not through ignorance but through his knowledge secondly, for him to be of opinion that this thing is something else and for the soul, when something else is this thing knowledge has come to it, to know nothing and be For by this argument there ignorant of all things ?
Is it
;

nothing to prevent ignorance from coming to us and making us know something and blindness from making us see, if knowledge is ever to make us
is

ignorant.

THEAET. Perhaps, Socrates, we were not right in birds represent kinds of knowledge only, but we ought to have imagined kinds of ignorance also flying about in the soul with the others then the hunter would catch sometimes knowledge and sometimes ignorance of the same thing, and through the ignorance he would have false, but through the

making the

knowledge true opinion.


soc.

It is

praising you.

once more.

not easy, Theaetetus, to refrain from However, examine your suggestion Let it be as you say the man who
:

215

PLATO
200
cos Ae'yets"
v$r}
[JLev,

o Se
<f>ri$,

Sr)

rrjv

dveTTio-Trj/Jiocrvvrjv
r)

Xaf3a>v

Sofctcrei.

yap;
ye
ifjevbrj

0EAI.
2fl.

Nat.

Ov

BTJTTOV /cat rjyrjcrerai

Soaea'.

EAI.
2il.

ITcD? ya/o;

'AAA' dXrjOrj ye,


ej/reucrrat.

/cat

cos etStos" Sta/cetcrerat

0EAI.

Tt
'ETT-tcTT^/x-Tyv

2n.

a'pa ot^aerat

dAA' OU/C
EAI.

7TpL\06vTS
7Tpa)Tr]V 7rdpcrfjiV aTTOpiav.

TTCtAtV

eVt

6 yap re
'^
'
1

eAey/crt/cos"

'

e/cetvo? yeAacras

<f)TJaL'
1

irorepov, c5
/cat

d{Ji<f)OTepas rt? et'Scus , eTrtcrr^/x^v


,

TO
/J

oioev;
^et

^ avTOiv rj ovoerepav f/ ? TO
/
>
rt

rjv M

otSev, erepav avrrjv oterat rtva etvat


^
1 A

etoojs , r/v

T^

O>

erepav
W

TO

cov ou/c otoev; ^ TO


T)V /ZT)

i\\
i\

/^T)
\

'/
TO

otoe,

17

TT)V /xev
<\

etoa)?,

ou,

T)V

otoev,

otoev;

17

T)V /XT)

otoev,

otSev T^yetrat; 7^ 7rd\iv av JJLOI e'petre ort /cat dveTTiarrjiouvvwv elaiv av

a? o
av

/ce/cr^jLteVo? eV
T^

eVepot? rtat yeAotot? 77eptareTrAaajitacrt


/cat

pecuCTtv

Krjpivois

Kadeip^as,
eou>
/AT)

/ce/crfjrat

eVtcrrarat,

r
TTEpirpe^iv
77/36?

et? ravrop'
'

fjivpLotKL?
co

ouSev

rt

raura,

eatTTyre,

aVo-

ai/TT]i>

BT

om.

W.

216

THEAETETUS
catches the
opinion.
soc.

ignorance
?

will,

you

say,

have

false

Is that it

THEAET. Yes.

But surely he
*

will not also think

that he

has false opinion. THEAET. Certainly not. soc. No, but true opinion, and will have the attitude of knowing that about which he is deceived.

THEAET.
soc.

Of course. Hence he will fancy that he has caught, and

knowledge, not ignorance. THEAET. Evidently. soc. Then, after our long wanderings, we have come round again to our first difficulty. For the real " Most excellent reasoner will laugh and say, Sirs, does a man who knows both knowledge and one of them, which he knows, ignorance think that he knows is another thing which or, knowing neither of them, is he of opinion that one, which he does not know, is another thing which he does not know or, knowing one and not the other, does he think that the one he does not know is the one he knows or that the one he knows is the one he does not know ? Or will you go on and tell me that there are kinds of knowand of ignorance, ledge of the kinds of knowledge and that he who possesses these kinds of knowledge and has enclosed them in some sort of other ridiculous aviaries or waxen figments, knows them, so long as he has them not at hand in possesses them, even if he
has,
; ; ;

And in this fashion are you going to be compelled to trot about endlessly in the same circle What shall we without making any progress?" ? reply to this, Theaetetus 217 H
his soul?

PLATO
EAI.

'AAAo.

fjLa

At",

a)

Zco/cpare?,
/caAtu? o
ou/c

eya>ye OVK

ri xpr) Aeyetv.
.

^A->' ovv
/cat

rjfJtiV,

c5 ?rat,

Aoyo? emtfjevSrj
a</>-

7T\r]TTei,

Ivfte'iKwrai

ort

op9a>s

So^-av Trporepav ^rovfjiev

&iricrrrjfj/ris,

eKelvrjv
Trplv
ctV

eVres

TO

8'

ecrriv

LKO.VO)S

a&vvarov yvuvai, AaSr rt TTOT' ecrrtV.


co

rt?

@EAI.

'AvdyKT],
2H.

^(jjKpares,

eV

rco

s Aeyet? otecr^at.

38.
ILT]V;

Tt ouv rt? epet

77

ov yap TTOV

aTTepovfJtev
jjirj

ye
crv

TTCO;

@EAI.
.

"Hxrto-ra, edvrrep

ye airayopevrjs.
^taAtcrra

Aeye
av

817,

rt

ai>

auro

eiTrovres

ttv

ayrot?
eV

0EAI.

"Orrep

TCO TrpoaOev

c5 eTre^etpou/zev, ^coKpares, ov yap e^cu eycoye aAAo oiJSeV.

2H.
0EAI.

To

TTolov;

fjLapTrjTOV
UTT'

Ti)v dArjOrj So^av eTnaTtj^v elvai. avaye TTOV eartv TO So^a^etv dXrjOrj, /cat TO,

aurou

ytyro/xeva

Travra

KaXa

Kal

dyada

yt'yverat.
.

'0 TOV
v

TTora/jLov KaOyyov/Jievos, t3 0eatT7yre,


/cat

apa
201
(f>rjveiV

oeetr avroTa-%

rovro

eav

tovre?

av

e^TroStov
(jievovcn Se
c/,AA'

yevoucvov

avro

TO ^TOV/JLCVOV,
'Qp6a)s Aeyeis*

EAI.

ta/xeV ye /cat ovco-

218

THEAETETUS
THEAET.
to say.
soc. Then, my boy, is the argument right in rebuking us and in pointing out that we were wrong to abandon knowledge and seek first for false opinion ? It is impossible to know the latter until we have adequately comprehended the nature of knowledge.

By

Zeus, Socrates,

don't

know what

THEAET. As the case now stands, Socrates, we cannot help thinking as you say. soc. To begin, then, at the beginning once more, what shall we say knowledge is ? For surely we are not going to give it up yet, are we ? THEAET. Not by any means, unless, that is, you
up. Tell us, then, what definition will make us contradict ourselves least. THEAET. The one we tried before, Socrates ; at

give

it

soc.

any

rate, I soc.

have nothing else to


?

offer.

What one

THEAET. That knowledge is true opinion ; for true opinion is surely free from error and all its results are fine and good. soc. The man who was leading the way through the river, 1 Theaetetus, said " The result itself will " show ; and so in this matter, if we go on with our search, perhaps the thing will turn up in our path and of itself reveal the object of our search but if we stay still, we shall discover nothing. THEAET. You are right let us go on with our
:

investigation.
1

A man
if

asked
event

itself will

The expression became

who was leading the way through a river was " the the water was deep. He replied O.VTO show " (i.e. you can find out by trying).

5',

proverbial.

219

PLATO
.

QVKOVV rovro ye
oA^ oijjLtaiVei /z-^ etWu ImaTTJfJLrjv avro. Ha)? 17; Kai ris avnfj;
raiv fjieyiarajv ei? oo<f>iav, ouV
/<:ai
17

yap

crot

EAI.
Sfl.
criv

'H

prJTOpds re eavraJv v f)

St/cai'i/cous'.

ourot yap TTOU


StSacr/covres',
.

TX

TreiOovaiv

ov

aAAd
otet

TTOiovvres

a aV

fiovXajvTai,

T)

cry

rtva? OVTOJ StSacr/caAous" etvat,

wore

ofs

^117
r\

TrapeyevovTO

rive?

a.7TO(JTpovfjLevoi$

^p^/JLara
Trpos

d'AAo

^ta^o/xeVots",

rourot?

SvvaaOai

a^JLLKpov StSa^-at iKavaJs TOJV yevojjievtDV

EAI.
2fl.

OuSa/xaJ? eycaye

olfjiai,

aAAd

Tretcrat jU,eV.

To

Tretcrat S'
/xrj^;

o^X^ So^ctcjat Aeyet? Trot^crat;

BEAI.

Tt

OUACOUV orav St/catco? TreioOajcnv St/cacrrat " \r>^' "j ' "^^ o>> " cuv looim IJLOVOV eoriv etoevat, aAAcu? oe 77-6/01
2H.

2'

raura

rdre

e^

aKorjs

KpLvovreSy

Xafiovres, avev eViCTTT^u,^? eKpivav, L7rep ev e'St/cacrav;


EAI.

opOd

YlavTaTracri

Uu/c av,

s~\ *

Kara
TTOT'

^j'\ a <ptAe, et ye TOLVTOV i]v ooga T ^LKaartLa 4 /<:at eTnartiry 60d


"

fjiev

ovv.

><

o //

w Se

aV SiKaarrj? drpo? e'So^a^e^ dVey

OLKV

d'AAo rt

KaTpov
rourofs T.

TOI/TOIS]
2

/56/rt] eZSov r^
;

;
;

et'Son

W.

8
4

Kara Jowett

/ecu

MSS.

5i/(acrT?7pia] St/caor^pio^

om. Heindorf. om. Heindorf.

220

THEAETETUS
soc.

Well, then,
;

this

at

least

calls

for

slight

investigation for you have a whole profession which declares that true opinion is not knowledge. THEAET. How so ? What profession is it ? soc. The profession of those who are greatest in wisdom, who are called orators and lawyers ; for they persuade men by the art which they possess, not

teaching them, but making them have whatever Or do you think there are any opinion they like. teachers so clever as to be able, in the short time allowed by the water-clock, 1 satisfactorily to teach the judges the truth about what happened to people who have been robbed of their money or have suffered other acts of violence, when there were no
eyewitnesses ? THEAET. I certainly do not think so they can persuade them.
is
;

but

think

soc. And persuading them an opinion, is it not ? THEAET. Of course.

making them have

soc. Then when judges are justly persuaded about matters which one can know only by having seen them and in no other way, in such a case, judging of them from hearsay, having acquired a true opinion of them, they have judged without knowledge, though they are rightly persuaded, if the judgement they have passed is correct, have they not ? THEAET. Certainly.
soc.

But,

my

friend, if true opinion

and knowledge
;

were the same thing in law courts, the best of judges could never have true opinion without knowledge in fact, however, it appears that the two are different. 1 The length of speeches in the Athenian law courts was
limited

by a water-clock.

221

PLATO
0EAI. "0 ye eyod, t5 JlcoKpares, CLTTOVTOS rov Se T^y d/coucra? eTreAeA^cr/z^v, vuV 8* evvooo' <f>r)
/u,ei>

/u-era Adyou dXr)9rj ooav eVtcrr^ft^v efvat, /cat cbv fj,V T^y 8e dAoyoy e/cros" eTnarrjfJLrjs' ^rj
e'crrt

y
t,a>i>,

Adyo?, ou/c eVtcrr^ra etvat, ourcocrt / ^ a o e^et, emoT^ra.


>/

/cat OVO/JLOL-

>

2n.

KraAcD?
/IT^ 777y

Aeyet?.
St7y/o6t,

TO,

Se

817

TOLVTCL /cat

Aeye,
et

et a/oa

eVicrr^Ta /cara raura

re /cayco 0EAI. 'AAA'

ov/c

ot8a

e^evpijcra}'

Xeyovros

1 eVr* av erepov, cos eycpfjiai, a/coAoi>$i]crai/z' dV.

39-

2n.

E yap

au

e'So/cout'

"A/coue S^ 6Vap dvrt oveipa.ro?. eycu d/couetv TLVOJV ort TO, /xev Trpajra

OLOVTTtpel crrot^eta, e^ cuv rj/JLeis T crfy/cet/ze^a /cat rdAAa, Adyov OVK e^ot. ai)rd yap /ca^' aurd e/ca-

OTOV dvo/xdcrat [LOVOV eirj, Trpoaenrelv 8e ouSe^ W V\ \ >//)> >'/)> aAAo oyvarov, out; cos COTLV, ovu cos OVK ecmv 202 rjorj yap av ovaiav ^ fJLrj ovaiav aural TrpoariBeaQai, oelv oe ovoev Trpoa^epeiv, etVep avro e/cetvo fj,6vov
(J.

'

>

rt? epet.

e77et
/

OUO6
t(

><>.\

TO ^ TOVTO

auro ouoe TO e/cetvo " '^^ Q^ OVO KCLO~TOV TO OVOC [JiOVOV 'S'" ^ ^^ TrpoaoLareov ovo aAAa TroAAa TOtauTa*
ouoe TO
>

> <> \

<(

>

'V

>

xs

>

'

TCLVTCL

p,V yap TreptTpe'^ovTa


6'vTa
-^v

?7acrt

77pocr</>epea^at,

eVepa
etVep

e'/cetVcov

ot?

TrpoariOeraL,

oelv

Se,

SuvaTov auTo

Ae'yecr^at /cat et^ev ot'/cetoy

auTOU Adyoy, dVeu TOJV dAAtov aTrd^Tcov XeyeaQai. vvv oe dovvarov elvai OTLOVV roav rrpoorcov prjOfjvai
1
aKO\ovdr)<ra.Lfji.' SLV

Schanz

a.KO\ovdi)ffalfJii]v

BT

crai/ju al.

222

THEAETETUS
THEAET. Oh yes, I remember now, Socrates, having heard someone make the distinction, but I had He said that knowledge was true forgotten it. opinion accompanied by reason, but that unreasoning true opinion was outside of the sphere of knowledge and matters of which there is not a rational explana;

unknowable yes, that is what he called and those of which there is are knowable. soc. I am glad you mentioned that. But tell us how he distinguished between the knowable and the unknowable, that we may see whether the accounts that you and I have heard agree. THEAET. But I do not know whether I can think but if someone else were to make the stateit out
tion are

them

ment of it,
soc.

I think I could follow. Listen then, while I relate it to you "a dream for a dream." I in turn used to imagine that I heard certain persons say that the primary elements of which we and all else are composed admit of no for each alone by itself can rational explanation only be named, and no qualification can be added, neither that it is nor that it is not, for that would at once be adding to it existence or non-existence,
;

whereas we must add nothing to it, if we are to alone. Indeed, not even speak of that itself " itself" or " that " or " each " or " alone " or " this " or anything else of the sort, of which there are many, must be added for these are prevalent terms which are added to all things indiscriminately and are different from the things to which they are added but if it were possible to explain an element, and it admitted of a rational explanation of its own, it would have to be explained apart from everything else. But in fact none of the primal elements can be ex223
;
;

PLATO
BAoyor
ov yap ctvat
ovofjia

avra)

aAA*

r)

o
e/c

yap

fjiovov

e^ew
avra

ra Se

TOVTCDV
OVTOJ

o~vyKifji6va,
l

cooTrzp

TreVAe/crat,

ra oVd/zara avrcov ovofjidraiv yap ovrw 8^ ra ovcriav.


dyvojora
zlvai,

af/zTrAa/ceVra Xoyov yeyoelvai Xoyov ovfJiTrXoKr^v


fjiev

aladr^rd

crrot^eta dXoya Kal Se' rd? Se crvXXafias

yvoDords re Arat prjrds Kal dXyOei oor) ooacrrds. orav fiev ovv dvev Xoyov TTJV dXyOrj 86av TWOS

rt?

Xdfir),

dXrjOeveiv

fJLi>

avrov

rov yap avro, yiyvdiaKeiv 8' otr Bovvai re Kal oe^aoOai Xoyov dveTTLarTJaova etvat

TOVTOV TTpoaXafiovTa Se Xoyov 8vvarov re ravra Trdvra yeyovevai Kal reAetco? Trpos e e^etv. OVTOJS ov TO CVVTTVLOV r) aAAco? aKrJ EAI. OVTO) p,ev ovv Travrdrrao'LV.
Trepl

2n.

'ApecrK6L ovv oe Kal riBeaai ravrrj,

6av

dXr)9rj jLtera.

Aoyou
to

eTTLO-njfji'qv

elvai;

EAI.

Ko^LttS^
T

fiei/

ow.

2n.
qfjiepa

Ap',

lXij(f)a[jiv

Oeatr^re, vw ourco r^Se 777 o TrdXai Kal TroAAot rcDv CTOCJXJJV


/caAais
1

fyrjTovvres Trplv evpzlv Kareyijpaaav; EAI. 'Eftot yovv 8o/cet, c5 Saj/cpares",

Xeyeodai TO vvv prjOev.


.

Kat 6LKOS ye avTo TOVTO OVTCOS e^ety


/cat ert

rty

av
/cat

eVto-r^/zry etiy ^copt?

rou Aoyou TC

op9fjs o6r]s;

ev /JLCVTOL rt

EAI.

To

TTOLOV

224

THEAETETUS
pressed by reason they can only be named, for they have only a name but the things composed of these are themselves complex, and so their names are complex and form a rational explanation ; for the combination of names is the essence of reasoning. Thus the elements are not objects of reason or of knowledge, but only of perception, whereas the combinations of them are objects of knowledge and When therefore a man expression and true opinion. acquires without reasoning the true opinion about anything, his mind has the truth about it, but has no knowledge for he who cannot give and receive a rational explanation of a thing is without knowledge of it but when he has acquired also a rational explanation he may possibly have become all that I
; ; ;

have said and


Is
is it

may now be
it

that the version of the


different
?

dream you have heard,

perfect in knowledge. or

THEAET. That was


soc.

exactly.

this

then, and do you state it in way, that true opinion accompanied by reason is
satisfied,
?

Are you

knowledge

THEAET. Precisely. soc. Can it be, Theaetetus, that we now, in this casual manner, have found out on this day what many wise men have long been seeking and have grown grey in the search ? THEAET. I, at any rate, Socrates, think our present statement is good. for soc. Probably this particular statement is so what knowledge could there still be apart from reason
;

One point, however, in what and right opinion ? has been said is unsatisfactory to me.
THEAET.

What

point

225

PLATO
"0
Ka.1

So/cet

v crrot^eta ayvcocrra,

\eyeo9ai KOfiiftorara, co? ra TO 8e TOJV at>AAa/3a>v yeVo?

yvcuoToV.
EAI.

QVKOVV 6p9a)$;
Icrreov
877'

2H.

cucrTrcp

yap

ofirjpov?

e^o/Jicv
e ^7

rov Xoyov ra TrapaSety^tara, 01? xP i*J lJievo s Travra raura.


EAI.

Hota

2n.
jSas".

Ta
T?

otet

TOJV ypa/XjLtaTOJV crrot^eta T /cat cruAAaaAAocre 7701 jSAcTrovra ravra

rov elTTovra a Aeyo/xev; 0EAI. OL/C, dAA' etV ravra.

203

aura avaAa/x^a -^ ou^ ovrajs fiara efiddofjiev. <f>ep Trp&rov dp' at /xev jSat Aoyov ^ovai y ra Se oroi^eta aAoya;

40

2fl.

Bacraw^co/Ltev
1

Si]

/LtaAAov Se T^/xas awrot;?, ovrcus

y/)a/x-

0EAI.
/cat

rou?

yow
'

et
(3

rt?

epotro

r^v

Trpoirrjv
'

ovrcocri"
(1770 /cpt vet;

Qeairrjre, Aeye
CTtyjLta /cat c5.
1

rt

eVrt

cra>;

rt

EAI.
2il.

"Ort

Ou/cow rovrov

e^ets

Aoyov r^? ovXXafifjs;


/cat

EAI.

2n.

"Eycoye. "I^t ST;, ovrais

etVe

rov

rou

crty/xa

Aoyov.
EAI.
/cat

Kat

TTCU?

yap

877, co

TOU crrotxet'ou rt? epet crrot^eta; Sco/cpares , TO Te aty/xa


1

226

THEAETETUS
soc. Just that which seems to be the cleverest the assertion that the elements are unknowable and the class of combinations is knowable. THEAET. Is that not right ? soc. We are sure to find out, for we have as hostages the examples which he who said all this
;

used in his argument. THEAET. What examples ? soc. The elements in writing, the letters of the ] or alphabet, and their combinations, the syllables do you think the author of the statements we are discussing had something else in view ? THEAET. No those are what he had in view. soc. Let us, then, take them up and examine
; ;

them, or rather, let us examine ourselves and see whether it was in accordance with this theory, or not, that we learned letters. First then, the syllables have a rational explanation, but the letters have not ? THEAET. I Suppose SO.

Theaetetus, tell me, what is SO ? you reply ? THEAET. I should say " S and O."
soc.

"

soc. I think so, too, decidedly. Now if anyone should ask about the first syllable of Socrates
;

"

What would

This, then,

is

your explanation of the syllable

THEAET. Yes.
soc. Come now, in the same manner give me the explanation of the S. THEAET. How can one give any elements of an element ? For really, Socrates, the S is a voiceless

and
letter

o-uXXajS??,

originally general

terms

element and combination, became the

common words

for for

and

syllable.

227

PLATO
ecm,
rrjs'
i/s6(f)os rts" [Jiovov,

olov ovpiTTGvarjs rrjs


(f>a)vr]

TOV

8'

av Prjra ovre
cur

oi>Ve i/ro^o?,

ovSe

TOJV TrXeLCTTCDV OTOt^et'cov

XeyeaOai avra aAoya,

ware TTOLVV ev ^6 TO ye ra evapyearara aura


>

ra

eTT-ra <f>covr)v IJLOVOV

x ei ^oyov 8e owS' ovnvovv.


cu

2fl.

Tourt

/Ltev

apa,

eratpe,

EAI.

Oatvo/xe^a.

sn.

Tt Se; TO
EtVo? ye.

jLtiy

yvcocTTo^ etvat TO
9

d\Xa
2H.
TO,

rrjv avAXafirjv

dp op9a>s a77oSeSei'y/ze0a;
J

EAI.

Oe'/oe Si],

T^V orvXXa^rjv Trorepov


7^

Ae'yco/xev
r)

djLt^orepa o-Tot^eta, /cat e'ar TrAetco


t'Se'ttv

Suo, Ta

yeyovutav

avrcijv;

0EAI.
2fl.

To, aTravTCL efjiOLye SOKOV/JLCV. "Qpa Sr) eVt Suotv, oly^a, Kal to.
7Tf)(jL)Tr)

d/i^oTe/oa

77

cruXXaftr)

TOV

efjiov

oVo/zaTO?.

aAAo

Tt o yiyvaxyKOiv avTrjv EAI. Tt ^17^;

ra ap,(f)6rpa
TO
c5

yt-yvcoa/cet;

2n.
EAI.

To
T<
/

aty/xa
O>
*

/cat

apa

yiyv'cocr/cet.

Nat.

2H.

ltd;

KaTpov ap

ayyoet,

/cat

\^/ ovoerepov

ctStu? dfJL(j)6rpa ytyvt6cr/cet;


EAI.

2n.
cr/cetv,

'AAAa 8etvo^ /cat oAoyo^j c5 Scu/cpaTes*. 'AAAa pevroi et ye avdy/c?) e/caTepcv ytyvcu1

etVep dfji^orepd Tt? yvtuaeTat,


\tywjj.ei>

X^o/xej'

et al.

228

THEAETETUS
1 B letter, a mere noise, as of the tongue hissing again has neither voice nor noise, nor have most of the other letters and so it is quite right to say that they have no explanation, seeing that the most distinct of them, the seven vowels, have only voice, but no explanation whatsoever. soc. In this point, then, my friend, it would seem that we have reached a right conclusion about
;

knowledge. THEAET. I think we have. soc. But have we been right in laying down the principle that whereas the letter is unknowable, yet the syllable is knowable ? THEAET. Probably. soc. Well then, shall we say that the syllable is the two letters, or, if there be more than two, all of them, or is it a single concept that has arisen from their combination ? THEAET. I think we mean all the letters it
contains.

take the case of two, S and O. The first He syllable of my name. who knows it knows the two letters, does he not ? THEAET. Of course. soc. He knows, that is, the S and the O. THEAET. Yes. soc. How is that? He is ignorant of each, and knowing neither of them he knows them both ? THEAET. That is monstrous and absurd, Socrates. soc. And yet if a knowledge of each letter is necessary before one can know both, he who is
soc.

Now

two together are the

The
a, e,

distinction
o, v,

here

made

is

between vowels and consonants.


are
17,
t,

that which we make The seven Greek vowels

w, called ^uw^ej/ra.

229

PLATO
orot^eta aVacra oVay/c-^ TO) yvcoaeadai avXXaf3r)v, KOI OVTCDS Adyos aVoSeSpa/ca^s O6\'^orerat. EAI. Kai fjidXa ye eai(fnrr)STO,
1
1

/LteAAoi/nt
r)fj,iv

TTOTC

/caAo?

/caAaj? auTov TiOeadai fjirj ra crroi^eta, T^V avXXafirjv w T^ >^ / e^ e/cei^cov ev TL yeyovo? eioo?, toeav auro avrov EAI. DaVu /xev ouv /cat rct^a y' aV

2n.

Ov yap
>
/

yap >\\ aAA

to-co?

>>

etco?
.

S/ceTrreov

/cat
/cat

ou

TrpoSoreov

ourco?

av-

fteyav re
EAI.

oe^vov \6yov.

Ou yap ow.
'E^ercu
TOJI^
817

204

2n.

ai?

vw

^>a/xev,

jut'a

tSea

e^

e'/caarcov
fAevYj
rj

ouvapiiorrovrajv aroL^LO}v yiyvoeV cruAAa/??^, ofioicjos eV re ypa/xyuacrt /cat


IIdVi> /xev ouv.

rot? aAAot? aVacrt.


EAI.

2n.
EAI.

Oi)/cow /xep^ auras' ou Set etvai.

Tt ST}; "Ort ov av
fji^pf]

fj

^epr),
/cat

TO oXov ovary KJ] ra


6'Aov e/c

eii'at.

TO
1

Ae'yet?

yeyoyo? eV rt etSos
"Eya>ye. T>\o\ lo oe Trav
OT)
T)

erepov ra>y

EAI.

2n.

/cat

\x/\ TO oAov

rrorepov ravrov

<

/caAets"

EAI.

eVepov e/caTepov; "E^aj /zev oi)Sev aafies, ori 8e /ceAeuet?

OTI eVepov.

'H
8e
/cat
17

/xev

vrpo^u/zta,

c5

eatV^Te, 6p6ij'

et

aTrd/cptat?,

230

THEAETETUS
a syllable must certainly know the so our fine theory will have run away and vanished THEAET. And very suddenly, too. soc. Yes, for we are not watching it carefully. Perhaps we ought to have said that the syllable is not the letters, but a single concept that has arisen from them, having a single form of its own, different from the letters. THEAET. Certainly and perhaps that will be better than the other way. soc. Let us look into that we must not give up in such unmanly fashion a great and impressive theory. THEAET. No, we must not. soc. Let it be, then, as we say now, that the syllable or combination is a single form arising out of the several conjoined elements, and that it is the same in words and in all other things. THEAET. Certainly. soc. Therefore there must be no parts of it. THEAET. HOW SO ? soc. Because if there are parts of anything, the whole must inevitably be all the parts or do you assert also that the whole that has arisen out of the parts is a single concept different from all the parts ? THEAET. YeS, I do. soc. Do you then say that all and the whole are the same, or that each of the two is different from the other ? THEAET. I am not sure but you tell me to answer boldly, so I take the risk and say that they ever to

know

letters

first,

and

are different.
soc. Your boldness, Theaetetus, is right whether your answer is so remains to be seen.
;

but
231

PLATO
0EAI.

Aet
2fl.

Se'

ye

817.

41.
0EAI.

OTJ/COW

Sta</>epot

aV

TO

6'Aov

TO>

cos o

wv
O.

Aoyo?;

Nat.
rri
/ O> V

2H.

It oe or);

ra navra.

/cat

TO Trav eaa
^

<

**.

M
*

o Tt
Tpta,

C/ rerrapa,
EAI.

otov fVet8ay Aeyca/j-ev eV, ' \>\ ov w> / Trevre, e^, /cat eav ot? Tpta

8uo,

17

T/3t?

^ rerrapOL re /cat Suo T) Tpta /cat Svo /cat eV, V Trdcrt TOVTOt? TO auTO T) erepov Aeyo/xev;

To

aj5To.
r

2H. ^A' aAAo Tt 0EAI.

EAI.
2fl.

Nat.
IlaAtv 8' oi>x eV
'Avay/cry. T aAAo Tt
3

Aeyo/zey

TO.

Travra \4yovres;

EAI.
2fl.

T)

TO,

e;

EAI.

OuSeV.

2n.
ecrTt,

Tavrov apa eV ye Tot? ocra e^ dpt^/xou TO Te ?rav Trpoaayop^vo^ev /cat Ta aVaKTa;


OatVeTat.
T

EAI.

2H.

^pou

2n.

CLVTOJV XeywfJLev. 8)7 Trept api9fj,os /cat TO TrXedpov Tavrov EAI. Nat. f ' ^ /* T7-\f O/

Q8e

6 TOV TrAeT)

yap;

Kat o TOV oraotou


Nat.
/xr)v

or)

acrauTCO?.
/cat

EAI.

Kat
1

/cat

o TOU arparoTreSov ye

TO

5^ 7e 5J

2 iravra TO,
3

BT BT

; ;

7 e 5^ W.
Trdrra

W.
;

TrdXiv 5 oi^x

^ Hermann

ir&Kiv

8' otiStif

BT

irav 5' ovdtv

Burnet, after Campbell.

232

THEAETETUS
THEAET. Yes, certainly, we must see about that. soc. The whole, then, according to our present view, would differ from all ? THEAET. Yes. soc. How about this ? Is there any difference between all in the plural and all in the singular ? For instance, if we say one, two, three, four, five, six, or twice three, or three times two, or four and two, or three and two and one, are we in all these forms speaking of the same or of different numbers ? THEAET. Of the same.
soc.

That

is,

of six

THEAET. Yes.
soc.

Then

in each

form of speech we have spoken

of

all

the six ? THEAET. Yes.


soc.

And

when we speak

again do we not speak of one thing of them all ?

THEAET. Assuredly. soc. That is, of six ? THEAET. Yes.


soc.

Then

in

all

things

that

are

made up

of

number, we apply the same term to and all in the singular ?

all in

the plural

THEAET. Apparently. soc. Here is another way of approaching the matter. The number of the fathom and the fathom are the same, are they not ? THEAET. Yes. soc. And of the furlong likewise. THEAET. Yes. soc. And the number of the army is the same

233

PLATO
orpaToVeSov,
/cat

yap

dpiOfjios Trds EAI. Nat.

TfdvTO. rd rotaura o/zoia)?; TO 6V TraV ZKQ.GTOV OLVTOJV ecrtv.

E J

2n.
/ >

'0 Se
'

Kacrra}v

apt^uos"

At^

a'AAo

rt

T)

/zepry

eortv; 0EAI. Oi5SeV.

2H. "Ocra apa e\;et /xep^, e/c fjiepajv av 0EAI. OatVerat. To, Se ye TTOVTO. p,cpr) TO Trav elvai
.

cu

1
,

etTrep /cat o Tra? apiO/Jios

TO TrdV eWat.
77a^

0EAI.

2n.
6177

To

OUTCD?. oAov ap' ou/c eariv TO, TTcivTa 6V


Oi)/c eot/cev.

e/c /xepa)^.

yap

EAI.
2fl.
*\
**.

TI/T /

Ivlepos"
t/\

o>

"

/)>

eo-(7

OTOU aAAou

"

"\

>

>

>

CCTTIV OTrep eariv

17

TOU oAou;
EAI.

To>

TTCLVTOS ye.

205

2^_
0EAI.

'A^Spi/cto?

ye,
Jir)$6v

a)
0,77-77,

QeaiTrjre,

jLta^et.
TTO.V

TO

dV Se ou
W/->
.

6Vav

auTo TOVTO
>/

fj

6'Aov
;

TauTOV TOVTO eaTai, ov a.v [j,r]$v OLTroaTaTrj ; ov 8' av O.TTOO raT-fj ouVe ouVe Trav, a/za yevo/xevov eV TOU awrou TO
OL>
,

UAov oe

NOVl

<

-?

EAI.

Ao/cet

/xoi

vuv

ouSev
t

Sta^e'petv

/cat 6'Aov.

ou av ftep^
ecrTai;

TO 6'Aov

/cat Trav

Ta TfdvTa
1

f^^prj

EAI.

Jlavv ye.
u/j.o\6yT)Tat

6/AoAo7etrai

B.

234

THEAETETUS
army, and all such cases are alike ? In each all the number is all the thing. THEAET. Yes. soc. And is the number of each anything but the parts of each ? THEAET. No. soc. Everything that has parts, accordingly, consists of parts, does it not ? THEAET. Evidently. soc. But we are agreed that the all must be all the parts if all the number is to be the all. 1 THEAET. Yes. soc. Then the whole does not consist of parts, for if it consisted of all the parts it would be the all. THEAET. That seems to be true. soc. But is a part a part of anything in the world but the whole ? THEAET. Yes, of the all. soc. You are putting up a brave fight, Theaetetus. But is not the all precisely that of which nothing is
as the

of

them

wanting

THEAET. Necessarily. soc. And is not just this same thing, from which nothing whatsoever' is lacking, a whole ? For that from which anything is lacking is neither a whole nor all, which have become identical simultaneously and for the same reason. THEAET. I think now that there is no difference between all and whole. soc. We were saying, were we not, that if there are parts of anything, the whole and all of it will be all the parts ? THKAET. Certainly.
1

Cf.

204

B.

235

PLATO
2fl.
TI

TldXiv

817,

orrep

avXXafir]

fjir)

ra

ff>7

to? [Atpy ^X il> oucrav aurot? O/JLOLCOS

apn eTre^etpouv, ou/c, crrot^eta eariv, aVay/c^ avrty ^ avr ^S TO. arot^eta, 7} raurov
Kivois yvajorrjv efvat;
?i/a
/UT)

EAI.

Our a>?.
TOUTO
yeV^rat, crepov av~

avryv EAI. Nat.


2X1.
/

T it
>/

'

O>
;

>

V\

eart^,
EAI.

t'X 61 ?

a/

M
1

L \

fjirj

ra arra
V

crrot^eca
etTretf

>c\ a

\\
ftepr^

O"
/

ovAAap^? /
{Jiev

ecrri

CTuAAa/5i]s"j 01) yueVrot

crrot^eta y' e/cetVT]?;

OuSa/zcos
1

arra avrfjs
d<j>evra

eV

et yap, cu Saj/cpare?, ftopt' Gvy^copoiiqV) yeAotov TTOU ra arot^eta d'AAa t'eVat.


.

2n.
EAI.
2X1.

YlavraTraaL
"Eot/cev.
Me/xvT^CTat

877,

t'w Aoyoi^ /zta

rts" t'Sea

c5 eatr^re, /cara afieptoros avXXa^r] av


1

rov
irj.

ouv, c6 <^tAe, ort dAtyov ev TO) rfpoadev a77e8e^o^te^a r/yovf^evoL ev XeyeaOai ort raw Trptorojv OVK CLYJ Aoyo? e^ cuv rdAAa cruy/cetrat,
Stort ai)ro /ca^' auro e/cacrrov
oj)8e
etT]

davvBerov,

/cat

avrov 6p0a>s ^X OL npocrfie" rouro," cu? erepa /cat aAAorpta povra L7Telv, ovo /cat aur^ atrta d'Aoyov re /cat Aeyo/zeva, ST) 7} v ayvoiorov avro Trotoi,*
ro
etrat
Trept
>
\

'

'

EAI.

T
2X1.

H ow
2

Me/xvTy/xat.
/cat

eiO$ re

aovod'AAT] rt? 77 aurT} rj atria rov d^epiarov avro elvai; eyd) [lev yap
&rra
2

oi>x opaj dXXrjv.


1

/J.bpi

avrrjs

re

fj.6pia

in ras.

TavTijs rt T.

BT.

236

THEAETETUS
as I was trying to say just not the letters, does it not follow necessarily that it contains the letters, not as parts of it, or else that being the same as the letters, it is equally knowable with them ? THEAET. It does. soc. And it was in order to avoid this that we
soc.

Once more, then,


the syllable
is

now,

if

assumed that
soc.

it

was

different

from them

THEAET. Yes.

Well then, if the letters are not parts of the can you mention any other things which are parts of it, but are not the letters l of it ? THEAET. Certainly not. For if I grant that there are parts of the syllable, it would be ridiculous to give up the letters and look for other things as parts. soc. Without question, then, Theaetetus, the syllable would be, according to our present view,
syllable,

some

indivisible concept.
I

THEAET.
soc.

agree.

then, my friend, that we while ago, on what we considered good grounds, that there can be no rational explanation of the primary elements of which other things are composed, because each of them, when taken by itself, is not composite, and we could not properly " " apply to such an element even the expression be " or this," because these terms are different and alien, and for this reason it is irrational and unknowable ? THEAET. I remember. soc. And is not this the sole reason why it is I can see no other. single in form and indivisible ?

Do you remember,
little

admitted a

is reminded that the words <rroixfiov and " " have the meanings " element and " combination " as well as " letter and " syllable."
1

The reader

o-i/XXa/Srj

237

PLATO
0EAI.

2n.

Ov yap ovv 817 QVKOVV els TCLVTOV


etWp

efiTTeTTrcoKev
fjirj

rj

av\Xa/3r)
/zt'a

etSos" e/cetVa>,

/xep^ re
OVV.

e^et /cat

larlv

tSea; 0EAI.
/cat

TlaVTOLTTacri

JJL6V

Et
<jvXXaj3ai

/zev

apa 77oAAa
fjieprj

6Aoi^ TL,

8'

crroi^eta rj cruAAa/S^ eartv avrfjs ravra, o/zoi'co? at re

yvuioTcu,

/cat

p^rat

7TL7Tp

TO, TTaVTO.

^pt]

TO) 6'AoJ

/cat ra TaUTOV (f)dvr]

0EAI.

Kat

jLtaAa.
/cat

Et 8e ye eV re
tuaavTOJS
77

d/zepe?,

oftot'a)?

Se

crrot^etop'

a'Aoyov

re

/cat

yap
yu,ev

0EAI.

Oi)/c

avrrj Trot^cret ^a> d'AAcu? etVetr.

ama

aura rotaura.
Ae'yr^

TOVTO
Tovvavriov.
0EAI.

fj,ev

apa /XT^ ^ yvwarov

aTToSe^aS/ze^a, o? dV
/cat

prjrov, oroi^elov

8e

206

Tt fjidXXov dV
5n.
0EAI.

M-)) yd/3, S' au;

L7Tp TO) AdyO) 7Tl06fJ,0a. rovvavriov Aeyovro? dp' oi5 aTToSe'^ato e^ cuv aurd? ovvoioQa crauraj
ypajLt/xrcov

Td
1

2n. 'Ds ou8ev d'AAo navBdvaw StereAecra? 2 orot^eta eV TC TT^ 6'i/et Staytyvcoa/cetv
/cat eV

T)

rd

e/caorov, tva d/co7y auro /ca^' avr rapdrrot Aeyo/xeVcov re /cat 0EAI. AXrjOeaTara Aeyet?. 2fl. 'Ey Se Kidapiarov reAeaj? /ze/xa^/ceVat dAAo Tt TJV T^ TO TO) <f)96yycp eVdcrTa) SvvacrOai

r$
'

o-e

W
2

re

; ;

tiyvuffrov pr.

BT.

om. BT.

238

THEAETETUS
THEAET. There is no other to be seen. soc. Then the syllable falls into the same class with the letter, if it has no parts and is a single

form ? THEAET. Yes, unquestionably.


then, the syllable is a plurality of letters whole of which the letters are parts, the syllables and the letters are equally knowable and expressible, if all the parts were found to be
soc.
If,

and

is

the same as the whole. THEAET. Certainly.


soc.

But

if

one and

indivisible,

then syllable and


;

likewise letter are equally irrational and unknowable for the same cause will make them so.

THEAET.
soc.

cannot dispute

it.

Then we must not accept the statement of any one who says that the syllable is knowable and
expressible, but the letter
is

not.

THEAET. No, not argument.


soc.

if

we

are

convinced

by our

belief,

But would you not rather accept the opposite judging by your own experience when you
?

were learning to read

merely constantly trying to distinguish between the letters both by sight and by hearing, keeping each of them distinct from the rest, that you might not be disturbed by their sequence when they were spoken or written.
is very true. the music school was not perfect attainment the ability to follow each note and tell

THEAET. What experience ? soc. In learning, you were

THEAET. That
soc.

And

in

239

PLATO
',

TTOIOLS

Trees'

aV d/zoAoyrjcrete
T

fJLOvaiKrj?

Ae'yea&u;

EAI.
2fl.

OuSei' d'AAo.
Qi> ftev
a/3*

avrol epireipot ecr/xev Set a/Tro TOVTCOV reKfJiaipecrdat /cat ct? TO, aAAa, TroAu ro rcDv oroL^eiajv yeVo? evapyearepav re T^V yvcoatv e^etv </>?]<7O/zei' /cat KvpLojrepav rfjs cruAAa^s" Trpos TO AajSetv reAecu? eVacrrov ^dOrffia, feat eav rt? ^>7^ orvXXa^rjv ftei/
/cat

avXXafiajv,

el

Ot',

ayvcucrrov 3e ?7</>u/ceVat OTOL^elov, e/covra

a/covra
EAI.

mueiy
'AAAa
817

croe

aurov.
ert
/caV

42.

sn.

TOUTOU

(j)aviv aTToSet^et^, to?


/cat

/xev e/xot So/cet'


'

aAAai

TO 8e
o Tt

Trpo/cet-

AeyeTat TO /xeTa 80^17? dXr]6ovs Adyov TrpocryevoiLzvov TT^V reXeajrdrjjv eVtcrT^/x^i/ yeyoveVat. EAI. Ou/covv xpi] opav.
2n.
EAI.

Oepe

817,

Tt TTOTC jSouAeTat TOI/

Adyov

->]/>t>

orj/jLCiLveiv ;

rpi&v yap eV
|Ltev

Tt /xot 8o/cet Aeyeti'.

TtVcov 817;

voiav

7rpu)TOV e'frj av ro TYJV avrov Siairoielv Sta <^OJVT]? yLteTa py/jLarajv r /cat ovofjiaTcov, COOTT^P els Karo-nrpov ^ v8a>p T^P

2n.

To

/j,(j)avfi

8dai>
po^v.
0EAI.

-^

eKTVTTOVjjLevov et? TT^V 8ta TOU CTTOjaaTO? ou So/cet crot TO TOLOVTOV Adyo? eivai;

"E^totye.

TOV

yow

airro

Spwvra

Ae'yetv

Ou/couv TOVTO ye Tra? Trotetv

SwaTo? Oarrov
Kaarov

T]

a^oAatVepoj/, TO eV8et'aa#at Tt 8o/cet Trept


w/

of^

BT.

240

THEAETETUS
which string produced it and everyone would agree that the notes are the elements of music ? THEAET. Yes, that is all true. soc. Then if we are to argue from the elements and combinations in which we ourselves have experience to other things in general, we shall say that the elements as a class admit of a much clearer knowledge than the compounds and of a knowledge that is much more important for the complete attainment of each branch of learning, and if anyone says that the compound is by its nature knowable and the element unknowable, we shall consider that he is,
;

intentionally or unintentionally, joking. THEAET. Certainly. soc. Still other proofs of this might be brought but let us not on that account lose out, I think
;

What is sight of the question before us, which is meant by the doctrine that the most perfect knowledge arises from the addition of rational explanation to true opinion ?
:

THEAET. No,
soc.

" " rational explanation ? three things. THEAET. What are they
soc.

Now what

we must not. are we intended


I

to understand
it

think

by means one of

would be making one's own thought clear through speech by means of verbs and nouns, imaging the opinion in the stream that flows through the lips, as in a mirror or wat,er. Do you not think the rational explanation is something of that sort ? THEAET. Yes, I do. At any rate, we say that he

The

first

that speaks or explains. Well, that is a thing that anyone can do sooner or later he can show what he thinks about
soc.
;

who does

24-J

PLATO
avro), 6
fjir)

eWo?

rj

Koj(f>os

oV

dp^rj?'

/cat

OVTCDS

ocrot TL

opBov Soaoucrt,
/cat

TTOLVTES

avro

fJLerd

Aoyou

ouSa/zou

en

opdr)

0EAI.
2fi.

MT)

Toivvv

pq$LO)s

KaTayiyvaMjKODfJiev

TO

.lpj]K.va.i

TOV

a,7TO(f)r]vdfJLVOV

eVtar^ryv o

vvv OKOTTOVfJiev. tcrcus" yap o Xeycuv ov TOVTO e'Aeyev, dAAa TO epojTrjOevTO. rt eKaarov Suvarov

207 CLTTOKpLOlV
EAI.

BlOL

TOJV OTOL^LO)V GTToSoUVat

Ofoi> Tt Aeyet?, a)

2n.
*

KO.Tov o

>^/
av

Otov

/cat
C
1

'HcHoSo?

re oovpatJ

'/)''

v SvvaifjLrjv elirelv,

Aeyet TO o a eya> /zep' OUK a/za^^?. aAA' ayaolfjiai Se ouSe au


77e/)t

dfjid^rjs

'/"^

> >

>

pajTr]0evT$ o rt

ecrrtv
1

a^a^a,

et e^ot/xej^

rpo^oi, da>v, inreprepia,


EAI.

dvrvyes, tpyov.

Daw

/xev

ow.
ototr* oV ^/xa?, coaTrep av TO
/cat

2n<

'0 Se ye

tcrco?

croV ovofjia

epcor^^eVra?

aTTOKpivofjievovs

Kara

opOaJs Ae'yovra? a Ae'yo/xev, olofievovs Se etvat /cat e^etv re /cat Ae'yetv ypa/x/xart/cais
/cat

auAAa/^i', yeAotou? elvai,

TOU 0eatr^TOi oVo/zaTOs Aoyov


1

TO

S*

ou/c etrat

ovSev

Ae'yetv, Trptv

ay Sta TCOV

/zeTa T^? dXrjOov? $OT]S eKaarov TI?, 6Vep /cat e/ Tots TrpoaOe TTOV e
a

Kuhn

f/TreprTjpla

VTrepr-fipui

T.

THEAETETUS
is deaf or dumb from the first and so all who have any right opinion will be found to have it with the addition of rational explanation, and there will henceforth be no possibility of right

anything, unless he

opinion apart from knowledge. THEAET. True. soc. Let us not, therefore, carelessly accuse him of talking nonsense who gave the definition of know-

ledge which we are now considering for perhaps that is not what he meant. He may have meant that each person if asked about anything must be able in reply to give his questioner an account of it in terms of its elements. THEAET. As for example, Socrates ? soc. As, for example, Hesiod, speaking of a wagon, 1 says, "a hundred pieces of wood in a wagon." Now I could not name the pieces, nor, I fancy, could you but if we were asked what a wagon is, we should be satisfied if we could say "wheels, axle,
;

body, rims, yoke." THEAET. Certainly.


soc.

But

he,

ridiculous, just as

your name, we holding a right opinion and expressing correctly what we have to say, but should think we were grammarians and as such both possessed and were expressing as grammarians would the rational explanation of the name Theaetetus. He would say that it
impossible for anyone to give a rational explanaknowledge, until he gives a complete enumeration of the elements, combined with true opinion. That, I believe, is what was said before. 1 Works and Days, 456 (4.54).
is

perhaps, would think we were he would if, on being asked about should reply by telling the syllables,

tion of anything with

243

PLATO
0EAI.
.

>/

'"EipprjOr] yap. OUTCO Toivvv Kal Trepl d^Ltd*^? rjfJias ^ / ^* S eiv oogav, rov oe ota TOJV ZKOLTOV eKe X.
>
*

<

>

ovvdfjievov avrrjs rrjv ovaiav, TrpoaXafiovra TOVTO, Aoyov re TrpocretA^^eVat rf} 80^17 Kal Civrl So^acrrtACOU TC^VLKOV re /cat e [jiova TTepl afjidr]s ovaias yeyovevai, Sta

SteA^etv

TO oAov TTepdvavra.
0EAI.
2fi.

Ou/cow eu So/ct
Et
o-ot,
>

crot,

c5

eralpe, SOKEL, Kal a Sta aroL^eiov StefoSoy Tre/at e/cacrrou Aoyov v ^ ^^D TT)V oe Kara avAAapas rf /cat /cara /uei(,ov
co

\^\
2n.

vv

>

"

ert

aAoytav, TOVTO
0EAI.

JJLOI

Ae'ye, tv'

avro

'AAAa

Tra^u a7roe'^o/zat.
-

Tlorepov 7]you/ze^o? eVtcrr^/xova etvat o 1 rou OTOVOVV, oTav TO avTo Tore jitev avTO) etvat, rore Se eTepov, TJ /cat orav TOU rj aurow rore /zev' erepov, rore Se erepov ood,r);
EAI.

Ma

At"

oi)/c

2n.

Etra
/car'

d/JLvrjfjLoveis
1

eycoye. eV

TT^

rail'

/Lta#r?cret

ap^ds aaurov T

/cat

TOUS-

ypa/x/Aarco^ d'AAou?

0EAI.

^Apa

Ae'yet? TT^? avTrjs avXXafifjs

TOTC

/xev

eVepov ^you/xeVous ypd/x^a, /cat TO auro Tore /zev etV T-^V Trpocr^/coucray, Tore Se
ct? dXXrjv rt^eVra? avXXafirjv;
2fl.

eVepo^, Tore

8e

Taura

Ae'yco.

EAI.
TTCO

Md rovai

At"

ou

Toivvv

djivrjiovoj

ovoe

ye

eTrioTaaBai TOVS OVTOJS

r6re

tfre

BT.

THEAETETUS
THEAET. Yes,
soc. So, too,
it

was.

he would say that we have right opinion about a wagon, but that he who can give an account of its essential nature in terms of those one hundred parts has by this addition added rational explanation to true opinion and has acquired
technical

knowledge of the

essential nature of a

wagon, in place of mere opinion, by describing the whole in terms of its elements.
THEAET.
soc.

the view that orderly description in terms of its elements is a rational account of anything, but that description in terms of syllables or still larger units is irrational, tell me so, that we may examine the question. THEAET. Certainly I accept it. soc. Do you accept it in the belief that anyone lias knowledge of anything when he thinks that the same element is a part sometimes of one thing and sometimes of another or when he is of opinion that the same thing has as a part of it sometimes one thing and sometimes another ? THEAET. Not at all, by Zeus.
If you,
soc. Then do you forget that when you began to learn to read you and the others did just that ? THEAET. Do you mean when we thought that sometimes one letter and sometimes another belonged to the same syllable, and when we put the same letter sometimes into the proper syllable and sometimes into another ? soc.

Do you agree to that, Socrates ? my friend, agree to it and accept

That

is

what

mean.

THEAET. By Zeus, I do not forget, nor do 1 think that those have knowledge who are in that
condition.

245

PLATO
.
'

Tt ovv ;
/cat

OTOLV ev TO) roiovrco /caipoi

"
'

0eat-

Trjrov

ypd<f)cw Tt? Orjra KOI


ypdifsrj,

el oivjraL
'

re Sety

208 ypd^eiv

/cat

av

Qe68copov
1

em-

^eipcljv ypd(j)Lv

rav KOI el

Kal ypdifjrj, dp' irpwrrjv ra>v vjjtereptov ovo/zarcov ovXXaf3rjV ; 0EAI. 'AAA' aprt co/xoAoy^cra/xev rov OUTCO?
.

re Setv ovryrai eVtcrracr^at <f)Tjcrofjiev avrov

KcoAuet
/cat

ow

rt icat Trept TT)V


/cat

Sevrepav

crvX-

rpirriv

Terdprr^v OVTCDS

EAI.
.

Oi)SeV ye.

'Ap'

ow
'

rare

TT)V

Sta crrot^etou 8te^oSoi'


'

QeairrjTOV orav e^s* ypa^*^;


ypaj/ret

/xera

opOfjs

80^77?,

A^Aov B/^k> 2H. Uu/cow


EAI.

0EAI.

ST;.
>/

>

>/

ert

ave7ncrTr]iJia>v

wv,

opc/a

*fl^?^ oe

Nat.

2n.

Aoyov ye

e^cov

/zero,

opOrjs
e'ypa^ei',

yap Sta TOU aroi^eiov oSov e^cuv


Aoyoy

w
Eartv apa, c5 eratpe, /xerd Aoyou o vTTO} Set ^taT^/x^v /caAetv.

EAI.

EAI.

KtvSwei;et.
2H.

43'

"Ovap

Sry,

cos"

eot/cev,

e^etv rov dXf]9eararov eTito'T^r^s' Aoyoi'.


Karr]'yopa)fjiei>;
1

LCTCOS

yap ov TOVTO

oi^rat] oterat

BT.

THEAETETUS
soc.

Take an example

his progress a

he ought to E, and again he ought to

we

say that
?

When at such a stage in person in writing "Theaetetus" thinks and write, and actually does write, " " Theodorus thinks in trying to write write, and does write, T and E, shall he knows the first syllable of your
:

TH

names

THEAET. No, we just now agreed that a person in such a condition has not yet gained knowledge. soc. Then there is nothing to prevent the same person from being in that condition with respect to the second and third and fourth syllables ? THEAET. No, nothing. soc. Then, in that case, he has in mind the orderly terms of letters, and will write description in " Theaetetus " with right opinion, when he writes the letters in order ? THEAET. Evidently. soc. But he is still, as we say, without knowledge, though he has right opinion ? THEAET. Yes. soc. Yes, but with his opinion he has rational exin terms planation for he wrote with the method of letters in his mind, and we agreed that that was
;

rational explanation.

THEAET. True.
is, then, my friend, a combination of rational explanation, which cannot with right opinion as yet properly be called knowledge ? THEAET. There is not much doubt about it. soc. So it seems that the perfectly true definition of knowledge, which we thought we had, was but a golden dream. Or shall we wait a bit before we condemn it ? Perhaps the definition to be adopted

soc.

There

247

PLATO
C avTov
opietTat,

aAAa TO

XOLTTOV

etSo? TOJV

<Lv ev ye' ri e</a/xev

\6yov

6r}crea9ai TOV e

opi^ofjievov
EAI.

S6av

etyat opOrjv fJLra Aoyou.


VTTjjivr)oras'

'Op^co?

ert
(f>a)vfj
/

yap
'^
v

ev

AotTroV.
et'

TO
<

yLtev

yap
v
\

r^v

Siarota? ev
/l\

wcnrep

TO o

O*

aprt Ae^t7ei^ ota orrot^etou ooo?


/

C>\
\

'^ em

TO o

"

TO oe
2fl.

\o\o-\
or)

rpiTOv

Aeyet?;

"Ovrep av 06 TroAAot etVotev, TO e^etv Tt


17TIV d) TOJV CLTTOLVTaJV 3ia(f)pL TO epO)Tr)6eV.

fJiiOV
EAI.

Qlov

Tiva. TtVo? e^et? /xot

Aoyov

etTretv;

2H.

Otov,

et

fiovAei,

rjXiov

rrepi

LKOVOV

aoi etvat aTrooe^aaOai,,

OTI TO

Xa^n poTdTov

TOJV KOLTa TOV OVpaVOV LOVTOJV 7Tpi yfjv.


0EAI.

Haw
Aape

2n.

Anvox

/Ltev

ovv.
T
/
>f

or)

ov x aP lv ^tp^Tac.
oj$

ecm

oe o?7ep

o\ef

apTt

e'Ae'yo/zev,
fj

apa T^V Sta^opai^ eVaaTOU aV


8ta</>epet,

Xafji/3di>r)s

TOJV aXXojv
eco?
S'

Aoyo^, co? ^acrt


(f)a,7TTr) ,
.

Ttve?,

A^j/fer
TTtpl OOL

av KOLVOV TWOS

KLVOJV

OTO.L 6
/cat

AoyO?
jitot

O>V ttV

7)

KOlVOTrjS

fl

EAI.

Mai'fldVar

So/cet

/caAto?

^X

iv

AoyOV TO TOLOVTOV Ka\LV.


2H.
TOJV

"0?
OVTCUV

S*

aJ7

jLter'

opOrjs

o6rj?

rrepi

OTOVOVV

TTJV

OLa<j>opav

TOJV

aXXojv

248

THEAETETUS
which we said must be affirmed by anyone who asserts that knowledge is right opinion combined with rational explanation. THEAET. I am glad you called that to mind. For there is still one left. The first was a kind of vocal image of the thought, the second the orderly approach to the whole through the elements, which we have just been discussing, and what is the third ? soc. It is just the definition which most people would give, that knowledge is the ability to tell some characteristic by which the object in question differs from all others. THEAET. As an example of the method, what explanation can you give me, and of what thing ? soc. As an example, if you like, take the sun I think it is enough for you to be told that it is the
:

is not this, but bilities one of

the remaining one of the three possi-

brightest of the heavenly bodies that revolve about

the earth. THEAET. Certainly.


I It is because, as say this. just saying, if you get hold of the distinguishing characteristic by which a given thing differs from the rest, you will, as some say, get hold of the definition or explanation of it but so long as you cling

soc.

Understand why

we were

to

to

some common quality, your explanation will pertain all those objects to which the common quality
THEAET. I understand and it seems to me that it quite right to call that kind a rational explanation
;

belongs.
is

or definition.
soc. Then he who possesses right opinion about anything and adds thereto a comprehension of the difference which distinguishes it from other things
i

249

PLATO
avrov
0EAI.
emcrrry/zcoi' yeyovcos*

carat, ov 7rpo7pov

r\v

Oa^LteV ye /z^v ovra).

2H.
i^

Nw>

1 catT^re, 7Ta.vraTra.aiv eycoye, TOU eyyi)? tocnrep cr/ctaypa^r^taTos" ye'yova ouSe a^LLKpov ecu? Se d(f><jr'^Krj ^vvirjfjii

$rjra,

e<f>a.Lver6 ri {JLOI
1

Aeyea^at.
re
yeVco/zat.

0EAI.

Ileus rt

209

sn.

Opacreo,
2

TOVTO; eav oto?

opOrjv

eya>ye

e\'a>v

So^av

Trept crou,

rov aov \6yov,


EAI.

ytyvcucr/cco Sr^ ere, et Se

Nat.

5n.
EAI.

Aoyo?
*

Se'

ye ^v ^

rrj?

QVTOJSTT / rivc/c

ow
T1

eooga^ov
TOUTCOV

5 '/

5*

'

fjiovov,

""^ aAAo

T
a)

TWV

Sta^e/aets ,

ouSevos"

Stavota;
0EAI.

OuK OLKV.

Taiv Koiv&v apa ov /xaAAov -^ rt? aAAos e'^ei.


2n.

EAI. 'Avay/c^. 2n. Oepe ST) TT/DOS* Atos" TTOJ? 77ore e^ TO) TOLOVTO) ere /xaAAov eBo^a^ov TJ aXXov OVTLVOVV; 6es yap /xe SiavoovyLte^ov cu? ecrriv OUTO? OS" aV 17 re avdpajnos KCLL e^77 pt^a /cat
/cat

crro/xa

/cat
7^

ouv
1

ourco 81^ eV e/cacrrov raw Stavota ea^' o rt /xctAAov vrotTycret


gyuye I7w7e

Tfo.vro.iro.aiv

W W
;

TravTa.Tra.ffi
;

ye ^yu> T.

^70;

T.

50

THEAETETUS
have acquired knowledge of that thing of which he previously had only opinion. THEAET. That is what we affirm. soc. Theaetetus, now that I have come closer to our statement, I do not understand it at all. It is
will

like

coming

close

to

stood off at a distance,

a scene-painting. 1 While I I thought there was some-

thing in it. THEAET.


soc.
I

What do you mean ?

you if I can. Assume that I have right opinion about you ; if I add the explanation or definition of you, then I have knowledge of you,
will tell

otherwise I have merely opinion. THEAET. Yes.


soc. But explanation was, pretation of your difference. THEAET. It Was.

we

agreed, the inter-

soc. Then so long as I had merely opinion, I did not grasp in my thought any of the points in which you differ from others ? THEAET. Apparently not. soc. Therefore I was thinking of some one of the common traits which you possess no more than other

men.

You must have been. For heaven's sake How in the world could I in that case have any opinion about you more than about anyone else ? Suppose that I thought " That is Theaetetus which is a man and has nose and eyes and mouth" and so forth, mentioning all the parts. Can this thought make me think of Theaetetus any
THEAET.
soc.
!

In which perspective

is

the main thing.

251

PLATO
0eatT7iTOV
TI

/zeVcov Mucraiv

0eoScupov Stance loQai, roV ea^arov;


\

T)

TWV Aeyo-

EAI.

2n.

A\\>>0\ AAA eav orj


'

Tt yap;

6(f)OaXfJLOvs

TOV e^ovra pwa aAAa /<rat rov SiavoTy^aj, aijjiov re


fjirj

<

t~

fjiovov

KO.L /cat

>/- ' in \ egcxpUaAfiov,

fir]

rt ere

au

<\> ^ b/ ~\\ yLtaAAov oo^acrco -^ e/z,auTov

ocrot

TOIOVTOI;
0?)8eV.

EAI.

2n.
e/xot

'AAA' ou Trporepov yc, olfjiai, Qcairirjros Iv $oaa9ri<jTai, Trpiv av r) aifjiOT^s GLvrrj TUJV
aLjJLOTTJTOJV
e/zot

a'AAcov

iLv

eycj

ecopa/ca

Sta^opov rt

livrjfjieiov Trap*

eVcr^^va/^teV^ Acara^^rat, /cat w / \/-i ff ^\\ >/ raAAa owra; eg cuv et cnr 7) e/xe/ /cat eav avpiov

>>

>/

dvafjivrjcrei,

/cat

Trot^aet

op$a

EAI.

D
o. /

2n.
>

Ilept
ti

ooga av
EAI.

177

Sta^opoTT^ra TT)V e / / e/caorou ?7ept.

apa

/cat

OatVerat ye.

2n.

To
etT^;

oi)v TTpoaXafielv
et /zei'

Aoyov

rr^

op^^
rj

^0^77 rt

oV ert

yap 77pocjSoacrat

Ae'yet
77

8ta</epet
1

Tt TCOV aAAcov, Trayu yeAota ytyverat


EAI.
r
2fl.

eVtrafts

ricD?;

O^

opOrjV

6av

e^o/zev

T^

TO>V aAAcov StaT^/xas"

<f>pi,

TOVTOJV
T^
o-tf

TrpoaXafie'iv

/ceAewet
/cat

opOrjv
rj

Soai>
1

rcov aAAcuv Sta<^epet.


^
;

OVTCOS

el

el en)

^^ B

ei'cret

^ Wohlrab ^
T.

fj,ev
;

el <ry-

/*

W (but ^ added later)

252

THEAETETUS
more than of Theodoras or of the meanest of the 1 Mysians, as the saying is ? THEAET. Of course not. soc. But if I think not only of a man with nose and eyes, but of one with snub nose and protruding
eyes, shall I then have an opinion of you any more than of myself and all others like me ? THEAET. Not at all. I fancy Theaetetus will not be the soc. No object of opinion in me until this snubnosedness of
;

yours has stamped and deposited in my mind a memorial different from those of the other examples of snubnosedness that I have seen, and the other traits that make up your personality have done the like. Then that memorial, if I

meet
you.

memory and make me have

you

again

tomorrow,

will

awaken
opinion

my
about

right

THEAET. Very true. soc. Then right opinion also would have to do with differences in any given instance ? THEAET. At any rate, it seems so. soc. Then what becomes of the addition of reason For if it is defined or explanation to right opinion ? as the addition of an opinion of the way in which a given thing differs from the rest, it is an utterly absurd injunction. THEAET. HOW SO ? soc. When we have a right opinion of the way in which certain things differ from other things, we are told to acquire a right opinion of the way in which On this those same things differ from other things
!

The Mysians were despised

as especially effeminate

and

worthless.

253

PLATO
rj

imepov

7}

orov

Sr)

Xeyerat,

Trpos ravrrjv rrjv eTrira^iv

oi5Sev

av

Ae'yot, rv(f)Xov

Se

TrapaKeXevcTLS
XOfjLv,

av

/caAoiro

SiKaiorepov

TO
Iva

yap, a

ravra TrpoaXafieLV KeXeveiv,


TTO.VV

a So^a^o/xev,
EAI.
.

yevvaiais eot/cev

e'

EiVe 8^ 1 rt vvv Et TO Xoyov, d>

3rj J)s

epaJv

7rvOov;

TTGU,

TrpocrXa^elv

yvaivai
7]8j)

Jet,
,'

dAAa
ctry

So^acrat T^V Sta</opoT7^Ta,


ra)i>

av

rou /caAAtcrrou
yvajvat

Trept

Aoyou.

TO
rj

yap

7narrjfjLrjv

TTOV

210

earw
EAI.
.

yap;
epajT^^et?, to? eoi/ce, Tt
6Vt So^a
.

Nat.

OI)KOW

earw
TOUT*

dp^

/xeT

Aoyov

yap

TrpoaXrjijJis

dV

117

/caT* ZKtlvov.

EAI.

"Eoi/cei>.

Kat TTavraTTaai ye
(f)dvat,

cvrjOes,

,r)TOVVTtov r)^a>v

op6r]v
'

e.lva.1 [JLer'

eiVe Sia^opoTtyro? etVe OTOUOUV.


T

ai?,

to

r\

'

(yeatTT^Te,

OUTC

>'

o / ooa

e'mcm^LO]? ovVe apa aitrdrj" ' \i^ aA^c/r)? OUTE


5

dXrjOovs

So^9 Aoyoj TTpoayiyvo^vos


Ou/C

EAI.

OLKV.

i?

(and

in

marg.)

ct

76

5??

ef

76

STJ

B 2 W.

254

THEAETETUS
l or a pestle or anyplan the twirling of a scytale be as would of sort the compared with nothing thing It might more justly be called a this injunction. blind man's giving directions for to command us to acquire that which we already have, in order to learn that of which we already have opinion, is very like a man whose sight is mightily darkened. THEAET. Tell me now, what did you intend to say when you asked the question a while ago ? soc. If, my boy, the command to add reason or explanation means learning to know and not merely getting an opinion about the difference, our splendid definition of knowledge would be a fine affair!
;

For learning to know


it

is

acquiring knowledge,

is

not ? THEAET. YeS.

" What is knowsoc. Then, it seems, if asked, " our leader will reply that it is right opinion ledge ? with the addition of a knowledge of difference for that would, according to him, be the addition of reason or explanation. THEAET. So it seems.
;

soc.

And

it

is

utterly

silly,

when we

are looking

knowledge, to say that it is right opinion with knowledge, whether of difference or of So neither perception, anything else whatsoever.
for a definition of

Theaetetus, nor true opinion, nor reason or explanation combined with true opinion could be

knowledge.
THEAET. Apparently not.
1

(TKVTdXr)

strip of leather

was a was

written that

when

especially a staff about which a on which dispatches were so unrolled they were illegible until rolled
staff,

rolled,

again upon another staff of the same size and shape.


2.55

PLATO
2H.
*TJ
ri

T ow

"

ert Kvovfjiev rt /cat cooivoftev, a>

emcrTT^Lti]?, 7} TrdVra e/creTO/ca/zev; 0EAI. Kat vat jLta At" eyeoye TrAetco 7} oo-a

V efiavra) Sta, ae eiprjKa.

Ou/cow raura
ave/ittata
<^7^crt

jitev

rrdvra

rj

ycyev^cr^at

/cat

0EAI.

aVTOLTTaGl

fJL.V

OVV

44KVfJicov

2n.

'Edv roivvv

d'AAcuv
o>

fjiera

ravra ey-

67n%(,pfjs

yiyv<jQaLi,

0eatT7^re, edVre

e^eracrtv, yiyvr), /feArtdVajv ecret irAijprjs Std rr)v edvre /cevo? 7)?, TTJTTOV caret, fiapvs rot? ovvovai
/cat

vw

^epcurepos", aa>(}>p6va)s OVK otojLtevo?


\LOVOV
rt
TJ

et'SeVat

otSa a>v ot dAAot, oaoi jiteyaAot /cat Oav^daioi aVSpe? eto-t re /cat yeyovacrt. TT)V 8e fjiaceiav ravrrjv eycij re /cat rj e/c ^eou eAa^o^ev, 77 /Ltev raiv yuvat/caiv, fjirjrrjp eyto Se TOJV vecov re /cat yzvvaiajv /cat ocrot /caAot. Nuv /Ltev ovv aTTavrr^Teov /xot et? TT)V rou fiacnAeajs
OTOCLV enl rrjv
^

a /LIT) olaOa. roaovrov yap Swarat, TrAeov Se ouSeV, ouSe

efjir)

re^vr)

MeA^rou

ypa(f>r)v, r\v

fj,e

yeypaTrrat'

Se, to OeoScope, Seupo TraAtv cL

256

THEAETETUS
soc.

Are we then,

in travail with

my friend, still pregnant and knowledge, or have we brought forth

everything ? THEAET. Yes, we have, and, by Zeus, Socrates, with your help I have already said more than there

was
that

in
all

me.

art of midwifery declare to us the offspring that have been born are mere wind-eggs and not worth rearing ? THEAET. It does, decidedly. soc. If after this you ever undertake to conceive other thoughts, Theaetetus, and do conceive, you will be pregnant with better thoughts than these by reason of the present search, and if you remain barren, you will be less harsh and gentler to your associates, for you will have the wisdom not to think you know that which you do not know. So much and no more my art can accomplish nor do I know aught of the things that are known by others, the great and wonderful men who are to-day and have been in the past. This art, however, both my mother and I received from God, she for women and I for young and noble men and for all who are fair. And now I must go to the Porch of the King, to answer to the suit which Meletus 1 has brought against me. But in the morning, Theodoras, let us meet here again.
soc.
;

Then does our

led to the

Meletus was one of those who brought the suit which condemnation and death of Socrates.

257

THE SOPHIST

INTRODUCTION TO THE SOPHIST


IN The Sophist Theodorus and Theaetetus meet Socrates in accordance with the agreement made in the final paragraph of the Theaetetus. They bring with them an Eleatic Stranger, who presently agrees to undertake, with the aid of Theaetetus, the definition of the Philosopher, the Statesman, and the Sophist. Thereupon, after selecting the Sophist as the first of the three to be defined, he proceeds to illustrate his method by defining the angler, on the ground that the Sophist is a difficult subject and
that practice on an
desirable.

easier

and

The method employed

slighter matter is in defining first

the angler and then the Sophist

is that of comparison This successively into two parts. method was probably, at the time when this dialogue was written, something of a novelty, and is employed also in The Statesman, which is closely connected with The Sophist both in form and substance. It must be admitted that the process of dichotomy becomes very tedious, which may possibly be one of Plato's reasons for making the Stranger, not Socrates, the chief speaker in these two dialogues. The definition of the

and

division

Sophist

the avowed purpose of the dialogue

is

261

INTRODUCTION TO THE SOPHIST


carried on in a satirical and polemic spirit which
is

abundantly evident even when


sible to

it is

no longer pos-

name the

attack

is

particular persons against directed.

whom the

But all this occupies only the opening and conIt is interrupted by what is in cluding passages. form a long digression, but is really the most serious and important part of the whole. In this (236 D 264 B) the method of dichotomy is given up and abstract questions are treated in a quite different manner. The Sophist has been found to be a juggler and deceiver, and the question arises whether deception or falsehood does not involve the assumption of Not-Being, which was persistently opposed by Parmenides and the Eleatic philosophers in general. Plato refutes the doctrine that Not-Being; O cannot exist by showing that it has a relative existence that in each particular instance it denotes a difference or condition of being other than that in connexion with which it is said to exist. It is not mere negation the opposite of Being but becomes the This is the most positive notion of Difference. important doctrine promulgated in this dialogue. Hereupon follows the discussion of the nature of Being, and the conclusion is reached that everything which possesses any power, either to produce a change or to be affected by a cause, has existence (247 D), i.e., that power whether active or passive
is

Being.

predication of the possibility of solved by making the distinction between verbs and nouns and defining the sentence as a combination of those two. If that combination corresponds to reality, the assertion is true, if not, it
assertion
is

The problem of

262

INTRODUCTION TO THE SOPHIST


is

false.

How

far

this

is

original

with

Plato

is

" or categories of the five " forms Being, Motion, is an interesting feature Rest, Same and Other which may be interpreted as marking a stage in the development of the theory of ideas. This dialogue is important in content, though not especially attractive in form. The date of The Sophist cannot be earlier, and may be considerably later, than that of the

Other subjects discussed in theory of knowledge, the relation between reality and appearance, and that between the one and the many. The introduction
difficult to

determine. this dialogue are the

Theaetetus.

There is an edition of The Sophist and Politicus, with English notes, by Lewis Campbell (Oxford,
1864).

69

[H IIEPI TOY

ONTO2

'

TA TOY AIAAOrOY

IIPO212IIA

EOAnPOS, 5HKPATH2, HENO2 EAEATH2, 0EAITHTO2


I.

0EO. Kara rrjv X@S o/AoAoytav, a) Za>/cpares, avroL re ACOCT/XICO? /cat ro^Se rtvct evov

ro

jjiev

yeVo?
/cat

e'^

Hapfjievi$7]v
<f)lX6(JO(f)OV.

Z^vcuva,

'EAea?, eralpov 8e TCOV 1 /xaAa Se avSpa


>

TA > T ? >/ /"v /^ '\\ / 2H. Ap ouv, a> Weootope, ou $.vov aAAa rwa Oeov aycov Kara rov 'Qfjiijpov \6yov XeXr]9as; o? ^crtv dXXovs re Oeov? rols dvOpwrrois OTTOGOL p,ere%ovaLv alSovs St/cata?, /cat 817 /cat TOP ^iviov ov^ riKiora Qeov ovvorra&ov yiyvo^evov vfipeis re /cat evvojjiias ra>v ovv dv6pcj7ra>v KaQopdv. rd-%

dv

/cat

crot

ris euros' TOJV

Kpeirrovutv
1

ovra? eV rot? Aoyot? re /cat eXeya>v, 6eos &v rt? eAey/crt/cos @EO. Ot>x ovros 6 rporros, a> Haj/cpares', rov
(fravXovs
r)(J<ds
.

Z^j/wva eraipwif wss.

eratpuv

om. Upton.

64

THE SOPHIST
[OR

ON BEING:

LOGICAL]

CHARACTERS
THEODORUS, SOCRATES, AN ELEAN STRANGER, THEAETETUS
THEO. According to our yesterday's agreement, Socrates, we have come ourselves, as we were bound to do, and we bring also this man with us ; he is a stranger from Elea, one of the followers of Parmenides and Zeno, and a real philosopher.
soc.

says,

He

Are you not unwittingly bringing, as Homer some god, and no mere stranger, Theodorus ? says that the gods, and especially the god of

strangers, enter into companionship with

men who

have a share of due reverence 1 and that they behold the deeds, both violent and righteous, 1 of mankind. So perhaps this companion of yours may be one of the higher powers, who comes to watch over and refute us because we are worthless in argument a kind of god of refutation. THEO. No, Socrates, that is not the stranger's
1

A modified

quotation from Odyssey,

ix.

271

xvii. 485-7.

265

PLATO
dAAo,

pcrpLcbrepos
.

rwv
So/cet

rrepi
^eos*

rds
ftev

epioas
l

LKorajv

/cat

/zot

dvrjp

ovSajjLOJs elvai, Oelos


(f)iXocr6<f)OVs

fjLrjv

rrdvras

yap eyo) rovs

roiovrovs rrpocrayopeva}.

2H. KaAaJ? ye, ta ^tAe. rovro JJUEVTOI TO yeVo? OT) TioAw rt pqov, cu? eVo? etVetv, 2 rravv yap d^Spe? ovrot SiCLKpiveiv r) TO rov 6eov'
Travroloi (fravra^ofjievoi 8ta r-^v raiv aAAcov ayvotav
7TiOTpa)(f)a)<JL
<f)iX6oo(f)O(,,

TroA^a?, ot /x^ 77Aa<7Ta)9 dAA'

Ka9opcuvTs v^69ev rov ra)v Kara)

/cat rot? [lev ooKovaw elvai rov fjirjoevos rifuoi, TOLS 8' ct^tot TGI; rravros' /cat rore ^tev TroAtrt/cot Griv rore 8e oro^tcrrat, rore 8* <j>avrdt,ovrai y

ols

ooav

rrapdo"%oivro av a>s Travrdnaaiv e^ovres rov /zeVrot ^eVou T^^ttJ/ rjoea)s av rrvvdaavra), ri rav6*

cl (friXov

ol rrepl rov c/cet

217 TO77OV yyovvro /cat 0EO. To, 77Ota


2H.

0EO.

2o</>tCTT^y, 77oAtrt/cov, <f>t,X6cro<f)OV . Tt 8e jLtdAtcrra /cat TO vrotov Tt Trept a.vra>v


?

TdSc*
TI

tpeaOai oievorj0r]s; irorepov ev rrdvra ravra


1

evofjLL^ov

KaOaTrep rd ovofjiara rpia, rpia /cat yeVi? oiaipovfjievoL Kad* ev 6Vo//,a yeVos e/cdo-TO) Trpoaovo,
TJ

rjrrrov;

0EO.

'AAA*

ouSet?,
r)

co?

eya)/xat,

(f)06vos

avra)

oieXOelv avrd'

TTOJS, a) ^eVe,

Xcyajfiev;

HE.

QVTOJS, c5 0ed8cope. fiev <f)66vos ovoe -^aXeTTov etVetv 6Vt ye T/3t"

yap

Bekker dvyp BT. Bekker fi;>5/>es BT.


;

266

THE SOPHIST
he is more reasonable than those who And though devote themselves to disputation. I do not think he is a god at all, I certainly do think he is divine, for I give that epithet to all
character
;

philosophers.
it is

However, I fancy say so, to recognize this class, than that of the gods. For these men I mean those who are not feignedly but really 1 philosophers appear disguised in all sorts of shapes, thanks to the ignorance of the rest of mankind, and visit the cities, 1 beholding from above the life of those below, and they seem to some to be of no worth and to others to be worth everything. And
not

soc.

And rightly, my friend. much easier, if I may

sometimes they appear disguised as statesmen and sometimes as sophists, and sometimes they may give some people the impression that they are altogether mad. But I should like to ask our stranger here, if agreeable to him, what people in his country thought about these matters, and what names they used. THEO. What matters do you mean ?
soc. Sophist, statesman, philosopher. THEO. What particular difficulty and what kind of difficulty in regard to them is it about which you had in mind to ask ? soc. It is this Did they consider all these one, or two, or, as there are three names, did they divide them into three classes and ascribe to each a class,
:

corresponding to a single name ? THEO. I think he has no objection to talking about them. What do you say, stranger ? for I have no STR. Just what you did, Theodorus objection, and it is not difficult to say that they
;

Cf. Od. xvii. 485-7.

267

PLATO
cKaarov
ear iv,
0EO.

uyv

oj) cr/xt/cpov

Kat

jLtev

OLOpiaaaOai cra^co? ou8e paSiov e'pyov. S^ Kara rvyr\v ye, to

TI

TTOT'

Adytov eTreXdftov TrapaTrXrjcricov a>v /cat Trptv o Seup' eXOelv SteptoTtovTe? a^TOV ervy^dvo^v 8e ravra aVep Trpos ere yw, /cat TOTC eaKTjTrrero
rrpos
77et Sia/c7]/coeVat ye 7^/xas" /cat ou/c dfjiV7]p,oveiv. 2. 2n. MT] roivvv , to ^eVe, rjjjiojv
(f>7]o~iv

iKavajs

rr\v
yevrj,

ye

Trpto-

TTIV
8*

alrr)o~dvra)v

^aptv d7Tapvr)9eis

roo~ovo

T^ittv ^>pa^e* rtorepov etco^a? TJOLOV avros e?rt cravrov /xa/cpto Adyto Ste^teVat Ae'ytov rovro o av i TO) f3ovXr]6fjs, TJ St' e'ptOTT^cretoy, otdy

/cat HapfJLvl,8rj ^pto/zeVto /cat Ste^td^Tt


1

Adyou?
CKCIVOV

Tray/caAous

Trapeyevd/x^v

eyto

ve'o?

tov,

fidXa
HE.

817

TOTC OVTO? rrpeafivrov ; Tto ftev, to Sco/cpaTe?,


TrpocrStaAeyo/zeVto
et

cxAwTrto?

evrjvicos

paov

ouVto,

TC /cat TO Trpo?

d'AAoy
2n.

8e

/X7y,

TO

/ca$'

auTov.

"E^ecrTt roivvv rcov Trapovrwv ov av fiovrrdvres yap vrraKOvaovral crot K\e^aadai Xrjdfjs crvfjifiovXto p,r)v e/^ot ^pwfjicvos rcov Trpatos"

a
t

atprjaei,

Seairrjrov rovoe,

r)

/cat

Ttov o

Tt?
EE.

O*Ot /CttTO,

VOW.
atScus"
?5/>ttv

^D
TTOs

Sco/cpaTes",
7rotetCT0at

cruyye^o/xevo^
dirop,r]KVViv

T^V Xoyov avxyov

/x* e^et TO /caTa cr/xt/cpov eVo? o~vvovo~iav , aAA' e/CTet-

Tts"

/AT)

KCLT*

l^avrov,

etTe /cat Trpoj erepov, oiov l eVt'Sei^tv Troiovfjievov' TO) yap OVTL TO vw> prjQev oi>x oaov c58e epwryBev
eA77to-etev

av auTO
1

etj^at Tts,

aAAa Tuy^ctvet Adyou


BT.

oTo^

Ast

ficroy

268

THE SOPHIST
considered them three. But it is no small or easy task to define clearly the nature of each. THEO. The fact is, Socrates, that by chance you

have hit upon a question very like what we happened to be asking him before we came here and he made excuses to us then, as he does now to you though he admits that he has heard it thoroughly discussed and remembers what he heard. soc. In that case, stranger, do not refuse us the first favour we have asked but just tell us this Do you generally prefer to expound in a Jong uninterrupted speech of your own whatever you wish to explain to anyone, or do you prefer the method of I was present once when Parmenides emquestions ? ployed the latter method and carried on a splendid discussion. I was a young man then, and he was very old.
;

STR.

The method
;

of dialogue, Socrates,

is

easier

with an interlocutor who is tractable and gives no trouble but otherwise I prefer the continuous speech by one person. soc. Well, you may choose whomever you please
of those present
to
;

they will all respond pleasantly you but if you take my advice you will choose one of the young fellows, Theaetetus here, or any
;

of the others

who

suits you.

is the first time I have come you, and I am somewhat ashamed, instead of carrying on the discussion by merely giving brief replies to your questions, to deliver an extended, long drawn out speech, either as an address of my own or in reply to another, as if I were giving an exhibition but I must, for really the present subject is not what one might expect from the form of the

STR. Socrates, this

among

question, but

is

a matter for very long speech.

On

PLATO
ov.
rotcrSe,
d'AAcos
1

TO Se av aol
Te
/cat

/LIT)

xapteo-0ai
co?

/cat

<rou

Ae^avTOS'

a^Gvov TI /caTa</>aiVeTat (AOL /cat ayptov. 218 0eatVi7TdV ye TOV 77poaStaAeyoju,ei'ov etvat Se^o/xat TravTaTraatv coV auros re irporepov StetAey/Aai /cat au ra vw />tot Sta/ceAeuet.
1

e'

EAI. '''Apa TOLVVV, 60 ^eVe, OVTO) Kdl KadoLTTp cine Sco/cpar^s 7Ta.cn /ce^aptcr/xeVo? ecret; HE. KtvSuveuet TT-pos" p>ev ravra ovbev ert Ae/creov
1

ctvat,

eatTTyre-

Trpos Se ae 17817
1

TO
o

/zero,

TOVTO,
rt rco

eoiK, yiyvoiTQ av 6 Aoyo?.


77ovtov
e

a.v

dpa

a^^,

^17

e'/ze

at'rtacr^at TOUTCOJ^, dAAa,

EAI.

TOUS (TOU9 eVatpou?. 'AAA' Ot/xat jLteV Si)

VW
rov

OVTOJS OVK
/cat

0.7T-

epetv

av

8*

apa

rt TOLOVTOV

ytyv^rat,

roVSe

Sco/cparTy,

Se T^AiActtur^v /cat a cruvtaTiOT'etv /zer* e/zou ra TroAAa oi/c


3-

HE.

Eu

Ae'y^t?, /cat

raura
Kowfj

/zet'

tSta /SouAeucret
jiter* ejLtot

Trpotoyros'

TOU

Aoyov

Se

e/xou

crot

<jvcrK7TTOV dp^ofjLeva) TTpaJTOV, co?

(^atVerat,

vw
C
77-e'pt

aVo TOU
77-or*

oo(j)Larov,
ecrrt.

Aoyto rt
co

vw

^TOVVTI yap 817

/cat
cru

e/z</>ai>t'oj'Tt

/cay to

rourou
pyOV

TOVVOfJLO,

[JLOVOV

)(OfJLV

KOLVfj'

TO O

KaXovfjLev e/carepo? Ta^' av t'Sta Trap' T^/ztv aurot? e^ot/zev Set 8e det Travro? vre'pt TO Trpay/xa
e^>'

auTO /zaAAov Sta Aoycov ^ Tovvo^a [LOVOV avvofjioAoyr^aaa^at ^topis' Aoyou. TO Se (frvXov o vvv eVtTt VOOVjJLEV ,r]T6lv OV 7TOLVTCOV pCLOTOV avXXa^LV 270

THE SOPHIST
the other hand it seems unfriendly and discourteous to refuse a favour to you and these gentlemen,

when you have spoken as you did. As Theaetetus I accept him most willingly as interlocutor in view of my previous conversation with him and of your present recommendation. THEAET. But, stranger, by taking this course and following Sociates's suggestion will you please the
especially
for

others too
STR. I

afraid there is nothing more to be said about that, Theaetetus but from now on, my talk And if you get will, I fancy, be addressed to you. tired and are bored by the length of the talk, do not blame me, but these friends of yours. THEAET. Oh, no, I do not think I shall get tired of it so easily, but if such a thing does happen, we will call in this Socrates, the namesake of the other
;

am

Socrates
in the

he is of my own age and my companion gymnasium, and is in the habit of working


;

with

me

your own devices about that as the discussion proceeds but now you and I must investigate in common, beginning first, as it seems to me, with the sophist, and must search out and make plain by argument what he is. For as yet you and I have nothing in common about him but the name but as to the thing to which we give the name, we may perhaps each have a conception of it in our own minds however, we ought always in every instance to come to agreement about the thing itself by argument rather than about the mere name without argument. But the tribe which we now intend to search for, the sophist, is not the easiest thing in the world to catch and define, and
STR.

Very well

in almost everything. ; you will follow

271

PLATO
TTOT* eoriv,

o crouton]?

ocra 8*

au TOJV

Set 8ta7rovetcr#at /caAa)?, 77ept rcov roiovrajv Se'So/cTat Traoiv /cat TrdAat TO rrporepov ev a/JLLKpois

D /cat

paoow aura

Setv /zeAerdV, Trptv ev avrot? TOI?

/xeyujTOt?.

<3 eatr^re, e'ycoye /cat vaiv ovTO) avfJL^ovXeva) , xaXeirov /cat SvaOrjpevrov rjyrjcra/xeVot? etvat TO TOU ao(f)Larov yevos Trporepov Iv

vw ow,

aAAa)
,i7

paovi

rrjv

peOoSov avrov
>/

TrpofJLeXeTdv,

et

TToOev evTrerecrrepav e^et? etVetv dXXrjv 6$>6v. > * \ \ OLI/C 0EAI. e^w.
cru

AM

EE.

BouAet S^Ttt
Nat.

776pt TtVO? TCOV (f>avXa)V

fJ,TlOVTS

a6a>iJiv TrapaSety^ta

auTO 6ea9aL rov fiei^ovos;


/cat

EAI.

Tt S^Ta TrpOTa^a/jite^' ay zvyvaiarov p,V cXdrrova crjut/cpoV, Aoyov 8e /x^Sevos


HE.
1

fj,i,6va)v ;

olov
/cat

dorTraAteuT^s"

ap'
Tt

ou

Tracrt

yvcopt/zov
EAI.

crTrovS^?

ou

TTOLVV

TroAA^?

219

MefloSov ft^v auTov eATTt^co /cat Aoyov dveTTtT^Setov T^ty e^etv 77pos" o fiovXofjieOa. EAI. KaAcDs" av e^ot. HE. Oepe 8^, T?^8e dp^to/ie^a avrov. 4. /not Aeye* Trorepov a? TC^VLTTJV avrov r^ riva a
HE.

ow/c

/cat

vov y aXXrjv oe Swa/xtv


EAI.

e^owa

O^jaofJiev;

HE.
e'ior)

"H/ctaTa ye aVe^voy. 'AAAct /z^v TCUI/ ye Te^tuv TTavajv

Suo.

EAI.

Hcos ;
1

TO QvrfTov irav ocrTy Trept BepaTreia, TO Te au Trept TO ovvQerov /cat 77AaCTTdV, o 817 OKevos tbvofMaKafjLev, TJ re
HE.

Feorjpyta ftev /cat

crco/xa

272

THE SOPHIST
everyone has agreed long ago that if investigations of great matters are to be properly worked out we ought to practise them on small and easier matters before attacking the very greatest. So now, Theaetetus, this is my advice to ourselves, since we think the family of sophists is troublesome and hard to catch, that we first practise the method of

hunting in something easier, unless you perhaps have some simpler way to suggest. THEAET. I have not. STR. Then shall we take some lesser thing and
try to use it as a pattern for the greater
?

THEAET. Yes.
STR. Well, then,

what example can we

set before

us

which

is

well

known and

small, but

no

less

capable of definition than any of the greater things ? Say an angler is he not known to all and unworthy of any great interest ? THEAET. Yes. STR. But I hope he offers us a method and is capable of a definition not unsuitable to our purpose. THEAET. That would be good. STR. Come now let us begin with him in this way Tell me, shall we say that he is a man with an art, or one without an art, but having some other
; ; :

power ?
THEAET. Certainly not one without an art. STR. But of all arts there are, speaking generally, two kinds ? THEAET. HOW SO ? STR. Agriculture and all kinds of care of any living beings, and that which has to do with things which are put together or moulded (utensils we call

273

PLATO
vp,TravTa
EAI.

TavTa

St/catoraT*

av

evl

Trpocrayo-

pevoiT* av oVo/zart.
IlcD? *at TLVI; riaV 07Tp av p,r) rrporepov rt? 6V varepov els ovaiav dyrj, TOV fiev ayovra iroizlv, ro Se dydSE.

TTOV

0EAI.
EE.
els

Ta

ye

vw

87)

arravra

TOVTO

rrjv

avrajv 8vvafjuv.

0EAI.
SE.

otTt/cr^ roivvv avra


"E7TO>. 8e fjLa9r]iJLaTLKov av /zera TOVTO rat TO TT^s yvajpio-etos TO re

0EAI.
SE.

To

oAov

/cat aycovtcrrt/cov ACCU

ovoev TOVTCDV,

dypevTiKov, eTr 8e 6Vra Kal yeyovora ra Xoyois Kal Trpd^eai, Ta oe Tots


TOL

OVK

TTiT7TL,

>taAtar'

av Tfov 8ta
TI$

raura

^vvdrravTa ra ^te/37^ Te^vrj av EAI. Nat' TrpeTTOL yap av.


HE.

5.

D OUCT60V
a>

KT^rt/c^?

817

/<:at

TroirjTiKfjs

TO>V T"Xytii)V

7TOTpa

TTjV

eatr^re,
0EAI.
SE.

'Ev KTrjTLKfj TTOV ofj\OV <* / > ov ?' '"^ ap OV OVO LOfj; I\TY]TLKr]S O
.

-\r

TO

fJLV

KOV-

)v Trpo? KOVTas /xeTa^SA^TtKov 6V 8ta re Saipetov Kal [uaOcjoecjv Kal dyopdaeajv, TO 8e AotTroi' rj
1

5iKcu6raT'

ftt-

BT
8

5i/cat6rara

W,

StobaeuS.

& om.

BTW.

274

THE SOPHIST
these might them), and the art of imitation all one name. properly be called by THEAET. How so, and what is the name ?
STR. When anyone brings into being something which did not previously exist, we say that he who and that which is brings it into being produces it

brought into being is produced. THEAET. Certainly. STR. Now all the arts which

we have

just

men-

tioned direct their energy to production. THEAET. Yes, they do. STR. Let us, then, call these collectively the productive art. THEAET. Agreed. STR. And after this comes the whole class of and learning and that of acquiring knowledge,

money making, and


of these
is

None fighting, and hunting. creative, but they are all engaged in

which already coercing, by deeds or words, things exist and have been produced, or in preventing therefore all these others from coercing them
;

divisions

together might very properly be called

acquisitive art.

THEAET. Yes, that would be proper. STR. Then since acquisitive and productive art shall we comprise all the arts, in which, Theaetetus, ? place the art of angling THEAET. In acquisitive art, clearly. STR. And are there not two classes of acquisitive one the class of exchange between voluntary art

and wages and purchases, agents by means of gifts and the other, which comprises all the rest of

275

PLATO
/car'

epya

77

Kara Aoyous* x i P^fJLpov

v{JL7rav

0EAI.
HE.
EAI.

aV OatVerat
Se';

yow

e/c

rcov el

Tt

TJ]V xeipojTiKrjv dp'

ou

11^;
fjikv

HE.

To

E TO

dva^avSov

6'Aov

Se Kpv(f>a.lov avrrjs TTOV


@EAI.
HE.

Nat.
/AT^V

Trjv Se ye

dr^pevriKr^v

aXoyov TO

fjirj

ov

0EAI.
HE.

Aeye
jjiev

07717.

To

difjvxov

yeVous SteAo^eVou?, TO
1

8'

EAI.

220

HE.

Tt ysf]v; etVep earov ye a/ Deo? Se ou/c earov; KOI Set ye ^/xas TO 6V 2 TrAy /<raT* eta KoXvfJL^TLKrj? aTTCL fJipr] Kdi TOtaUT* aAAa ^alpeiv eacrat, TO Se', TCOV l^v-^v ^wtov
1

o#crai> Qripav, Trpoaenrzlv ^coodTqpiKTJv.

0EAI.
HE.

"Eorco.

Zcoo^pt/cT^? Se ap' ov StTrAow etSo? av Ae'yotTO ev StVo], TO /xev Tre^ov yeVou?, 77oAAot? et'Seai
/cat oVojitaor

St^p^/xeVov, Tre^oOrjpiKov, TO S* eVepov

VCVGTLKOV ,a)ov Trow ewypoOrjpiKov ; EAI. IldVu ye. HE. Neuo-Tt/cov /z^v TO ftev Trrrjvov Se eVuSpov; y TO
0EAI.
HE.
Jlcos" S'

cf>v\ov 6pa>-

ou;
TTTTJVOV fLrjV

Kat TOU
Aeyerat'
1

yeVou? Tracra ^/ztv

17

7701; Tts"
2

opvidevTiKrj. 0<^ras Stobaeus J ^ei/res BT.


d?

Heindorf

^ay

BTW.

276

THE SOPHIST
acquisitive art, and, since it coerces either or deed, might be called coercive ?

by word

THEAET. It appears

so, at

any

rate,

from what you

have
into

said.

Well then, shall we not divide coercive art two parts ? THEAET. In what way ? STR. By calling all the open part of it fighting and all the secret part hunting.
STR.

THEAET. Yes.
STR.

But

it

would be unreasonable not

to divide

hunting into two parts. THEAET. Say how it can be done.


STR.

By

dividing
living.

it

into the hunting of the lifeless

and of the

THEAET. Certainly, if both exist. STR. Of course they exist. And we must pass over the hunting of lifeless things, which has no name, with the exception of some kinds of diving and the like, which are of little importance but the hunting of living things we will call animal-hunting. THEAET. Very well.
;

STR. And two classes of animal-hunting might properly be made, one (and this is divided ander many classes and names) the hunting of creatures that go on their feet, land-animal hunting, and the other that of swimming creatures, to be called, as a whole, water-animal hunting ? THEAET. Certainly. STR. And of swimming creatures we see that one tribe is winged and the other is in the water ? THEAET. Of course. STR. And the hunting of winged creatures is called, as a whole, fowling.

277

PLATO
0EAI.
HE.
EAI.

Tou
rp
f

Ae'yerat yap ovv. Se eWSpou cr^eSov TO avvoXov dAteim/ci?.

Nat.
<Z f

HE.

It

oe;

TG.VTr\v

av

/) /

TTJV

urjpav

ap

T>>^ OVK
i L

civ

Kara
HE.

jLteytcrra fJ^cprj
TTr\->
\

ovo
\

SteAo///,?^;
/

EAI.

Kara Tfola; Kaa a TO /xev


1

epKccrw

//) avrouev

>

T^
C

Orjpav, TO Se TrA^yf}. @EAI. Ilajs Aeyet?, Kat 777^ Statpou^tet'o HE. To /xeV, 6Vt ?rav oaov aV eVe/ca
EAI.

ttpy^ rt Trepte^ov,

HaW

ep/cos" et/co? ovojjid^eiv.

/xe^
1

ow.
KO.I

/cat OLKTVCL /cat ^po^ovs Kv'prous 17 TTOpKOVS KOI TO, TOLCLVTO. [JLtOV d'AAo Tt

HE.

EAI.

HE.

Touro
Nat.
8e

jLtev
rj

apa IpKoQiqpiKov
TI TOLOVTOV.

Trjs

aypas TO

/xepo? (j>^ao{JiV
EAI.

HE.

To

dy/ctcrrpot?

/cat

rptoSoucrt

TrA^yry

[lev EKCLVOV, TrA^/crt/c^v 8e rtva rt Oijpav r)/j,ds 7Tpooei7TLV Ivl Aoya> 1/uv ^pecuv -^ Tt? dV, 0eatri]Te, etTrot /cdAAtov;

yiyvo^vov erepov

EAI.

'AjLteAcD/zev

TOU oro/zaros"
TrXrjKTlKrjS

dp/cet

yap

/cat

TOUTO.
HE.
L,

T^S"

TOLVW

77po? TTVpos

<f)a)s

yiyvo^evov

TO fJ,V VVKTtplVOVy VTT* avrajv TO>V

EAI.

Ildvu ye.
Se'

HE.

To

ye /le^fteptvoV,

cos"

I-^OVTCDV Iv d/cpotj

ay/ctarpa

/cat ra)y TptoSoj^rcoy, Trap dy/aoTpetm/coV. 1 ayr6^ey al. ; ai)r60i BT.

278

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. It is. And the hunting of water creatures goes by the general name of fishing. THEAET. Yes. STR. And might I not divide this kind of hunting
STR.

into

two principal

divisions divisions
carries

? ?

THEAET.
STR.

What

The one

on the hunt by means of

enclosures merely, the other by a blow.

THEAET.

What do you mean, and how do you

distinguish the two ? STR. As regards the first, because whatever surrounds anything and encloses it so as to constrain it is properly called an enclosure.

THEAET. Certainly. May not, then, wicker baskets and seines and snares and nets and the like be called enclosures ? THEAET. Assuredly.
STR.

STR. Then we will call this division hunting by enclosures, or something of that sort. THEAET. Yes. STR. And the other, which is done with a blow, by means of hooks and three pronged spears, we must now to name it with a single word call striking ; or could a better name be found, Theaetetus ?

THEAET. Never
well enough.
STR.

mind the name

that

will

do

of striking which takes place fire is, I suppose, called by the hunters themselves fire-hunting. THEAET. To be sure. STR. And that which belongs to the daytime is, as a whole, barb-hunting, since the spears, as well as the hooks, are tipped with barbs.
at night

Then the kind

by the light of a

279

PLATO E
0EAI.
6.

Aeyerat yap ovv.

KTJS

TO

TO i?

roivvv dyKLCTTpevTLKOV Trjs avaiOev ei? TO Kara} yiyvo^zvov 8ia TO Tpiooovcrw OVTO) /zaAiora ^p^cr^at T/cuo8oi>Tia
HE.
IJLZV

To

TI$, ot/zat, KeKXrjTCLL. 0EAI. Oacri youy rive?.

HE.

To

8e ye XOITTOV ecrrw ev

en

/JLOVOV to?

EAI.

HE.

To To T^?

evavrlas ravrrj
/cat

TrXrjyfjs,
fj

re ytyvo/xeyov
221 TOU
OCLIfJiaTOS,

TOJV l)(9va)v oi>x

TLS av

0)(77Tp

TOLS T/)to8oUCTtV, ttAAa

rrjv K<f>a\r)V

CTTOT6,

Kal TO oro/za TOU OrypevOevTOS e/cctKOLTa)6V 1$ TOVVOVTIOV OVO) pdft ov TL ^^cro/xev, /caAa/xoi? ava(jTTa)p,evov
ACttt
,

Seir TOWO/ZO. \eycaBai;


/^eV,

0EAI.

Ao/<:a

6Vep
T-^?

a/OTt

TOT' auTO
7.

HE.

Nw

apa

do*7raXiVTiKfjs TrepL

ov

Te

Kayo) avva>fioXo'yrjKafjLv ov /JLOVOV aAAa :at TOI^ Aoyov ?7ept auTO Tovpyov vjJL7rdar]$ yap Texvys TO
KTrjTiKov
rjv,

Tovvofia,
iXTJ<f>a[j,V

KTTJTIKOV oe

TIKOV oe QrjpevTiKov, TOV 8e OrjpevTiKov ,a)o9r]piKov 8e evvypoOrjpiKov, evvypodripiKOV 8e TO KOLTwOev T/jirjfJLa o\ov dXievTiKov, dAteim/dy? 8e TOVTOV rrXrjKTLKov, TrXrjKTiKrjs Se dyKioTpevTLKov oe TO 7re/36 Trjv KaTOjQ^v dvoj TrXrjyrjv dvauiTa)iJL.vr}v ,
1

ait

Heindorf;

oi5

<rJ

BT.
from
avaffiroiffffai

Plato's

etymology

do-TraXieurt/c??

is

hardly less absurd than that suggested in the translation.

280

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. Yes, it is so called. STR. Then of striking which belongs to barbhunting^ that part which proceeds downward from above, is called, because tridents are chiefly used in
it,

tridentry,

suppose.

THEAET. Yes, some people, at any rate, call it so. STR. Then there still remains, I may say, only

one further kind.


THEAET.
STR.

What

is

opposite

is characterized by the of blow, which is practised with a hook and strikes, not any chance part of the body of the fishes, as tridents do, but only the head and mouth of the fish caught, and proceeds from below

The kind
sort

that that

upwards, being pulled up by twigs and rods. By what name, Theaetetus, shall we say this ought to

be called ? THEAET. I think our search is now ended and we have found the very thing we set before us a while ago as necessary to find. STR. Now, then, you and I are not only agreed about the name of angling, but we have acquired also a satisfactory definition of the thing itself. For of art as a whole, half was acquisitive, and of the acquisitive, half was coercive, and of the coercive, half was hunting, and of hunting, half was animal hunting, and of animal hunting, half was water hunting, and, taken as a whole, of water hunting the lower part was fishing, and of fishing, half was
striking, and of striking, half was barb-hunting, and of this the part in which the blow is pulled from below upwards at an angle l has a name in the very

The words
in

at an angle are inserted merely to give a reason English for the words which follow them.

281

PLATO
C
arr'

avTrjs rfjs

Trpd^ecos

dfiofjioiajOev

TOVVO/JLGL,

r)

vvv do7raAiVTLKr) ^rrjOelcra em/cA^v ye'yovev. HavTOLTTacrL fJiV ovv TOVTO ye iKavojs EAI.
8.
/cat

o-

EE.

Oe'pe

877,

/card

TOVTO

rov

ao(f)i<jTr)V

e77t^;etpa)/zev

TO TrapdSety/za evpelv, o ri TTOT'

0EAI.
HE.

K(X6

/U,7)j/

6KiVO
17
.

y*

7]V

TO ^TT^jLta TTpOJTOV,

TfOTepov

t'Stctjr^v

rtva Tiyyr\v e^ovra 6eTeov elvai

TOV O.UTTaXiVTrjV EAI. Nat.


HE.

Kat

yw

8^

TOVTOV

LOiOJT'qv

Orjcrofjtev,

aj

QeairrjTe, r) TravTarraoiv cjs dXrj6a)s o~o(f)L(jTijv ; 0EAI. OuSa/^tu? LOLOJTriv' (jLavGdvci) yap o Aeyetj,
to? Trayro? 8et

Totouro?

etvat TO ye 6Vo/xa TOVTO

HE.
eot/ce,

'AAAa Ttva
TtVa
TTOT'

0EAI.
HE.
T

ow

819

Tav

Ap'

cS

Trpos ^eaiv riyvor^Ka^ev Tav'opos TOV

EAI.

TtVa TOU;
acrTraAteuT^i'

HE.
EAI.

Tdv

TOU

Il7y;

HE.

EAI.

S^peVTOL TIV6 KO.Ta(j)aiVo9oV TtVo? drjpas OLTepos; TOV

afJL<f)tD fJLOL.

fJLev

yap
T^V

.Ttpov

L7TOfjLV.

HE.
1

At^a

77ou

vw

8^

StetAo/xev

aypav
1

Tfaaav, VCVOTLKOV fiepovs, TO 8e rre^ov Te/xvo^Tes


TraiTcs 5e? rotouros
e?

Winckelmann

TTOLVTUS Set rotoOroj


2

Trdirwy

TOLOUTOV T.

pC?

5?j

^Oy B.

282

THE SOPHIST
likeness of the act and is called angling, which was the object of our present search. THEAET. That at all events has been made

perfectly clear.
STR.

try to find out

Come, then, let us use this what a sophist is.

as a pattern

and

THEAET.
STR.

By

all

means.

first question we asked was whether we must assume that the angler was just a man or was a man with an art.

Well, then, the

Shall

man of ours, Theaetetus. we assume that he is just a man, or by all means really a man of wisdom ? THEAET. Certainly not just a man; for I catch

THEAET. Yes. STR. Now take this

your meaning that he is very far from being wise, although his name implies wisdom. STR. But we must, it seems, assume that he has an art of some kind. THEAET. Well, then, what in the world is this art that he has ?
STR.

Good

gracious
is
7

Have we

failed to notice

that the

akin to the other man ? THEAET. W ho is akin to whom ? STR. The angler to the sophist. THEAET. HOW SO ? STR. They both seem clearly to me to be a sort

man

of hunters. THEAET.
STR.

What
just

is

the hunting of the second


first.

We

have spoken about the

divided hunting as a whole and made one division that of swimming creatures and the other that of landinto

We

now

two

classes,

hunting.

283

PLATO
0EAI.
EE.

Nat.
fjiev

Kat TO

8i?]A$o/zev,

oaov

Ttepl

ra vev-

evvopajv TO oe Tre,6v eLo-aanev aa^taro^, eiTTOVTeS OTL 7ToXvLO6S 11]. 0EAI. Tldvv ye. 222 EE. Me'^pt pev Toivvv evTavBa 6 oo^tcrr^? re
<7Tt/ca Ttov
feat

o aa7TaXL6VTr)S a/za cbro

TT^ST

0EAI.
HE.

'EotVarov yovv.
/cat

/u,ej^

'l&KTpeTreadov Se ye a77o eVt OaXaTTav rrov KOL TroTafJiovs

TOUTOI?

Tt '0 8e ye eVt T^V y^p' av rtj^a?, TrouTou /cat d(f)06vovs, TOV TOVTOIS
EAI.

HE.

/cat rroTa/jiov?

erepovs

EAI.

IlcDs Aeyet?;

EE.

T^? 7re^?

Oujpas

ylyvtaQov 3uo

EAI.

Do tot'
ytte^

cKa.Tpov;
rjjjLepajv,

EE.
p.

To

rcov

TO Se rcD^ dypccov.
raiv rf^epcov;
^'/xepov
v

0EAI.

Etr'
ye'

ecrrt rt?
ecrrti/
/

^pa
\

SE.
<> \

Ei-Vep
</

oe
a'AAo

0777^

jLtev

^atpet?, etre p,r]oev rtfet? rj^epov, etre rj/Jiepov rt, rov 8e avOpajirov aypiov, etre
Ae'yet?
rjyei

avOpanros o

/)

>'

TJfjLepov

fjiev

au roy avdpcorrov,
TOVTOJV O77orep' av
r^jilv

oe

fjirjoefJLLav

Oypav
TOVTO

<f)i\ov

elpfjadai aoi,

biopiaov.

EAI.

'AAA' T^ju-a? re rjfjiepov, a) re dvQpamajv eivai Ae'ya>.

284

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. Yes. STR. And the one

ming
but

we discussed, so far as the swimcreatures that live in the water are concerned ;
left

we

the
it

land-hunting
has

undivided, merely

remarking that

many

forms.

STR. Now up to that point the sophist and the angler proceed together from the starting-point of

THEAET. Certainly.

acquisitive art.

THEAET.
STR.

think they do.

But they separate at the point of animalhunting, where the one turns to the sea and rivers and lakes to hunt the animals in those.
THEAET.
STR.

To be

sure.

But the other turns toward the land and to rivers of a different kind rivers of wealth and youth, bounteous meadows, as it were and he
intends to coerce the creatures in them. THEAET. What do you mean ? STR. Of land-hunting there are two chief divisions. THEAET. What are they ? STR. One is the hunting of tame, the other of wild creatures. THEAET. Is there, then, a hunting of tame creatures ? STR. Yes, if man is a tame animal but make any assumption you like, that there is no tame animal, or that some other tame animal exists but man is a wild one or that man is tame but there is no hunting of man. For the purpose of our definition choose whichever of these statements you think is
;

satisfactory to you.

THEAET.
animal, and

Why,
I

Stranger,

think
is

agree that there

we are a tame a hunting of man.


285

PLATO
EE. AtTTT^V TOIVVV KOI TTjV rjfJLpoOrjpLK7]V 0EAI. Kara ri Aeyovre?; HE.
t77CO//,V.

TT^V

fjiev

ArjcmKrjV

/cat

aVSpaTroStOTt/o^
It'

/cat

TvpavviKrjv
0EAI.
HE.

/cat ^vfJLTraaav rr)V TroAe/xt/c^v,

TrdVra

jStatov dripav optcrajLtevot.

KaAcDs

T-^v Se ye St/cavt/o]i' /cat 8^jLt^yopi/c^ /cat TTpocro/xtA^Tt/c^v, IV ay TO ^woAov, TndavovpyiKijv

TWO.

{JLLO.V

rexvrjv TTpocreiTTOVTes

0EAI.
EE.

'Op^cD?.
Tr^? 17 TTiOavovpyiKrjs Strra XeywfJiev yevrj. Ilota; To /ze^ erepov tSta, TO Se S-^/zocrta ytyvo/ze-

EAI.

HE.

EAI.

HE.

Tiyva9ov yap ovv etSo? eKa Ou/cow au T^? tSio^7]peL'Tt/c^S'


l

TO

oQapvri'TLK.ov

eari, TO Se Stopo</>opi/cdV;

0EAI.
HE. OVTTO)
EAI.

Oi) ^avOavaj.

T^7 TCOV epa)VTO)V Oijpa rov vovv,

ws

eot/cas

HE.

Toy "0 TO 6?
TOUTO

drjpevOelcn Sajpa

0EAI.
HE.

'AXrjOeaTara Aeyet?.
/u,ei>

roivvv

epcoTt/c^j

Ttxvrjs

terra)

ITavu ye. 8e' ye ^na9apvrirLKOv TO ftev Xovv Sta ^aptTo? /cat vravTaTracrt Si' 7]So^? TO oVAeap TT7TOLr)fjivov /cat TOI' fjLia9ov eavra) \iovov KoXaKiKi/jv, rpo<j>r]V
EAI.

HE.

Tou

fua-dapvrjTtKoi'

Heindorf;

fuo-fla/^evrt/ctfv

BTW

(so also

below).

286

THE SOPHIST
STR. Let us, then, say that the hunting of tame animals is also of two kinds. THEAET. How do we justify that assertion ?
STR.

By

and the whole by force.

defining piracy, man-stealing, tyranny, art of war all collectively as hunting

THEAET. Excellent.
STR. And by giving the art of the law courts, of the public platform, and of conversation also a single name and calling them all collectively an art of

persuasion.

THEAET. Correct.
STR.

Now

let us say that there are

two kinds of

persuasion.

THEAET.
STR.

private persons, the other with the community. THEAET. Granted each of them does form a class. STR. Then again of the hunting of private persons one kind receives pay, and the other brings gifts, does it not ? THEAET. I do not understand. STR. Apparently you have never yet paid attention to the lovers' method of hunting. THEAET. In what respect ? STR. That in addition to their other efforts they give presents to those whom they hunt. THEAET. You are quite right. STR. Let us, then, call this the amatory art. THEAET. Agreed. STR. But that part of the paid kind which con;

What kinds ? The one has to do with

verses

exclusively

to furnish gratification and makes pleasure its bait and demands as its pay only

maintenance,

we might

all

agree, if I

am

not mis-

287

PLATO
223 TrdvTs
clvai.
EAI.
<t>aljJiV

av

x
r)

fjovvTiKTJv

TLVOL

Hois yap ov;

8e eVayyeAAo/xevov /xev cos aperq? eVe/ca ra? o/xiAia? 77Otou/xevov, /xtcr$oV Se vo/xtoyxa Trparroapa ov TOVTO TO yeVo? ere/DO)
SE.
EAI.

To

no)? yap ov;


817

SE.

EAI.

TOVTCO; TretpaJ Aeyetv. TOV yap O-O^LCTT^V /xot 807' TOUT ovv eycoye elrrajv TO TrpoafJKov av rjyovfjiai KaXelv avTov.

TtVt

A^Aoy

10.

SE.

eot/cev,
,

KaTa 8r) ToV vvv, a) eatV^Te, r) Te^^S ot/cetcoTt/cr^?,


3

Aoyov,

^cooOrjpias,

^epCTata?,

07;

ta?, ISioO'rjpias, p.ia9apviKrjs, TOTTO}\LKrjS, So^OTTaLOeVTLKTJS, VO)V TrAoUCTtCOV ev$6cov yiyvo \juivr] Qr^pa TTpocrprjTeov, a)$ o

Kal

Aoyo?
SE.

TII^IV o"t>/x/?aiVet,

EAI.

HavTctTraat
arat Tr^Se t'Sco/xev
/

/xeTO^ov Te^T^? v /xaAa 77Ot/ctA^?. /cat yap ow ev Tot? TrpoaOev etpr^^teVots" <f>dvTaafJia Trape^eTat, txr) TOVTO o vvv avro rjfJiels <f>afJLev aAA' eVepov et^at Tt yeVoj.
EAI.

//>
SE.

"ETt 8e
ecrTt

4-

TO

~.

vuv

ov yap TI (f>av\r)s r MV L^TOv^evov, aAA


y

n^y

817;

KTVJTlKfjS Te^^? StTfAoW T)V CtSoj OrjpevTLKov /xepo? e^ov, TO 8e aAAa/cTt/cov. 1 ^ Heindorf ^ om. MSS. 2 KT^TLK^ MSS.; seel. Schleierxei/>am/c?}y add. Aldina ; macher.
TT^?

To

TTOU,

TO

ytxev

3 4

fyo0?7pi'as ire^od-qpla's MSS.; TrefrodTjplas seel.


idu/j.ev

Schleierraacher.

eldu/j.ev

BT.

288

THE SOPHIST
taken, to call the art of flattery or of
pleasant.

making things

THEAET. Certainly. STR. But the class which proposes to carry on conversations for the sake of virtue and demands

its
its

pay in cash does not this deserve to be called by another name ? THEAET. Of course.
STR.

And what
is

is

that

name ?
;

Try

to tell
r

w e have discovered the sophist. And therefore by uttering that word I think I should give him the right name.
THEAET. It
obvious
for I think

seems, according to our present reasoning, Theaetetus, the part of appropriative, coercive, hunting art which hunts animals, land
STR.

Then, as

it

tame animals, man, privately, for pay, is paid in cash, claims to give education, and is a hunt after rich and promising youths, must so our present
animals,

argument concludes be called sophistry. THEAET. Most assuredly. STR. But let us look at it in still another way for the class we are now examining partakes of no mean art, but of a very many-sided one. And we must indeed do so, for in our previous talk it presents an appearance of being, not what we now
;

say

it is,

but another

class.

THEAET.
STR.

HOW

SO

The

acquisitive art

was of two

sorts,

the one

the division of hunting, the other that of exchange.

K 2

289

PLATO
EAI.

*HV yap

ovv.

Tfj$ Tolvvv dXXaKTLKrjs Suo et'Si^ Ae'ycu/zev, TO jjiev ocoprjTiKov, TO oe T6pov dyopaoTLKov ;
HE.
EAI.

ElprjaOco.
[Ar]i>

EE.

Kat

av (^TJoo^ev dyopaoriKrjv

o^xf)

'~

fJivecrOai.

EAI.

11^;

T^i/ /xev rcop' avrovpyaJv avTO77a)\iKr)V Staipovp,VOL, rrjv Se ra dAAorpta e/oya


HE.

0EAI.
HE.

yu ye.

Tt Se;

TT]? /zera/JA^Tt/o^stffJiicrv

ou^

17

//,ev

dAAay?y, cr^eSov avrrjs


EAI.

/xepos" 6V,

Nat.
2

EE.

To
rp

TOfJLVOV
EAI.

OJv
/

Se ye e'^ aAAi]? et? d'AA^v TTO\IV StaAAarKOI


o>
>/

SE.

ov; ?>> rp^>5 iTys o ep,7TOpiK7]S ap ou/c


1

It o

rjcrurj/Jiua ort
3

/)//)

TO

yu,ev

OCTOt?
7

TO
9

cra)/za

rpe^erai
Ae'yets;

^^X ?

77<^Aoi7v Std.

^p^Tat, TO Se vofjiivfjiaTOS aXXdrreraL;


Acat

EAI.

nco? TOVTO
Tvept TT)V

SE.

To TpOV

i/JV)(r)v

LOCUS ayvoov^ev, eVet

TO

7TOV

vVLjJLV.

EAI.

Nat.
MOUCTIACT^
1

224

EE.

Toivvv
bt
Kal

^vvciTTaoav
TT^Xt'/CT;

KaTT7J\lKT]

BT.
diaXdrrov

5ia\a.TTO[j.j>oji>
3

BT

W.

/cat ^/)9jrat

Heindorf ;

/cexpT/rai

BT.

290

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. Yes,
STR.
it

was.

we say that there are two sorts of exchange, the one by gift, the other by sale ?
shall

Now

THEAET. So be
STR. sale
is

it.

And we

shall say further that

exchange by

divided into two parts. THEAET. HOW SO ?


STR.

We

make

this distinction

calling the part

which sells a man's own productions the selling of one's own, and the other, which exchanges the works
of others, exchange.

THEAET. Certainly. STR. Well, then, that part of exchange which is carried on in the city, amounting to about half of it, is called retailing, is it not ? THEAET. Yes.
STR.

to city
STR.

And that which exchanges goods from city by purchase and sale is called merchandising ?

THEAET. Certainly. And have we not observed that one part of merchandising sells and exchanges for cash whatever serves the body for its support and needs, and the other whatever serves the soul ? THEAET. What do you mean by that ? STR. Perhaps we do not know about the part that has to do with the soul though I fancy we do understand the other division. THEAET. Yes. STR. Take, therefore, the liberal arts 1 in general
;

1 The word /zoimK??, here rendered " liberal arts," is much more inclusive than the English word " music," designating, as it does, nearly all education and culture except the purely In the Athens of Socrates' day many, possibly physical. most, of the teachers of music in this larger sense were

foreigners, Greeks, of course, but not Athenians.

291

PLATO
KOLOTOT
erepojcre
1? 7TO\IV

V0V
TmTpaaKOfJLevrjv,
/cat
/cat

Se e

yo/xe^i/

/cat

ypa^LKrjv

Kal

OavfJLaroTroiLKrjV
/cat

TroAAd

erepa
/cat

rrjs ifjvxfjs, TO, [lev TrapafivOias,

ra Se
rov

/cat cnrovSfjs

TrcoAow/xeva,

ayovra

rjTTOv rrjs rcov airiajv /cat TTOTCUV


Trpdcrecos e/jiTropov opOcos av Aeyo^tevov EAI. 'AA^^eCTrara Aeyet?.

EE.

Oz)/cow
e/c

TroAtv re

/cat rov vvcuvov[JLevov fjia6rjfjiara 77oAecos yo/xtayLtaros a/xetjSo^ra


1

Trpoaepels ovo^a; 0EAI. 2^o8pa ye.


II.
HE.

TO

/^ep'

eTTtSet/crt/CT]
jLtev

yeAotov

ifjvxefjiTTOpiKfjs ravTrjs ap* ou St/catorara Ae'yotr' dV, rd 8e ou^ rjrrov TOV Trpoadev, o/xco? Se
'^?

ovaav Trpdaiv avrrjv dSeA(/(p dw/xart irpocrziirelv dvdy/c^;


EAI.

rtvt rr^

ndVu
Ta
Hois'

EE.

Taurus'
TTtpi

/zev ouv. TOivvv rrjs

/ia^/^aroTrcoAi/C'^S'

TO

/u,ey

77ept

TCOI/ d'AAcov

re^vcov /jLaO^aara erepa),


d'AAa) TrpoaprjTeov.

TO oe
SE.

0EAI.

TO T^? dperfjs yap ou; TO


3e
Trept
i\

Te^vo77coAt/cov

yLt^v

TO

ye

Trept
<ji>

TaAAa dV

apfjiOTTOL-

ravra
v\
\

TrpoOujJLrjOrjTi
1
\

av aAAo ovof^a CLTTCOV OVK a.v TrA^^jiteAotTy TiA^ TO vvv r]TOVfjivov avro efvat TO ao<f>i<jTiKov yeVo?;
EE.

Ae'yetv ovo/xa. \ / TT" EAT. J\at Tt Tt?

i\

OuSev
Aeyoj^Tes1

d'AAo.
cos"
(5)?

Wi
TO

ST)

j-'W

auTo

/CTT]Tt/c7y?,

i'^i

yw BT
a

above the

line

T)

Wi 5^

W.

fJ.fra^\r]TiKijs} fJ.CTa.p\rjTiKbi>

BT.

292

THE SOPHIST
that constantly go about from city to city, bought in one place and carried to another and sold painting, and conjuring, and the many other things that affect the soul, which are imported and sold partly for its entertainment and partly for its serious needs we cannot deny that he who carries these about and sells them constitutes a merchant properly so called, no less than he whose business is the sale of food
;

and drink.
THEAET. Very true.
STR. Then will you give the same name who buys up knowledge and goes about from city exchanging his wares for money ?

to

him

city to

THEAET. Certainly.
STR. One part of this soul-merchandising might very properly be called the art of display, might it not ? But since the other part, though no less ridiculous than the first, is nevertheless a traffic in knowledge, must we not call it by some name akin to its business ? THEAET. Certainly. STR. Now of this merchandising in knowledge the part which has to do with the knowledge of the other arts should be called by one name, and that which has to do with virtue by another. THEAET. Of course. STR. The name of art-merchant would fit the one who trades in the other arts, and now do you be so good as to tell the name of him who trades in virtue. THEAET. And what other name could one give, without making a mistake, than that which is the object of our present investigation the sophist ?

STR. No other. Come then, let us now summarize the matter by saying that sophistry has appeared a

293

PLATO

D dyOpaarLKfjS,
EAI.

1 efJLTTOplKrjS, ljJV)(fJL7rOpLKrjS TTepi X6~ Kai jjiaO^ara, dperrjs rrw\7]riK.ov oevrepov you?

dve<j)dvr) ao(f>LariKTq .

HE.

MctAa ye. Tpirov oe y*


1

oifjLai

ae,

Kav el

ns
1

pu/xeVos
t

ev TroAet,

ra ^ev

cop'ou/zevos ,

ravra Kai
0EAI.
EE.

TKraiv6jJLVOs OLVTOS fjia9^fjiara Trepl 7ra>Aa)v e/c TOUTOU TO ^t' Trpovrd^aro, KaXelv ovSev d'AAo 77 XTJV onep vvv STJ.

avrov ra Se ra aura

Tt

8* GJ) /zeAAco;

Kat TO
av
fj

Krr)TiKr]s

apa

[JLTaf3Xr)TiK6v, ayo/oa-

CTTIKOV, KaTrrjXiKov

eiVe

auTO77CoAi/cov, af

OTLTrep

Trepl

ra roiavra
ra>

yeVo?, del av Trpcxjepe'is, to? ^>aiVet,


0EAI.

^AvdyKt]'

yap Aoya> Set crwa:oAou-

ec TWI 12. HE. "Ert ST) TotaiSe 0KO7Ta>fjiv, 7TpocTOLKv apa TO i>w ^Lerd^LOJKo^vov yeVos".

225

0EAI.
HE.

Iloi'aj 817;
r]v.

T-^9 KrrjriKrjs dycwicrriKTJ ri jjiepos TI^IV 0EAI. v yap ouv.


HE.

OVK

drro rporrov roivvv earl Stacpetv

avryv

a.

0EAI.
EE.

Ka^' ovnna Aeye.


jLtev

To

dfJiiXXrjriKov avrfjs riOevras,

TO Se

EAI.

"Ecmv.
roivvv
jjLaxrjriKTJs
tp.iropi.Kov

SE.

T-^S"

rat

fiev

BT.

294

THE SOPHIST
second time as that part of acquisitive art, art of exchange, of trafficking, of merchandising, of soulmerchandising which deals in words and knowledge,

and trades

in virtue.

THEAET. Very well. If a man settled STR. But there is a third case down here in town and proposed to make his living by selling these same wares of knowledge,
:

buying some of them and making others himself, you would, I fancy, not call him by any other name than that which you used a moment ago.
THEAET. Certainly not.
STR.

Then

also that part of acquisitive art

which

proceeds by exchange, and by sale, whether as mere retail trade or the sale of one's own productions, no matter which, so long as it is of the class of merchandising in knowledge, you will always, apparently,
call sophistry.

THEAET. I must do the argument leads.


STR.

so, for I

have to follow where

Let us examine further and see if the class are now pursuing has still another aspect, of similar nature.

we

THEAET.
STR.

Of what we

We

nature ? agreed that fighting was a division of


did.
it

acquisitive art.

THEAET. Yes,
STR.
parts.

Then

it is

quite fitting to divide

into

two

THEAET. Tell what the parts are. STR. Let us call one part of it the competitive and the other the pugnacious. THEAET. Agreed. STR. Then it is reasonable and fitting to give to

295

PLATO
crco/mra ytyvo/zeVa> cr\;eS6V et/co? /cat TrpeVov otoy /Jiaort/coV. ovofjua Ae'yeti' rt TOLOVTOV rt^efteVou?
77790?

EAI.

HE.

Nat. Ta> Se Aoyots Tipo? Aoyous rt

ris, c5
1 ;

0eat-

B T7?re,
EE.

d'AAo e 17777 TrA^v djit^tcr^r^Tt/cov EAI. OuSeV.

To

Se

ye

Trepi

ras ajLt^to-^r^aets Qeriov


1

EAI.

HE.

Ka^'

ocroy

jitev

ya/9 ytyverat
/cat

evavria
a'Si/ca

(JLTJKTI

Aoycuv

7re/n

prjKem re 77/>o? ra 2 St/cata /cat

EAI.
HE.

Nat.
8' ev tStot? ai) /cat

To

eptoTTJcrecri,

Trpos aVo/cptaets"

//.toy

eldiafJieOa

/c

aAAo TrA^y dyrtAoyt/cov; EAI. OvSeV.


HE.

Tou
Trepi

Se dvrtAoyt/cou TO /xev
ap,<f)Laj3r]TeLTai

vfJift6Xcua

Xyais

etSo?, eVetVep

avro auro
r)/xa;v

ocrov Trept ra /xeV, et/cr^ Se /cat aVe'3 Oereov /xe^ Trpdrrerat, TOLVTCL
Ste'yvcu/cey
cos-

erepoy 6V

o'

drap
EAI.

7TO)VViJ,ias

ov9*

VTTO

TWV

ep-irpocrOev

Aoyo?, erv^ev
feat

ovre vvv vfi

ru^et^ aftov.
/caret

*AXr]6rj-

a/xt/cpa

yap

At'av

TravroSaTra StTJp^rat. EE. To Se ye evre^vov,


/cat dSt/ccov /cat Trept

/cat Trepi St/catan^

raw

d'AAcov oAco?

ap' ou/c epiariKov av Ae'yetv


EAI.

ricos

yap ou;

rd

om.

TW.

Stephanus
-

a^ia^TiK^v

BTW.

raOra

BT

TOUTO al.

296

THE SOPHIST
that part of the pugnacious which consists of bodily contests some such name as violent.

THEAET. Yes.
STR.

we

And what other name than controversy shall give to the contests of words ?
No
other.

THEAET.
STR.

But controversy must be divided into two

kinds.

THEAET.
STR.

How?
are

Whenever long speeches

opposed by

long speeches on questions of justice and injustice in public, that is forensic controversy. THEAET. Yes.
STR. But that which is carried on among private persons and is cut up into little bits by means of questions and their answers, we are accustomed to call argumentation, are we not ? THEAET. We are. STR. And that part of argumentation which deals with business contracts, in which there is contro-

versy, to be sure, but it is carried on informally and without rules of art all that must be considered a distinct class, now that our argument has recog-

nized it as different from the rest, but it received no name from our predecessors, nor does it now deserve to receive one from us. THEAET. True for the divisions into which it falls are too small and too miscellaneous. STR. But that which possesses rules of art and carries on controversy about abstract justice and injustice and the rest in general terms, we are accus;

tomed

to call disputation, are

we not ?

THEAET. Certainly.

297

PLATO
D
HE.

Tov

[jirjv

epiaTLKOV

TO

p,ev
'

" PLKOV, TO oe xP 7HJLarLO rLKOV EAI. HavTOLTracrL ye.

v Tvyx avei
r]v

HE.
iV

Trjv

eirajvviJiiav

TOLVVV,

eKaTepov

Bel

aVTO)V } TTeLpaOaJfJLeV

eiTTelv.

0EAI.
HE.

OvKOVV XP
jjirjv

?' *

Ao/c<2>

TO ye
1

8t* rjoovrjv TTJS Trepl

raura

d/zeAe? TOW OLKtiajv yiyvo^zvov , oe TTjV Xe^iv rots 77oAAot? rav O.KOVOVTOJV ov rjoovfjs aKovofJLevov KaXelaBai /cara
Star/otjS^s

EAI.

EE.

Aeyerat yap ovv OVTOJ ToVTOV TOIVVV TOVVaVTlOV,

OL7TO

T&V

lBlO)TlTreipa)

KOJV epi8a)v xprjfjLCLTi^oiJLevov, ev TO*

//.epet
/

ov

vvv

eiTrelv.

EAI.

Kat

T7-\/0 8
rt

rts av

''^ eav enrwv eTepov OVK


T
>

Oavf^aaTOV TrdXiv eKelvov TtXr^v ye av vvv reraproy TOV {jieTaoiCJKOfJLevov v<>

TOV

226

HE.

Ovoev aAA* ^ TO xP 7lfJiarLO"TLKOV ytvos,


1

ct>?

eoiKev, epio~TLKrjs ov Texy*) 5 * T ^J S dvrtAoyt/c^s ,


3

, y

^TrjTLKfjs, Trj$ /zcr^Ti/cT}?, Trjs TTJS KTrjTiKrjs evTiv, d)s 6 Aoyoj av

6 ao^iaTrjs*

Ko/u,tS^ pev ovv. HE. 'Opa? cu? dXr)6rj Aeyerat TO 77OtKiXov elvai TOVTO TO drjpiov Kal TO XeyojJLevov ov
EAI.

13.

ow

EAI.
1

QvKOVV
;

dfJL^o'LV

r6 ye vulg.
3

r65e

BT

ro 5e

W.

H add.
BTW.

Heindorf.

d/i0i(T/37JT7jrt/C?5s] d/.C0t(T/377Tt/f?}s 4 ; X7?7TT6J' \TIVTtQV

BT.

298

THE SOPHIST
STR. Well, of disputation, one sort wastes money, the other makes money.

THEAET. Certainly.
STR.

Then

let us try to tell

the

name by which we

must

call

each of these.

THEAET. Yes,
STR.

we must do

so.

Presumably the kind which causes a man to neglect his own affairs for the pleasure of engaging in it, but the style of which causes no pleasure to

most of
other

his hearers,

is,

in

my

opinion, called

by no

name than

garrulity.

STR.

THEAET. Yes, that is about what it is called. Then the opposite of this, the kind which

try now, for it your turn, to give its name. THEAET. What other answer could one give without making a mistake, than that now again for the fourth time that wonderful being whom we have so long been pursuing has turned up the sophist STR. Yes, and the sophist is nothing else, apparently, than the money-making class of the disis
!

makes money from private disputes

putatious, argumentative, controversial, pugnacious, combative, acquisitive art, as our argument has now

again stated. THEAET. Certainly.


STR.
this

Do you
is

see the truth of the statement that


is,

many-sided and, as the saying not to be caught with one hand ? THEAET. Then we must catch him with both.

creature

299

PLATO
HE.
Xp-j)

yap

ovv,
ri

/cat

Kara SwajutV ye ovrco

rroir^reov,

TOtoVSe

/cat fJLOL Ae'ye'

LXVOS avrov. ra>v OLKeriK&v ovojjidrcov KaXovuev


jJieraOeovras

arra

TTOU;

EAI.

Kat

TroAAa*

drap

vrota 817 raiv

HE.

rotaSe, otov SirjOelv re XeyofJiev v /cat jSparretv /cat Sta/cptVetv. 1 EAI. Tt /AT^V;

Ta

HE.

Kat

Trpo? ye TOVTOIS ert ^aiveiv,


ei^
r\

/cep/ct^etv, /cat /zupta

rat? re^at? aAAa rotaura

evovra
0EAI.

7TiardfJLe9a.

yap;

To

7TOLOV aVTCOV

TrapaSety/xara TrpoOels ravra Kara Trdvrcov vjpov;


HE.

Atatpert/ca TTOU

ra Ae^eVra etp^rat

0EAI.
EE.

Nat.

rov e/>tov roivvv Xoyov (Ls Trept ravra ovaav ev arfaai rex VTl v eVo? ovouaros d^tcur\v.

Kara

EAI.

TtVa
"Ecrrco.

EE.

Ata/c
S/co7ret 817 ravrr)$

EAI.

EE.

a$ Svo dv

rrr)

EAI.

D
TO

HE.
e/

Kat

jLtev

a^etav co? e/,tot eV ye rats etp^yLteVat? Sta/cptcrecrt /ZT^V aTTO ^eArtovos aTrovcotetv TO ^etpoy 3 >
1

S> ojjioiov

a<f>

many emendations have been suggested, none


entirely satisfactory,

and

all

probably unnecessary.

300

THE SOPHIST
STR. Yes, we must, and must go at it with all our might, by following another track of his in this of the expressions connected with way. Tell me menial occupations some are in common use, are they not ? But to which of the many THEAET. Yes, many. does your question refer ? STR. To such as these: we say "sift" and l " strain " and " winnow " and "
;

separate."

THEAET. Certainly. STR. And besides these there are "card" and "comb" and "beat the web" and countless other Is it not so ? technical terms which we know. THEAET. Why do you use these as examples and ask about them all ? What do you wish to show in
regard to them ? STR. All those that I have mentioned imply a notion of division. THEAET. Yes. STR. Then since there is, according to my reckoning, one art involved in all of these operations, let
us give
STR.
STR.
it

one name.

THEAET.

What shall we call it ? The art of discrimination.

THEAET. Very well.

Now

see if

we

can discover two divisions


thinking, for a boy
of discrimination just

of this. THEAET.
like

You demand quick

me.

STR.

And yet, in the instance

mentioned there was, first, the separation of worse from better, and, secondly, of like from like.
1

cess of weaving

Apparently a term descriptive of some part of the procf. Cratylus, 338 B.


;

301

PLATO
EAI.

EE.

Z^eSoV ovrco vvv Ae^ey <j>ai.Vrai. T^? fJiV roivvv 6Vo//,a OVK e^co
Sta/cptcreo)?,

TTJS Se KaTa\i7rovor)$ /mv TO fieXriov TO oe x^lpov diToflaXXovcrrjs e^cu.

0EAI.
EE.

Aeye
ITacra

rt.
r)

TOLavTr] StaKpicns, co? eyco Trdvrajv Aeyerat Trapa KaOap^o? TL$.


EAI.

vvvoa),

E
1\

EE.
/^

Ae'yerat yap ouv. Ou/cow TO ye KaQapriKov efSo? au SiTrAow

ot' 7TCLS

av toot; Nat, Kara o^oA^i' ye


HE.
tcra)?'

/O>

EAI.

ou

fj,rjv

eycoye

Kadopcj vvv.
14.
et'S^

Kat

/>t7)j/

TO,

Tre/ot

ra aw/mara TroAAd

KaOdpaecov
Ilota

evi TreptAa^Setv dvofJLari TrpocnJKei.

EAI.

Krat rtVt;

re TOJV ^cocuv, ocra eyro? ocop,dra)V VTTO re opOoJs yvjJLvacTTiKfjs iarpiKrjs


SE.

Ta

227 KaOaiperai KO!


ocra
djv

Trept

ra/cro?,

etVetv
/cat

/xev

ftaXavevTLKrj
,

Trape'^eraf
/cat

TCUV

yva^eurt/c^

u/ZT7acra

eVtjite'Aetav
/cat

Trape^OjLteV^

/cara

cr/xi/cpa

yeAota 8o/cowra ovo^ara


EAI.

cr%V.
aAAct

MaAa

ye.
fjiev

EE.

HavraTTaoL

ovv, c5

eatr^re.

yap

T7^ Tojy Aoytov jJieOoSa) o-TroyytcrTtAC^?

</>ap/xa/co-

TTOcrias
et

TO

jLtev
1

ov$ev r/rrov ovSe rt /xaAAov ruy^avet fieXov, a/xt/cpa, TO Se /zeyaAa ^a? to^eAet /ca^atTCKTOS] irepira/croj

Tre/)!

TO, ?re/)l

rd

Micros

& T.

302

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. Yes, as you
clear.

now

express

it,

that

is

pretty

STR. Now I know no common name for the second kind of discrimination but I do know the name of the kind which retains the better and throws away
;

the worse. THEAET.


STR.

What

is it ?

Every such discrimination, as

I think, is uni-

versally called a sort of purification. THEAET. Yes, so it is.


is

STR. And could not anyone see that purification of two kinds ? THEAET. Yes, perhaps, in time but still I do not see it now. STR. Still there are many kinds of purifications of bodies, and they may all properly be included
;

under one name.


THEAET.
STR.

What are they and what is the name ? The purification of living creatures, having

do with impurities within the body, such as are successfully discriminated by gymnastics and medicine, and with those outside of the body, not nice to speak of, such as are attended to by the bath-keeper's
to

and the purification of inanimate bodies, which the special care of the fuller's art and in general of the art of exterior decoration this, with its petty subdivisions, has taken on many names which seem
art
is
; ;

ridiculous.

THEAET. Very.
STR. Certainly they do, Theaetetus. However, the method of argument is neither more nor less concerned with the art of medicine than with that of sponging, but is indifferent if the one benefits us It enlittle, the other greatly by its purifying.

303

PLATO
B
TOV KTrjcraaOai yap eW/ca vovv rracrcov TO ^vyyeves /cat TO fjirj ^vyyeves KaTavoelv laov rrdaas, /cat 6aTpa pa)jjivrj Tifia rrpos TOVTO e T&V Tepwv /cara Tr\v oftotor^ra ovolv yeAotorepa, ae^voTepov Se rt TOV OLOL ovoev rj (fiOeipio'TiKrjs S^Aowra drjpevTiKrjV aAA* co? TO TroAi) xavvoTepov. Kol or) /cat
pov.

6Vep

TL v/JL7rdcras Trpoaepovfjiev oVo/za TJpov, ocrat craj/za etre e^^u^ov etre atjjv^ov

Xe^Oev

KaOaipeiVy ovoev avTrj StotCTet, rtolov TI %Ta> JJLOVOV V7Tp7TcrTaTov elvai o6i~6L'
vvofjcrav,
'oidvoia.v

X&PLS T&V TT}S tpvxfjs Kaddpcreajv TTOLVTO. ocra aAAo rt KaOaipei. TOP yap rrpl TTJV

KadapfJLOV OLTTO TQJV a\\a}V 7TiK)(Lpr]K6V d<f)Opio~CLcrOai ret vvv, et ye ojrep fiovXeTcu fiavddvofjiev. 0EAI. 'AAAa fjiefJidOrjKa, KCLI crvyxcopaj ovo fj,ev
e'i,or)

KaOdpcrea}?, eV Se TO Trepl TTJV i/jv^is etSo? elvai,


Trepi

TOV

TO

CTaifta

^ojpt? 6V.
/cat jitot

EE.

Ilap'TCOv /caAAtCTTa.

TO

fJLGTa

TOVTO

eVa/coue rreipcb/Jievos av TO \)(dev oixfj Te^veiv.


0EAI.

Ka^' oVot'aV
HE.

ixfriqyfl

77etpacro/xat crot

15.
Tt;
EAI.

Ilo^ptW

eVe/oov dpeTrjs eV faxf}

Aeyo-

ITo)?

yap ou;
2

EE.

KaOapfjLo? r]v TO AetVety Tepov, e/c/3aAAetv Se OCTO^ aV ?y TTOW Tt <f>Xavpov.


/ZT^V

Kat
T

EAI.

H^ yap ow.
i/JV)(rjs

EE.

Kat

apa,

/ca^'

oaov av
BT. BT.

W
2

el\ri<t>a<n
;

XefTret?

Heindorf

Xwret^

304

THE SOPHIST
deavours to understand what is related and what is not related in all arts, for the purpose of acquiring and therefore it honours them all intelligence equally and does not in making comparisons think one more ridiculous than another, and does not consider him who employs, as his example of hunting, the art of generalship, any more dignified than him who employs the art of louse-catching, but only, for the most part, as more pretentious. And now as to your question, what name we shall give to all the activities whose function it is to purify the body, whether animate or inanimate, it will not matter at all to our method what name sounds finest it cares only to unite under one name all purifications of everything else and to keep them separate from the For it has in our present purification of the soul.
;

discussion been trying to separate this purification definitely from the rest, if we understand its
desire.

THEAET. But I do understand and I agree that there are two kinds of purification and that one kind is the purification of the soul, which is separate from that of the body. STR. Most excellent. Now pay attention to the next point and try again to divide the term. THEAET. In whatever way you suggest, I will try to help you in making the division. STR. Do we say that wickedness is distinct from virtue in the soul ? THEAET. Of course. STR. And purification was retaining the one and throwing out whatever is bad anywhere ? THEAET. Yes, it was. STR. Hence whenever we find any removal of evil

305

PLATO
KOLKICLS d<f>aipcriv riva, KaOapfjLov

avrov Xeyovres eV

228

Kat fjLoXa ye. Avo fjiev e'iSr] /ca/cta? 0EAI. Rota; HE. To fjiev olov voarov
0EAI.
SE.

rrepi

ifjv)(r)V

prjreov.

eV crc6/Aart, TO 8*

0EAI.
EE.
EAI.

OVK
NOCTOV
to-oj? /cat ardaiv ov ravrov OuS* av Trpos TOVTO e^co ri xpij fjL

vaodai.
EE.

Ilorepov a'AAo rt
et<

GTOLCTLV T^yov/xevo?

T)

r^v rou

vaei ^vyyevovs EAI. Oi)SeV.

TWOS

8ia(f)6opd$

SE. 'AAA* a 10-^0? a'AAo rt TrA^v 2 TTOLVTOLXOV SvcretSe? eVov yeVos ; EAI. OvSa/za}? a'AAo.
>

TO

Tt Se; eV ^X^ So^a? eTTiOvfJiLais /cat OV/JLOV /cat Aoyov AwTrats /cat Trdvra dAA^Aot? ravra <f>Xavpa)$ e^ovrcjv OVK fjcrOrjfjieOa oia(f)p6fjiva; 0EAI. Kat a(f)6opa ye.
EE.

ats

EE.

Suyyev^

ye

ju,7]v

e'^

dvay/c^s"

EAI.

SE.

Da)? ya/o ov; Tacrtv a/oa /cat

voaov

rfjs

^X^

irovrjpiav

Xeyovres opdcos epovfiev.

/O>Wl\O av SE. Crr-i ltd;


OpOorara
ocr

0EAI.

[j,V ovv.
/
/
\

Kivrjorecos

^raa^ovrcL
r

/cat

OKOTTOV
1
2

TLVCL

Geneva
Galen;

dia<j)6opas Siafpopdv
3

^d^ Schleiermacher ;
6cr'

'6v

5ia(popas5ia<pOopdi'}$ T, Stobaeus, Stobaetis ; o^ t ; Sf BT.

a?

Cobet ; 6Va BT.

306

THE SOPHIST
from the soul, we shall call that a purification.
STR.

be speaking properly

if

we

THEAET. Very properly.

We

must say

that there are


?

two kinds of

evil

in the soul.

THEAET.
STR.

What

kinds
is

The one

comparable to a disease in the

body, the other to a deformity. THEAET. I do not understand. STR. Perhaps you have not considered that disease and discord are the same thing ? THEAET. I do not know what reply I ought to

make
else

to this, either.

you think discord is anything than the disagreement of the naturally related, brought about by some corruption ? THEAET. No I think it is nothing else. STR. But is deformity anything else than the
STR. Is that because
;

presence of the quality of disproportion, which is always ugly ? THEAET. Nothing else at all. do we not see that in the souls STR. Well then of worthless men opinions are opposed to desires, anger to pleasures, reason to pain, and all such things to one another ? THEAET. Yes, they are, decidedly.
;

STR.
STR.

Yet they must

all

be naturally related.
right
if

THEAET.

Of course. Then we shall be

we

say that

wickedness is a discord and disease of the soul. THEAET. Yes, quite right. STR. But if things which partake of motion and aim at some particular mark pass beside the mark
*

ireip&iJ.eva

T, Galen, Stobaeus

Trapu^etfa

om. B.

307

PLATO
jV Trapd<f)opa
2

avrov yiyv^rai

KOL

a7TOTvy)(dvr) , Trorepov

avrd ^cro/xev

VTTO avfjifjierpias

Trpos aXXrjXa
EAI.

r)

rovvavriov VTTO dfjierpias aura

HE.

A^Aov co? VTTO 'AAAa fj,r)v ^iv\j]V ye


.

'La^.v

aKOvaav Trdaav TTQ.V

ayvoovaav
EAI.

2^>oS/)a ye.
/n^y ayvoetv eartv CTT* aAry$eicu> op/xcoTrapa(j)6pov crvveaeais

HE.

To ye

jueV?]?

ifrvxfjs,

uSev d'AAo
@EAI.

TrXrjv Trapa(j)poo"ui>r].

Ila^u
avoiqTOV atcr^pav
/cat

HE. ^Fu^v apa 0TOV.


EAI.

a^erpov

HE.

"Ecrrt
yevr],

0^777

ST) Suo ravra, cos ^atVerat, TO /zev Trovripla KaXov^Vov VTTO TOJV

TToXXcov, vocros avrrjs EAI. Nat.

aa^eVrara

6V.

HE.

To
eV

avro

8e ye ayvotav /xev /caAoucrt, KCLKIQV Se ^xfl l^dvov yiyvo^vov OVK eOeXovcrw


avy^ojpr^reov, o vvv

o/xoAoyetv.

E
l

EAI.

KojtttS^

or)

Ae^avro?

rjfjLffieyvorjo-d crov,

TO 8uo

eti-'at

yeV^

KCLKLO.? ev

oeiXiav p,ev KCLL a/coAacrtav Acat aSi/aav vouov eV r^^lv, TO Se T^? TroAA'^s' /cat

dyvoias TrdOos alamos 9ereov.


!

yiyvyrai d7roru7X" ?? T
I/

BT
;

yLyverai
'

al.

d7rori'7X^ I

e'

et al.

308

THE SOPHIST
it on every occasion when they try to hit it, say that this happens to them through right proportion to one another or, on the contrary,

and miss
shall

we

through disproportion ? THEAET. Evidently through disproportion. STR. But yet we know that every s,oul, if ignorant
STR. Now being ignorant is nothing else than the aberration of a soul that aims at truth, when the understanding passes beside the mark. THEAET. Very true. STR. Then we must regard a foolish soul as

of anything, is ignorant against THEAET. Very much so.

its will.

deformed and ill-proportioned. THEAET. So it seems.


STR. Then there are, it appears, these two kinds of evils in the soul, one, which people call wickedness, which is very clearly a disease. THEAET. Yes. STR. And the other they call ignorance, but they are not willing to acknowledge that it is vice, when it arises only in the soul. THEAET. It must certainly be admitted, though I disputed it when you said it just now, that there are two kinds of vice in the soul, and that cowardice, intemperance, and injustice must all alike be considered a disease in us, and the widespread and various condition of ignorance must be regarded as

a deformity. 1 The connexion between disproportion and missing the mark is not obvious. The explanation that a missile (e.g. an arrow) which is not evenly balanced will not fly straight, fails to take account of the words TT/JOS aXA^Xa. The idea seems rather to be that moving objects of various sizes, shapes, and rates of speed must interfere with each other.

309

PLATO
l6.
HE.

QVKOVV

eV crw/jiaTL ye irepl Suo

TOVTOJ Suo re^va rt^e eyeveaOyv ; EAI. TtVe rovrco;

229

HE.

Ilept /xev ato^o? yu/zvacrrt/cry,

776/>t

Se vo

larpiKif] .

EAI. HE.
SetAt'av

QciLveaOov.

Ou/couV

/cat Tiept

jitev

vfipw

/cat a8t/<rta^

/cat
OYJ

T] /coAacrrt/ci] 7re(f)VK 1 7Tacra>v TTpoo-uJKOvaa At'/cjy ;

re)(va)V fjidXicrra

EAI.

To yow
Tt Se;

et/cos",

co? etVetv /caret T-^V avOpa>-

HE.

77ept

^v^Traaav ayvoiav pcov


1

TWO,
HE.

r)

SiSacr/caAt/c^ 6p66repov etVot rts av;


OvBefJiiav.
ST]'

@EAI.

Oepe

StSaa/caAt/CT^?

8e apa ev p,6vov

yeVo? (fraTeov etvat


EAI.
2/CO7TOJ.

TrAetco,

Suo 8e rt^e avrrjs

etvat jLteytCTTW, cr/coVet.


EE.
EAI.

Kat

/xot So/cou/xev TT^Se

aV

771]

ra^tara evpelv.
2

rify;
1

T-^y ay^otav t'So^res et 7797 /card /ze'crov aur^? TOfJiyv e\;et rtva. StTrA^ yap aur^ yiyvo^ivr] ort /cat r^v StSacr/caAt/c^v Suo ctvay/ca^et /xopta e
EE.
ei>

e^' evt yej^et rcov avrrjs e/carepoj. EAI. Tt ow; /cara</aveV 7717 aot ro vw ,r]TOVfjLevov ;
EE.

'Ayvota?

yow

/ze'ya

rt

/zot

So/ecu

/cat

^aAeTrov
EAI.

acf)a}pL<jjJLvov opav etSo?, Tracrt rots' a'AAot?

avrrj? dvTiora.dj.Lov fj^pccriv.

Do toy
Ln

817;

SE.
2

To

/caretSora rt So/cetv etSeVat*

8t
oiV

ou
BT.

ai'TTjs

Cobet ai)r^s BT.


T;

SI'/CT;

BT, Stobaeus.
3

yovv

6'

310

THE SOPHIST
STR. In the case of the body there are two arts which have to do with these two evil conditions, are

there not

THEAET. What are they ? STR. For deformity there is gymnastics, and for disease medicine. THEAET. That is clear. STR. Hence for insolence and injustice and cowardice is not the corrective art the one of all
arts

most closely related to Justice


is,

THEAET. Probably it judgement of mankind.


STR.

at least according to the

art it

And for all sorts of ignorance is there any would be more correct to suggest than that of
?

instruction
STR.

THEAET. No, none.

Come now, think. Shall we say that there only one kind of instruction, or that there are more and that two are the most important ? THEAET. I am thinking. STR. I think we can find out most quickly in
is

this

way. THEAET. In what way ? STR. By seeing whether ignorance admits of being for if ignorance turns out cut in two in the middle
;

be twofold, it is clear that instruction must also consist of two parts, one for each part of ignorance. THEAET. Well, can you see what you are now
to

looking for

any rate think I do see one large and grievous kind of ignorance, separate from the rest, and as weighty as all the other parts put together.
STR. I at

THEAET.
STR.

What

is it ?

Thinking that one knows a thing when one


311

PLATO
rrdvTa ova Siarota cr^>aAAo/xe#a ylyveoBai
Tfaaiv.
EAI.
*AXr]6fj.
$r]

SE.

Kcu

Kal TOVTO) ye ot/zai


ye.

[jLovq) Trjs

ayzWas

dfjiaOiav Tovvofjia 7Tpoo~pr)6fjvai,.

0EAI.
EE.

Haw

Tt Se

ST]

TO) rfjs ScSacr/caAt/c^S'

apa

/xepet TO)

TOVTO aTraAAarro^rt Ae/creov;


0EAI. Oi)ucu ^u,ev ow, c5 ^eVe, S^/xtoupytKas" SiSacr^aAta?, TOVTO rraioeiav St rjfjiajv KK\fja9ai.
SE.

TO
Se

/Ltev

aAAo
ye

eV^aSe
eV

"EAA^crtv.

Kat yap cr^eSoX aAAd yap 7]/^,tv


^'

cS

eatr^re,
A<ra6

Traaiv

ert

TOVTO aK7TTOV,
Statpecrtp'

el aro/xov ^'S^ ecrrt vrav

rtva e^ov

diav

9EAI.
EE.

AoKCt TOIVVV
rt;
1

{JLOL

Kal

TOVTO

TL

ITf)

0EAI.
EE.

Kara T^? eV
rts

rpa^urepa
0EAI.
SE.

rot? Aoyot? StSacrAcaAt/c^? toiKev 6005 zlvai, TO 8*

erepov

avT-fjs fj,6piov Aetorepoi^.

To Trotov 017 TOVTOJV KaTpov XeycojJi To /zej^ ap^atoTrpeTreV T6 Trarptov, cu


ftrat

TGI)? Diets' jLtaAtCTr' e'^pcovro re

ert TroAAot

rat

TO,
"

vw, orav avTols

e'fa/xapravcocrt rt, TO.

230

x^^
aV

77 01

"

^"7

6 ?,

TO
0EAI.
SE.

S*

ow

ra 8e {jLaAOaKWTepcos rrapafjiv v[ji7rai> avTO op^orara etVot

cTTtV OVTCOS.
8e'
1

To

Tt^es* au Aoyov eavTols ye, ei'^aat etfcal BT, Stobaeus ; ws ei'|a<ri vulg.
-

312

THE SOPHIST
does not know it. Through this, I believe, all the mistakes of the mind are caused in all of us. THEAET. True. STR. And furthermore to this kind of ignorance alone the name of stupidity is given.

THEAET. Certainly.
STR. Now what name is to be given to that part of instruction which gets rid of this ? THEAET. I think, Stranger, that the other part is called instruction in handicraft, and that this part
is

here at Athens
STR.

through

our

influence

called

education.

And

so

it is,

Theaetetus,

among

nearly

all

But we must examine further and see whether it is one and indivisible or still admits of division important enough to have a name. THEAET. Yes, we must see about that. STR. I think there is still a way in which this also may be divided. THEAET. On what principle ? STR. Of instruction in arguments one method seems to be rougher, and the other section smoother.
the Hellenes.
THEAET.
STR.

What shall we call each of these ? The venerable method of our fathers, which

they generally employed towards their sons, and which many still employ, of sometimes showing anger at their errors and sometimes more gently exhorting them that would most properly be called as a whole admonition. THEAET. That is true. STR. On the other hand, some appear to have con313 L

PLATO
rjyrj(jaa9ai Trdcrav OLKOVCTLOV d/j,a#tW etmt, /cat ouSeV TTOT* ay eOeXew rov olofjievov eivai
ao(j>ov rovra>v ow ototro Trepi Setvd? etWu, ju,erd 8e TroAAou TroVou TO vov9eTT]TU<ov el8os Trjs (JfJLLKpOV aVVTZLV.

EAI.

HE.

'O/^cD? y VO/JLl,OVTS. Ta> rot ravrrjs TTJS Sof^? e'm


TtVt
1

Kf3oXr)i>

aAAo)

rporra) EAI.
HE.

Atepcorcoaty toy a^ ot^rat rts


fJirjSev

are TrAavco/^eVajv ra? Sofa? paStco? e^erd^ovcn,, Kal avvayovres ST) rot? Aoyot? et? raurov nOeacn Trap* aAA^Aas", Tt^eVre? Se iKvvovcriv aura? CLVTCLLS l a/xa Trept rcov CLVTOJV
Aeycov
TO,

eW

Tre/n

Xeyeiv

avra Kara raura eVavrtas"

ot 8* o

eavrols H<V ^aAeTratVouat, Trpo? 8e rou? d'AAous" ^fjLepovvTdiy Kal TOVTCO 817 ra> rpoTrq) TOJV Trepl

O.VTOVS /xeydAcoy /cat cr/cAi]pa)v Sof aiv aTraAAdrrop'Tat


7rao-a)v
2

aTraAAaycDv aKOveiv

re

YjSicrTrjv

/cat

TO)

a) Trat <^>tAe, ot TO, crc6jU,ara

Kadaipovres OLVTOVS, coaTrep ot

larpol V^VO^LKCLGI ^rj Trporepov av Trpoo-^epOjiteV^? rpo^rjs dVoAau'etv SvvaoOaL


?rptv

dV rd eyu,7ro8t^ovra ev aura) rt?


ifjvxfjs

e/c^SdA^,

raurov

/cat 77e/ot

Trporzpov avrrjv efetv TCOV Trpoa^epo^eva^v /Lta^/xdrcov ovrjcriv,

Stevo^^aav

e/cetvot, /u^

Trptv

dV eAeyp^cov rt? TOV eAey^d^Lteyov


1

etj atcr^uv^x'
1

rds
'?/

V, KaOapov ?<?
aTre/3
2

rots' fJLaOyjfjiaaLV e^TroStous Sofa? a7TO(f)rjvrj /cat ravra rjyovLievov,


/

otoev, etoevat /xova, vrAeico oe


1

\'^v/ ^.
BT. BT.
iravuv re

auTats] atfrcus

Tracrwj'

Slobaeus

814

THE SOPHIST
vinced themselves that
all

ignorance

is

involuntary,

and that he who thinks himself wise would never be willing to learn any of those things in which he believes he is clever, and that the admonitory kind of education takes a deal of trouble and accomplishes little.
THEAET. They are quite right. STR. So they set themselves to cast out the conceit of cleverness in another way. THEAET. In what way ? STR. They question a man about the things about which he thinks he is talking sense when he is talking nonsense then they easily discover that his opinions are like those of men who wander, and in their discussions they collect those opinions and compare them with one another, and by the comparison they show that they contradict one another about the same things, in relation to the same things and in respect to the same things. But those who see this grow angry with themselves and gentle towards others, and this is the way in which they are freed from their high and obstinate opinions about The process of freeing them, moreover, themselves. affords the greatest pleasure to the listeners and the
;

most lasting benefit to him who is subjected to it. For just as physicians who care for the body believe that the body cannot get benefit from any food offered to it until all obstructions are removed, so, my boy, those who purge the soul believe that the soul can receive no benefit from any teachings offered to it until someone by cross -questioning reduces him who is cross-questioned to an attitude of
modesty, by removing the opinions that obstruct the teachings, and thus purges him and makes him think that he knows only what he knows, and no more. 315

PLATO
EAI.

BeArtcrri]

yo>v
or)

/cat

aax^poveardrr]
o>

TOW

e^ecov avrrj. HE. Atd ravra

rrdvra

7]fttv,

eatnyre, KOI

TOV eXeyxov XeKreov co? d'pa fjieyiarr) /cat KVpia>rdrrj TOV dveAey/crov au :at rajv KaOdpaetvv eori, vo/xtcrreov, av /cat rwyxdvr) fiaaiXevs o fjueyas a)V, TO, /xeytcrra aKa.Oa.prov ovra, aTTaiSevTov re /cat

ala^pov
elvai.
EAI.
1 8.

yeyovevcu,
77/36776

/caAAicrTOi'

ravra, a Ka.9a.pajra.rov /cat TOV oVraj? a6fJLVOV evoaifjiova

EE.

HavrdrracrL pev ovv. Tt 8e; rous" ravrrj ^paj'^vovs


eyco
/z,ev

rf}

231 rtVa?
cf)dvai.

^>rjo~ojjiV ;

yap

^Oj8ou/xat cro(f>Lards

EAI.

Tt

817;

EE.

M^

ftetoi> avrot? Trpoo-drrrcofjiev yepas.


/Lt^v 77/3ocreot/ce

EAI.

'AAAd

roiovra) nvi ra vvv

EE.

Kat yap /cwt

Au/co?, dypicorarov

rj

TOV oe

da<f)aXfj Set Trdvrajv jLtdAtcrra 77ept

rd?

o//,otd-

Trjras del rroielaOai rr\v (f)V\aK^v oXiaOr^porarov yap rd yevos. d/zcos" Se ecrrcoow ou yap 77ept
a^juKpcov

opwv

rrjv

dfJLcfjLa^-rjrirjo'LV
.

oto/zat yevTyaeo-^at

TOTe o77OTay t/cai/co? (frvXarrajaiv EAI. Ou/couv TO ye et/cds*. SE. "ECTTCO ST) Sta/cptTt/CTys" Texvys KaOapriKij, KaOapriKrjs oe TO 77ept ifrvxyv [nepos d<f>copLO-6a), Tovrov Se StSaa/caAi/c^, StSacr/caAt/c^s' Se 77at8euTt/c^

T^? Se TraLoevTLKrjs 6
yiyvofjievos
fjur]oev

rrepi rrjv jJidraLov

oooao(f>iav

e'Aey^o? ev TO) yw Adya> rrapa^avevri d'AA* 7^/xtv etvat Xeyeodaj TrXr^v rj yeVet yevvaia

O~0(f)LO-TlKTJ.

316

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. That is surely the best and most reasonable state of mind. STR. For all these reasons, Theaetetus, we must assert that cross-questioning is the greatest and most efficacious of all purifications, and that he who is

not cross-questioned, even though he be the Great King, has not been purified of the greatest taints, and is therefore uneducated and deformed in those things in which he who is to be truly happy ought to be most pure and beautiful. THEAET. Perfectly true. STR. Well then, who are those who practise this I am afraid to art ? say the sophists. THEAET. Why SO ? STR. Lest we grant them too high a meed of honour. THEAET. But the description you have just given
very like someone of that sort. STR. Yes, and a wolf is very like a dog, the wildest like the tamest of animals. But the cautious man must be especially on his guard in the matter of resemblances, for they are very slippery things. However, let us agree that they are the sophists for I think the strife will not be about petty discriminais
;

tions

when people are sufficiently on their guard. THEAET. No, probably not. STR. Then let it be agreed that part of the discriminating art is purification, and as part of purification let that which is concerned with the soul be separated off, and as part of this, instruction, and as part of instruction, education and let us agree that the cross-questioning of empty conceit of wisdom, which has come to light in our present discussion, is nothing else than the true-born art of sophistry.
;

317

PLATO
0EAI.

TO TToAAd Tre^dvdai,
SE.

drropa) Se eytoye Aeye'cr0a> jLteV TL xpij TTOTC a>? dArjOrj

17877

Sta

Xeyovra
.

/Cat Oll(JXVpl,6{JLVOV 61776 Iv

OVTCOS

LVCLl

TOV aO^HJTrjV

Et/corais

ye GV drropayv.

dAAa rot

Acaicetvov

^yetcr$ai ^77 vw ^'817 a<f)68pa arropelv 07717 Trore ert 8ta8ucrerat TOV \6yov 6p9r) yap 77 Trapot/xia, TO ra?
ctWcras: ^77 paStov et^at 8ta^>euyetv. uaAtcrra ImBereov avraj.

i/w

ow

/cat

0EAI.
ip.

KaAaj? Aeyei?.
HE.
1

IT/jcorop' 877 ardvre? olov c^avaTrvevao)fJLv, /cat Trpos 77/^5? avrovs SiaXoyiaco/JieOa a/m dva-

Trauo/xevot, (f>epe, oTrocra 77/0,^ o crofiicrTrjs Tre^avrat. So/ca) jLtev yap/ TO Trptorov veatv /cat rjvpeOrj

0EAI.
EE.

Nat.
Se ye 8e'JTepov e/x7ropd? Tt? Trept
TO, TT}?

To

0EAI.
SE.

IldVu ye.
77-ept

Tpirov Se dpa ou
Nat,
'Qp9ajs
/cat

TauTa

TCLVTCL /cd

EAI.

reraprov ye avroTrwXr)?
rrefJiTTTOV

vrept

EE.

efJLvrjfJLovevcras.

8*

eya;

fjLvr]jjLovViv T77? yap 77ept Adyof ? 77^ Tt? d^A77T77S', TT^V

7TLpdaofjiai

0EAI.
SE.
8*

yap
jitT^v

To ye
t

e/cTOV dfM(f)La^TTJai.fiov fteV,

0fjiV avra)
Trept

EAI.

^v^ty Ka6aprr)i> ayTaTraCTt Ltev ow.


7a/j
fij/

avrov elvai.
2

W
318

BT.

^ add.

Heindorf.

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. Let us agree to all that but the sophist has by this time appeared to be so many things that I am at a loss to know what in the world to say he really is, with any assurance that I am speaking the truth. But it is fair STR. No wonder you are at a loss. to suppose that by this time he is still more at a loss to know how he can any longer elude our argument ; for the proverb is right which says it is not easy to So now we must escape all the wrestler's grips. attack him with redoubled vigour. THEAET. You are right. STR. First, then, let us stop to take breath and while we are resting let us count up the number of forms in which the sophist has appeared to us. First, I believe, he was found to be a paid hunter after the young and wealthy. THEAET. Yes. STR. And secondly a kind of merchant in articles of knowledge for the soul. THEAET. Certainly. STR. And thirdly did he not turn up as a retailer of these same articles of knowledge ? THEAET. Yes, and fourthly we found he was a seller of his own productions of knowledge.
;

STR.

Your memory

is

good

but

will try to

recall the fifth case myself.

He

was an athlete in

contests of words, who had taken for his own the art of disputation. THEAET. Yes, he was. STR. The sixth case was doubtful, but nevertheless we agreed to consider him a purger of souls, who removes opinions that obstruct learning. THEAET. Very true.

319

PLATO
232
ovv eWoets", orav HE. *Ap' emcm^icoi' TroAAcDv <f)aivr)rai, /uas" 8e rexynjs oVo/zart rrpoorayopeinyrat, TO (f)dvTacrp,a. rovro a)S OVK ecr#' vyies,

dAAd

ovvarai

BfjXov cos 6 rrdo"%OL>v /cartSetv eVetvo

avro Trpos riva Te^v^v ov avTrjs els o TTOVTCL ra

ravra

^SAeVet, Sio /cat TroAAots" ovo/zacrtv

eVo? TOV e^ovra a7)ra Trpoaayopevei; 0EAI. KtvSuveuet rovro ravrrj Try /xaAtcrra

HE. MT) roivvv ^/xets" ye awro ev dpyiav Trda-^oj^v , dAA* avaAa/^co//.^ irpajrov n eV yap rt /xot TOJV Trepl rov oo<j)LcrTr)v elp7]^ev(jL>v /xdAtara Kare^avr] avrov [JLYJVVOV.

20.

Si*

0EAI.
HE.

To

Tfoiov;
(f>afjiV

'AvrtAoyt/cov avrov 0EAI. Nat.


HE.

etvat TTOU.

Tt

8';

OT) /cat

rcDv d'AAcuv avrov rovrov StSd-

CT/caAov yty^ecr^at;

0EAI.
HE.

Tt

^v;
1

TtVo? apa /cat (f>amv ol TOiovroi TTOtetv avrtAoyt/cous". ^ Se cr/cei/rts 7y/xt^ e^ orco rfj8e rrr\. deiatv, (fjepe, rrepi rojv dpxrjs
2/co77cD/>tev Siy, 77ept
OCT'

d<f>avr)

rot? 77oAAots , dp' LKCLVOVS TTOIOVCTI rovro


>

SpdV;

Aeyerat yoi;v ST) Trept avra>v ravra. HE. Tt S* ocra (jxivepd yrjs re /cat ovpavov /cat TCOV 77ept rd roiavra; 0EAI. Tt yap; HE. 'AAAd jio]i> eV ye rat? tStat? avvovoia.is, orrorav yeve'cretos re /cat ovacas rrepi Kara rrdvrajv
0EAI.
1

O^

0y

BT.

320

THE SOPHIST
STR. Then do you see know many things, but
is

that when a man appears to called by the name of a

is something wrong about this art, there impression, and that, in fact, the person who labours

single

under

this impression in

connexion with any art

is

clearly unable to see the common principle of the art, to which all these kinds of knowledge pertain,

he calls him who possesses them by many names instead of one ? THEAET. Something like that is very likely to be
so that

the case.
STR. We must not let that happen to us in our search through lack of diligence. So let us first take up again one of our statements about the sophist. For there is one of them which seemed to me to

designate him most plainly. THEAET. Which was it ? STR. I think we said he was a disputer. THEAET. Yes. STR. And did we not also say that he taught this same art of disputing to others ? THEAET. Certainly. STR. Now let us examine and see what the subjects are about which such men say they make their pupils Let us begin our examination at able to dispute. Is it about divine the beginning with this question things which are invisible to others that they make people able to dispute ? THEAET. That is their reputation, at any rate. STR. And how about the visible things of earth and heaven and the like ? THEAET. Those are included, of course. STR. And furthermore in private conversations, when the talk is about generation and being in
:

L 2

321

PLATO
ri, ^vvi(j^V <Ls avroi re OVTZITTZIV Sewoi TOU? re d'AAous 6Vt TTOIOVGLV dVep avrol ovvarovs;
1

EAI.

EE.

Tt

TlavTOiTTacri ye. 8* au 776/31 VOfJidlV

KO.I

^V/JLTTaVTCOV

TO)V

7TO\ITLK(JL)V ,

dp* OV% VTTKJ^VOVVTCLL 7TOLIV

EAI.

OuSets*
JLIT^

yap av
Trepl

avrots",

a>S"

erros

LTTLV,

SteAeyero
EE.

rovro

vmcr^i'otyzeVois'.

Ta

ye /x^v

Tracrwv re /cat /caret


Trpo?

/zi'av

e/cacrr^v

re^i^Vj a Set

IACOOTOV

avrov rov

SrjiJtiovp'yov

avTenrelv, SeS^/xoatco/^eVa TTOU

E /cat
r)

jSA^rat yey/3a/x/xeVa TO) f3ovXofjiVto ^aOelv. 0EAI. To, Tlpcurayopeta /xot <^atVet 7re/)t re
SE.

TCUV a'AAcuv re^v'ajv etpr^/ceVat. Kat TroAAajy ye, c5 /xa/capte, erepwv. TO rrjs ap'TtAoyt/c^? rej^wys a/3* ou/c ev /c
1

arap

TTOLVTCJV Trpos

afji(f)icrl3r)Tr)cri:V

iKavr) rts

eot/c*

elvai;

EAI.

OatVerat

yow

cr^eSov ovSev V

SE.

2u

80] 77/30? OeaJv, d) TTCLI,

ra^a yap aV
233

vfjiels /zey

SvvaTov ^yet rovro; o^vrepov ol vioi irpos avro


01)

/SAeVotre, rjfJieis Se afJL^Xvrepov. EAI. To TTolov, /cat Trpo? Tt /^aAtcrra Aeyet?;

yap

TTCO KCLTCLVOO)

TO

^w

eptt)Tc5/xevov.

EE.

Et Trdvra eVtWaa^at Ttva dvOpcjTrajv earl


Ma/captov
riajs*

Svvarov.
EAI.
/xevT*

av

^/xcDv,

c5

eW, ^v TO
TncrrdTI

yeVo?.
EE.

ow

dV

TTOTe' Tt? Trpo?

ye TOV

avros
1

di'TnarrjfjLO)v cjv

SwatT* dV wyteV
T.

d^TetTreiv;
a/i0ccr/3?7T77TiK<ws] a/j.<j)i<r(3i>)TiKOvs

322

THE SOPHIST
general, we know (do we not ?) that they are clever disputants themselves and impart equal ability to
others.

THEAET. Certainly. STR. And how about laws and public affairs in genera] ? Do they not promise to make men able to argue about those ? THEAET. Yes, for nobody, to speak broadly, would attend their classes if they did not make that
promise.
STR. However in all arts jointly and severally what the professional ought to answer to every opponent is written down somewhere and published

that he

to the text-books of Protagoras on wrestling and the other arts. STR. Yes, my friend, and to those of many other authors. But is not the art of disputation, in a word, a trained ability for arguing about all things ? THEAET. Well, at any rate, it does not seem to leave much out. STR. For heaven's sake, my boy, do you think that is possible ? For perhaps you young people may look at the matter with sharper vision than our

THEAET.

who will may learn. You seem to refer

duller sight.

THEAET.
refer to
STR.
?

just what do you do not yet understand your question. ask whether it is possible for a man to
I

What do you mean and

know

all things.

THEAET. If that were possible, Stranger, ours would indeed be a blessed race. STR. How, then, can one who is himself ignorant say anything worth while in arguing with one who

knows ?
323

PLATO
0EAI.
HE.
Qvoafjitos.
TTOT*

Tt

ovv av

e'irj

TO

rrjs aofiicrTiKrjs

Svva

0EAI.

Tov

or]

HE.
sects'

Ka$*

ov

Tiva

rpoTrov

TTOTE

Swarol

rot?

So^av irapaaKeva^eiv, avrol ao(f)a)TaroL. SfjAov 'yap


fjirJT

co? elal rrdvra


cos et
1

e/cetVots

e^atVovro,

(f)om>6fjLvoL

re

cl

av
etvat

^LtaAAov

(frpovijjioi,

eSoKovv 8ta r^v a/x^tcr^r^crtv TO aov 1 817 TOVTO, oxoAfj TTOT* av

TIS xP^IJLaTa OLOOVS tfOeXev av TOVTOJV


?

yiyveaOai.

0EAI.
EE.

^X

^??

M 6^'
eOe

<*i>.

Nuv 8e y 0EAI. Kat fJLaX

HE.

AOKOUCTI yap,
ailTOL

olfjidiy

77/06?

raura

EAI.

Dais'

yap oy;
TOVTO Trpos aTravTa,
(f>a{j,ev;

EE.

Apcocrt Se ye

0EAI.
EE.

Nat.

riaVra apa

CTCK/KH

rot? fJiadrjTals (f>aivovTai.

0EAI.
SE.
EAI.

Tt

jLt^v;

Ov/c oVre? ye*

aovvaTOV yap TOVTO ye

(f)dvrj

Ha)? yap
EE.

ou/c

dSwarov;
apa
^]^lv,
TLVCL

21.

AoaaTLKr)V
6
cro(f)iaTr)s

Tfepl

TrdvTO)v
dXij

aAA*

OVK

1 TO crop]

Ttoov

BTW.

324

THE SOPHIST
cannot at all. in the world can the magical power of the sophistical art be ? THEAET. Magical power in what respect ? STR. In the way in which they are able to make young men think that they themselves are in all matters the wisest of men. For it is clear that if they neither disputed correctly nor seemed to the young men to do so, or again if they did seem to dispute rightly but were not considered wiser on that 1 account, nobody, to quote from you, would care to
THEAET.
STR.

He

Then what

pay them money to become their pupil in these


subjects.

THEAET. Certainly not. STR. But now people do care to do so THEAET. Very much.
STR. Yes, for

they are supposed,

fancy, to have

knowledge themselves of the things about which


they dispute. THEAET. Of course.
STR. And they do they not ? THEAET. Yes. STR.

that

about

all

things,

do

Then they appear

to their pupils to be wise

in all things.

THEAET.
STR.

To be sure. Though they are not

for that

was shown

to be impossible.

THEAET.
STR.

Of course it is impossible. Then it is a sort of knowledge based upon

mere opinion that the sophist has been shown to


possess about all things, not true knowledge.
1

Cf. 232 D.

325

PLATO
J)

TO vvv

/cat KivSvvzvei ye. avTQjv opBoTCLTa elprjadaL. EE. Adf3a)iiV TOIVVV 0a<f)(JTp6v 77apd8ety/za 7Tpl TOVTCOV.

EAI.

HavTOLTTaai

/JLCV

ovv,

elpr/fjievov

TTtpi

EAI.

To

TTolov
/Cat
[JLOt,

EE.

TdSe.

7TlpOJ TTpO(76Xa>V TOV VOVV

EAI.

To
Ei'

SE.

TLS

cf)airj

[j,rj

Xeyew

aAAa TroiLV KOI Spav

/xta Tj(yr)

oQcLL 77-yoay/xara. EAI. YltJJS 7TOLVTCL etTTe?/

EE.

>

IT)V ctpx 7) 1

/) TOU PT~IVVTOS ov y

<>

ra yap
EAI.

^v/jLTravra, <Ls eot/caj,

ou

Ou yap

Aeyto TOIVVV ere /<m e//,e TCUI^ Travrcov Trpos rnjilv raAAa a>a feat SeVSpa. EAI. nco? Aeyetsv EE. Et n? e/xe /cat o~e /cat raAAa ^>Lra TrdVra
EE.
EAI. TtVa Sr) Aeycov 234 yewpyov ye epet? rtva*
TT^V
/cat

Trofycnv;

yap

t,a)a>v

ov yd/3 CLVTOV

EE.

^t,
/cat

/cat TT-po?

ye ^aAarr^s
avTtov

/cat

y^s

/cat /cat

ovpavov
TOIVVV

^ecov /cat TCOV d'AAcoy ^v^TTavro^v

Kal

ra^u

Tronjcras

e/cacrra

ap,LKpov vofjtiafjLaTOs aTroSiSorat. EAI. IlaiStdv Ae'yet? rtvd.


EE.

Tt

3e';

TT)V

rou Ae'yovros ort Trdvra otSe


1

/cat

W
326

iroirjcriv

BT.

/coi

7^5

om. BT.

THE SOPHIST
if

THEAET. Certainly and I shouldn't be surprised that were the most accurate statement we have
;

made about him


STR.
this,

so far.

Let us then take a clearer example to explain

THEAET. What sort of an example ? STR. This one and try to pay attention and to give a very careful answer to my question. THEAET. What is the question ? STR. If anyone should say that by virtue of a single art he knew how, not to assert or dispute, but to do and make all things THEAET. What do you mean by all things ? STR. You fail to grasp the very beginning of what for apparently you do not understand the I said
; ;

word

"all."
I

THEAET. No,
STR.
I

do

not.

mean you and me among the

"all,"

and

the other animals besides, and the trees. THEAET. What do you mean ? STR. If one should say that he would make you and me and all other created beings. " THEAET. What would he mean by " making ? will not that a he means husbandsay Evidently you man for you said he was a maker of animals also. STR. Yes, and of sea and earth and heaven and gods and everything else besides and, moreover, he
;

makes them

all

quickly and sells them for very little. THEAET. This is some joke of yours. And when a man says that he knows STR. Yes ? things and can teach them to another for a small
all

327

PLATO
ravra erepov av $iodeiev
Xpovco,
EAI.
IJLO)V

oAi'you

/cat

ev

oXiya)

ov Tracoidv

vofJLicrreov ;

EE.
EAI.

TldvTois TTOV. IlatSta? Se e^et?


etSoS"
T)

TJ

rt re^i't/caJTepov

?}

/cat

%apl<JTpOV
etV eV Travra

TO

fJiifJL^TiKOV ;

Oi)Sa/za>s"

22.
elvai

EE.
[JUG,

TrdarroXv yap e'iprjKa? efSo? ^uAAa^wv /cat a^eSov 77Ot/ctAc6rarov. Ow/cow TOV y' vma-)(yov^vov SVVCLTOV
TTOLVTCL

re^vr)

Troielv
/cat

yty^tucr/co/zeV

TTOU

TOVTO,
rous"

OTL

fjufji^/jLara

o/zaVu/za
TTCLL&OJV,

ra>v

oVrcuv
ecrrat

aTrepya^ofJievos
yeypa/z//,eVa
(3ovXr)9fj

rfj

ypafiiKrj
i/ecov
1

T^X V 1] SuvaTo?

aVo^rou? ra>v
8pav,
Hois'

iroppuiQev

ra
av

eTrtSet/cvus ,

\avOdveiv co?
t/cavajraro?

ornrep

TOVTO
oy;
t

EAI.

EE.

rrjs

TOU? Aoyou? ap ou Trpocrelvai Tiva aXXrjv Tiyyr}v, fj av SvvaTOV ov * TOVS veovs /cat ert Troppa) TOJV TrpayfJiaTCOv dXrjdeias a^ecrra)ra? Sta TOJV OJTWV rots' AoyotS"
017;

yap TI/^\O/ It oe

\/

>

Trept

Drp
EAI.

yo^reuetv, Set/cvwras* et'ScoAa Aeyo/xe^a Trept TTOLVTCOV, <jjo~T 7TOL6LV dXr)6rj So/cew Aeyea^at /cat TOP' Aeyovra
817 aro(f)a)TaTov TTOLVTCDV
/ \

aVavr' elvai;
i\

It

yap

OVK av

w\

irj

aAArj

Ti$

EE.

Tous" TroAAoys" ovv,

co

eaiTrjT, TO>V rore

a/couoVrtoi' ap'

OVK avdyKi] ^povov re CTreXOovTOs


/cat Trpo'Lovor)s rjXiKLas rots* eyyvOev /cat Sta. TraOrjiJLaTCov

iKavov

re ovon dvay/ca-

^ aC Svvarbv

evapyojs e^driTeaBai TCOV OVTCOV, 8i> Tvyx& vei Burnet ^ (?? T) oy Swarbv aS T^xdi'ei Madvig.
;

328

THE SOPHIST
price in a little time, a joke ?

must we not consider that

THEAET. Surely we must. STR. And is there any more artistic or charming kind of joke than the imitative kind? THEAET. Certainly not for it is of very frequent occurrence and, if I may say so, most diverse. Your
;

very comprehensive. we recognize that he who professes to be able by virtue of a single art to make all things will be able by virtue of the painter's art, to make imitations which have the same names as the real things, and by showing the pictures at a distance will be able to deceive the duller ones among young children into the belief that he is perfectly able to accomplish in fact whatever he wishes to do. THEAET. Certainly. STR. Well then, may we not expect to find that there is another art which has to do with words, by virtue of which it is possible to bewitch the young through their ears with words while they are still standing at a distance from the realities of truth, by
STR.

expression

is

And

so

exhibiting to
to

make

it

them spoken images of all things, so as seem that they are true and that the

speaker is the wisest of all men in all things ? THEAET. Why should there not be such another
art
?

Now most of the hearers, Theaetetus, when they have lived longer and grown older, will perforce come closer to realities and will be forced by sad experience 1 openly to lay hold on realities they
STR.
;

Apparently a reference to a proverbial expression. Hesiod, Works, 216 tyvu traQuv ; Herodotus, i. 207
fj.a0rjfj.aTa.

Of.
TO.

329

PLATO
/3a'AAetv

fjiev </>atVe<70at

TTOLVTCL

Ta? Tore yevo/xeVas So^as, cocrre oyxi/cpd ra /xeydAa, ^aAe-mi, Se ra pa8ta, /cat dva,TTpd<f)6aL rd lv TOis Adyois Trdvrr)
1

rd)i>

eV

rat?

Trpd^eaiv

epyatv

0EAI.

8e

'Q? Kplvai. ot/xat e^tot r^At/caiSe /cat e/xe TO>V ert TroppajOev d^ecrr^/corcDV elvai.

yow

6Wt

EE.
/cat

Totyapow r^els oe
rrepi
8'

otSe rrdvres TreipacrofjizOa

vw ireLpcofjieOa to? eyyvrara dVeu rcDv Tra^/xdrcov


irorepov
17817

Trpoadyeiv.

235 Aeye*
T)

ot^ row cro(f>icrTOV rdSe /xot rovro oa<f)s, OTL TOJV yor)ra>v
raJi^

eari rt?, /xt/x^TT]? cov


Trept

OVTOJV,

r)

Stcrrd^o/xev ert
1 1

SyvaTOS etvat, oaatvirep avriXeyew TOCTOVTOJV /cat rd? eVtCTT^/xas


So/cet

0EAI.

Kat
e'crrt

77OJS

dV,
1

cu

crakes' e/c raiv etp^/LteVcov, ort

ev; dAAd cr^eSdv 77817 raw r^9 TratStas /xer1

rt? et?.
/xey

HE.

rd77ra

817

/cat

/xt/x^TT^v

d'pa

Oereov

avrov riva. 0EAI. nd)? yap ou Oereov;

B ^pa

rjfJLerepov epyov 17877 roi> a^eSov yap avrdv TieptetAi^<f)ap,ev ev djjL(f)Lf3Xr)crTpiKa> TWI T&V eV rot? Adyots* 2 Trept TO, roLavra opydvajv, cuare ou/ceV e/c^eu^erai rdSe ye.

23.

HE.

"Aye

817,

vw

/XT7/ceV

dVetrar

0EAI.
1

To 3

TTolov;
;

rts efs

Heusde

rts ^e/>cD^ e/s


^rt

rts fj.epu>v els


2 3

OUK^T'

rd

W.
;

BT (giving efr to the stranger)

oiJif

ou/c

T.

ora.

BT.

330

THE SOPHIST
have to change the opinions which they had what was great will appear small and what was easy, difficult, and all the apparent truths in arguments will be turned topsy-turvy by Is the facts that have come upon them in real life. not this true ? THEAET. Yes, at least so far as one of my age can judge. But I imagine I am one of those who
will

at first accepted, so that

standing at a distance. Therefore all of us elders here will try, and are now trying, to bring you as near as possible without the sad experience. So answer this question Is this now clear, that he is a about the sophist kind of a juggler, an imitator of realities, or are we still uncertain whether he may not truly possess the knowledge of all the things about which he seems to be able to argue ? THEAET. How could that be, my dear sir ? Surely it is pretty clear by this time from what has been said that he is one of those whose business is enterare
still

STR.

tainment.
STR.

That

is

to say,

he must be classed

as a juggler

and

imitator.

THEAET.
STR.

Of

course he must.
;

sharp, then it is now our business not to let the beast get away again, for we have almost got him into a kind of encircling net of the devices

Look

we employ
he
will

in

arguments about such subjects, so that


thing.

now escape the next THEAET. What next thing ?


not

331

PLATO
HE.

To

firj

ov rov yevovs elvai rov ra>v Qavuaro-

TTOICOV ris els-

EAI.

EE.

Kd/zoi rovro ye ovraj rrepl avrov vvooKei. AeSoKTCU x roivvv on ra^icrra oiaipelv rrjv
1

eloajXoTTOUK'rjv re^vr^v, Kal /carajSavras eav {lev rjfjids i>9vs 6 ao^iar^ VTTOfJLeivr),

t?

avTrjV,

ov^afieiv

avrov Kara ra e7reara\^i4va VTTO rov jSacrtAt/cou Aoyou, KaKLVO) irapaoovras a7TO(f)fjvai rrjv aypav eav 8' apa Kara fJLeprj rrjs /zc/x^rt/c^s' ovrjrai rrrj, ovOe'iv avra) ^Laipovvras aet rr\v v avrov fjiolpav, ccuarrep av Xrj(f)6fj. ovre ovros ovre aAAo yeVo? ovoev (JLTJ rrorz K(j)vy6v 7Tvr]rai rrp ra>v ovrco Swauevaiv /^erteVat KaO* e/cacrra re KOI errl rravra [leOooov.
EAI.

Aeyet?

V, /cat

ravra ravrr)

rroLTjreov.
rfjs

EE.

Kara
1

817

rov

Statpecrecos

eycuye

Trap\rjXv66ra rporrov Kal vvv (^aivo^ai (JLOL

ovo

rrj$ fALfjLrjriKrjs' ryv 8e ^rjrovjJLevrjv loeav, ev orrorepa) rro6* rj/mlv ovaa rvy^dvei, /cara-

Kaflopdv

et'Si]

(JLaOelv ovoeTTO) 0EAI. ST) 8'

IJLOL

ooKtJo

vvv ovvaros eivai.

dAA' ecVe 7Tpo>rov Kal SteAe r]^iv,

rive ra) ovo Aeyet?. EE. Mi'av [JL6V rrjv

eLKaariKrjv 6pa>v ev avrfj Te^v^v. ear i 8' avrt] jLcaAtcrra, orrorav Kara ra? rov rrapaoeiyfiaros ovuuerpias ris ev uTJKei Kal TrXdret Kal fidOei, Kal rrpos rovrois eri %pa)fjiara aTrooLOOVs rd rrpoai/JKOvra eKaarois? rrjv rov
fjiLfJi^fjiaros

yeveaiv aTrepya^rat.
8';

EAI.

Tt
1 2

ov rrdvres oi

^u/zou/xez-'oi

rt TOUT'

erfi^eipovai opdv;
8e8oKTai] S^detKrai
e/cdarots

BT

Stobaeus,

; ;

dedeiKTai
e/cdcrrats

W.
BT.

332

THE SOPHIST
STR.

The
I

conclusion that he belongs to the class

of conjurers.

agree to that opinion of him, too. decided, then, that we will as quickly as possible divide the image-making art and go down into it, and if the sophist stands his ground against us at first, we will seize him by the orders of reason, our king, then deliver him up to the king and display his capture. But if he tries to take cover in any of the various sections of the imitative art, we must follow him, always dividing the section into which he has retreated, until he is caught. For assuredly neither he nor any other creature will ever boast of having escaped from pursuers who are able to follow up the pursuit in detail and everywhere in this methodical way. THEAET. You are right. That is what we must do. STR. To return, then, to our previous method of division, I think I see this time also two classes of imitation, but I do not yet seem to be able to make out in which of them the form we are seeking is to be found. THEAET. Please first make the division and tell
STR.
It is

THEAET.

us

what two
STR. I

classes

you mean.

see the likeness-making art as one part of imitation. This is met with, as a rule, whenever

anyone

produces the imitation by following the proportions of the original in length, breadth, and depth, and giving, besides, the appropriate colours
to each part.

THEAET. Yes, but do not


this?

all

imitators try to do

333

PLATO
HE.
criv

QVKOVV oaoi ye

TOJV /zeydAcov TTOV TL rrXaTTOV-

epytov 7} ypd(f>ovcriv. el yap 0,7708180 lev rr^v TWV KaXajv dXrjOwrjv crvmieTpiav, oiad* 6Vt (jfjUKporepa

236

jLtev

rov

av ota TO ra
6pdcr9ai.

ra MO\\\\
Se'ovTO?

dVco,
/

jU,eia>
r\

8e

ra.

Kara)

/xev Troppaiuev,

^fc>> ra o e

0EAI.
EE.
T

flaw
i

/xev

Ap' ovv ov

-%aipeiv

TO dXrjOes cdaavres ol

0EAI.
EE.

vvv ov TO,? ovaas crvfi/jLerpia?, aAAd TO,? elvou /caAd? Tot? et'ScuAot? eVaTrepya^ovTat; Ilavu /xev ow. 2

To

/zei'

a/aa erepov ov BLKCUOV, et/co?

ye 6V,

EAI.

Nat.
rrjs

EE.

Kat

KXyreov, OTTp
EAI.

ye /xt/x^TtAC^? TO e?rt TOVTCO L7TOfJLV ev TO) TrpoaOev, ei


TO
(fraivo/Jievov fjiev

KA^TeW.
Tt oe;
8td rrjv OVK
e/c

EE.

fcaAou Beav eot/ceVat TO) /caAai, 8wa/ztv Se t Tts" Aa/3ot TO, T^At^auTa t/cavcD? opdv, /.tTyS' etVo? a; eoiKevai, ri KaXov^Lev ; dp* OVK, eVetVe/)
fJiev,

eoLKe 8e oy,
Trdp,7ToXv
/cat
/cat

EAI.

Tt fti^;

SE.

Ou/cow

rovro TO pepos IOTI "


EAI.
TT C-> 11 co? o

/caTa
3

vfJLiracrav

ou;
dAA'
oi)/c

SE.

T^v

817 (f)dvTacrjJia

dp* ou <j)avTaaTiKr)v opdoTOLT*


T, Stobaeus
; ;

etVova drrepyaav

Ci'

om. B.
ye \V.

BT
3

Tra.vro.Tro.al

(pdi>Ta<r/j,a

\V

(pavTdfffj.a.Ta.

BT.

334

THE SOPHIST
STR. Not those who produce some large work of For if they reproduced the sculpture or painting. true proportions of beautiful forms, the upper parts, you know, would seem smaller and the lower parts larger than they ought, because we see the former from a distance, the latter from near at hand.

THEAET. Certainly. STR. So the artists abandon the truth and give their figures not the actual proportions but those which seem to be beautiful, do they not ? THEAET. Certainly. STR. That, then, which is other, but like, we may fairly call a likeness, may we not ? THEAET. Yes. STR. And the part of imitation which is concerned with such things, is to be called, as we called it
before, likeness-making ? THEAET. It is to be so called.
STR. Now then, what shall we call that which appears, because it is seen from an unfavourable

be like the beautiful, but which would not even be likely to resemble that which it claims to be like, if a person were able to see such large works adequately ? Shall we not call it, since it appears, but is not like, an appearance ? THEAET. Certainly.
position, to
STR.

And

this
?

is

very

common

in painting

and

in all imitation

THEAET.
STR.

produces appearance, but not likeness, the most correct name we could would be " fantastic would it not ?
give
art,"

Of course. And to the art which

335

PLATO
EAI.

IIoAt; ye.

EE.

TOVTOJ TOLVVV

TOJ

ovo eAeyov

e'ior)
.

rfjs etSo>Ao-

LKacrTiKr]v Kai (ftavTaaTLKr^v TrouKrjs, EAI. *Qp6a)S. EE. *0 Se ye /cat TOT rjfJL(f>eyvoovv , ev

TroTepa
3

TOV ao^iarr^v Oereov, ouSe vvv


oOat,

TTOJ Svvafjicn,

Oedaa/cat
/cat

cra^oj?,
et?

cxAA*

oWco?
1

Oav^aaros

dvrjp

ray^aAeTros aTTOpov etSos"


,

77et

Kat vvv ^LtaAa eu


SiepevvTJcraaOai

Kara-

EAI.

"Eot/cev.

EE.

Ap*
/3W/XT7

ow

at5TO

yiyvd)(JKa)v

^vfjifiys,

TJ

ere

OtOV

Tt9 U7TO TOV


irpos TO

AoyOU aVVL6i(7[JLVOV GVV7T5

EAI.

ITaJS" /cat 77/DO? Tt

TOVTO

et/)7]/ca?;
ecrfjiev

24.

EE,

"OyTCo?,

t5

fj.OLKa.pie,

ev

Ttaai xaAeTrfj cr/cej/ret. TO yap <^atWa$at TO 8o/cetv, etvat 8e ^17, /cat TO Ae'yetv
dXrj9fj oe
fjir^y

TOVTO
^Ltev

/cat

CLTTCL,

TcdvTa TavTO.

ecrTt

jueaTa drropias aet

ev TO) TrpoaSev xpovco /cat


^ ifjevorj Ae'yetv
T)

vw. oVco? yap etVoWa Soaeti> oVrco? etvat, /cat TOVTO

IvavTioXoyiq,

237

to

eat^Te,
877;

EAI.

Tt

TeToA/xT]/cev o Aoyo? OVTOS vrroOecrOai TO ov eivaii/feuSo? yap ou/c aV aAAco? eytyveTO ov.
SE.

Se o /xe'ya?,
1
2

c5 77at, iraiaiv rjfj.lv


liber.

OVVLV

add. Bessarionis

Trortpa
3

irorepa
;

TW.
BT.
BT.

ctfT/p

Bekker
6

<Tive7re(r7rci(raTo

T/

W W

di'Tjp

rOy ^TrecrTrdcraro
6Vi

BT.

336

THE SOPHIST
By all means. These, then, are the two forms of the imagemaking art that I meant, the likeness-making and the fantastic. THEAKT. You are right.
THEAET.
STR.

STR. But I was uncertain before in which of the two the sophist should be placed, and even now I

cannot see clearly.

The

fellow

is

really

wonderful

and very

keep in sight, for once more, in the very cleverest manner he has withdrawn into a baffling classification where it is hard to track him. THEAET. So it seems.
difficult to

assent because you recognize the did the force of habit hurry you along to a speedy assent ? THEAET. What do you mean, and why did you say that ?
STR.
fact, or

Do you

STR. are really, my dear friend, engaged in a very difficult investigation for the matter of appearing and seeming, but not being, and of saying
;

We

things,

but not
it
is

true

ones

all

this

is

always has Theaetetus,

been
is

very

perplexing.
difficult

now and You see,

extremely

to understand

how

man
and

exists

to say or think that falsehood really in saying this not be involved in

contradiction.

THEAET.

Why ?

statement involves the bold assumption that not-being exists, for otherwise falsehood could not come into existence. But the great Parmenides,

STR. This

my

boy, from the time

when we were

children to

337

PLATO
T
7re,fj
01)

KOI Std reXovs rovro


/cat jLtera

re a>Se e/cdoroTe Xeycov


1
y

yap /z?7 TTOTe rovro ap,f}, ^aiv, elvai /XT) eovra' dAAd (Ti) rrjoo* a<f> 6Sov St^/zevos 2 etpye vo

re ovv /xaprupetrat, /cat /xaAtcrra ye 3 aV 8-^Atocrete /xerpta ^ rrdvrajv 6 Aoyo? auro? rovro ovv avro rrpwrov et /ATI rt act 8ta<^epet. rp O'^ '/I lo /lev e/zoi' 07T27 pofAet rtc/eao, TOV oe 0EAI. Aoyov T^ jSe'Artcrra Ste'fetcrt CTKOTTOJV avros re Wi /cd/xe /caret ravrj]v rrjv oSov aye.
Trap* e/cetVou

\\J\W

<^>

25.

EE.

*AAAd ^p^ Spav ravra.

/cat

^ot Ae'ye

TO

oV roAyu-ai/xeV TTOU ^^e'yyea^at; jit^SajLtais' 0EAI. no!? yap ou; EE. M?) roivvv eptSos eW/ca jU-i^Se TratSta?, aAA' 4 Se'ot CTUwo^cravra rtva aTro/cptVacr^at et o-TTOVof)
1

,-^

d/cpoara>v Trot ^pi) rowo/x* e77t^>epetv rovro TO 6V Tt 5 ooKOVfJiev dv et? Tt /cat eVt rrolov avrov
/cat TOJ TrvvOavofjLeva)
o^'poy

re KaraxprjoacrOcu
0EAI.
EE.
77t

Set/cvwat;

XaAeTTov

/cat

o-^eSov etVetv ota> ye

e/zot 7Tavrd7TCL0LV drropov.

Tt

'AAA' ow TOUTO ye S^Aov, OTt TOJV ovraiv TO XT ov oi>/c oiareov


.

EAI.

Dais'

HE.

(JVKOVV

/-\>

yap dV;
/

erreiTrep

OVK

em
\
;

TO ov, ovo

>0>\ em

TO

Tt (frepcov 6p6a>s
1

dv Tt?

</>epot. roCr' ovSa^rj

roOro
2

6a^u.y
3

Simplicius
auros
;

St^evoj

BTW (St^a-to?

BT.

258

D).

OUTOS

BT.
ST?

d\X'

et
5

cnrovdfi rt] ort

Bekker

fiXX^s TroO

dXXTj o-7rou5 T.

TW.

rt ora.

BT.

338

THE SOPHIST
the end of his life, always protested against this and constantly repeated both in prose and in verse
:

Never let this thought prevail, saith he, that not-being But keep your mind from this way of investigation.

is

So that
tion

is his testimony, and a reasonable examinaof the statement itself would make it most

Let us then consider this matter absolutely clear. first, if it's all the same to you. THEAET. Assume my consent to anything you
wish. Consider only the argument, how it may best be pursued follow your own course, and take me along with you.
;

STR.

Very well, then.

Now tell me do we venture


;

to use the phrase absolute not-being THEAET. Of course.


STR. If, then, not

merely

for the sake of discussion

or as a joke, but seriously, one of his pupils were asked to consider and answer the question " To

what

how

the designation ' not-being to be applied ? do we think he would reply to his questioner,
is

'

"

and how would he apply the term, for what purpose, and to what object ? THEAET. That is a difficult question I may say
;

that for a fellow like


STR.

me

it is

unanswerable.

But
"

this

"

not-being THEAET.
STR.

is clear, anyhow, that the term cannot be applied to any being.

Of

course not.

not to being, then it could not be to something, either. applied properly 339
if

And

PLATO
T-r

f\

EAI.

EE.

"

TL

[JLOVOV
fjicvov

TTOV (fravepov, a)$ /cat TO r)/jiLV fJLa TOVTO 7T OVTL \OjLV KOLO'TOT6' yap auro Ae'yetv, axjTrep yv^vov /cat a

Kat TOVTO

aTTO TOJV OVTUL>V aTTavTUJv, aovvcLTOV'

rj

yap;

0EAI.
HE.

'ASwarov.
Trjoe CTKOTTCJV rt Aeyetv;
x

*Apa
<T7'^
\

vfjL<f)r)s

co? avayKt]

TOV TL

Aeyovra eV ye
EAI.

Oura)?.
iLvo?
<\

HE.
9
iVO.L,

yap
((
\

?^
OT)
?

TO O6

TIV6

OVOIV, TO O6

TO ye
t

'

TL
O
\

J
,(

'

~
o"f][JL6LOV
\

Berets'

TLVS

TTOAAWV.

N\ ^

EAI.

riajs*

yap ov;
dyayAcatorarov,

HE. Tov oe ST) /x^ rt Aeyovra c&s eot/ce, TTavTa.7Ta.cn i^rjoev Aeyetv.
1

EAI.

HE.

'Ayay/catorarov

/.tep'

ow.

Ap* ouv ovSe TOVTO crvyxaiprjTeov, TO TOV


/

TOLOVTOV Ae'yeiv /aeV, 1 Aeyeiv /xeVrot y.r^lv, dAA' / i\> ^> ^ox'x/ >'*_//)/ oi;oe Aeyetv <pareov, o? y av eTrt^etp^ JUT) ov cpuey/

yecrBai ;
EAI.

TeAo?
HE.

yow

238

26.

MT^TTCO

ecrrt, /cat

av aTropias 6 Aoyo? e^ot. etV^s" ert yap, a) rawra ye rcov aTropi&v r)


jLtey*

/cat TrpcoTfj.

Tcepi

yap

avTr^v avTOV TJ]V ap-^-qv

ovaa

EAI.

Hois'

</>T7?;

HE.

To;

/xev

6Vrt

Ae'ye /cat TTOU TrpocryeVotr'

ctV

rt

OVTOJV
EAI.
co?

yap ou;
Se'

EE.

MT^ 6Vrt
1

TL

TOJV OVTOJV

apa TrpoayiyveaOai

^v 2

TI

BT

TL

om. Schleiermacher.

fort &? TI] dv

dtnB;

fart dt

T.

340

THE SOPHIST
THEAET.
STR.

HOW

COllld it

And

this is plain to us, that

we always

use

the word "something" of some being, for to speak of "something" in the abstract, naked, as it were,

and disconnected from


not ? THEAET. Yes,
STR.
it is.

all

beings

is

impossible,

is

it

assent because you recognize that he who says something must say some one thing ? THEAET. Yes. " " or STR. And you will agree that something in the of is the "some" in the singular one, sign dual of two, and in the plural of many.

You

THEAET.
STR.

says not something, quite necessarily say absolutely nothing.

Of course. And he who

must

THEAET. Quite necessarily. STR. Then we cannot even concede that such a must even person speaks, but says nothing? We " " declare that he who undertakes to say not-being does not speak at all ? THEAET. The argument could go no further in
perplexity.
STR.

Boast not too soon

For there

still

remains,
It

friend, the first and greatest of perplexities. affects the very beginning of the matter.

my

THEAET.

What do you mean ?


which
is is ?

Do

not hesitate
or attributed

to speak. STR. To that

may be added

some other thing which


THEAET.
STR.

Of

course.

But

shall

we
is

not anything which

assert that to that which can be attributed ?

is

341

PLATO
0EAI.
EE.

Kat

7760?;

'ApiOfjiov Sr) rov ^VfJiTravra rtov ovrwv Tt'$e/zei>. 0EAI. EtVep ye KOI d'AAo Tt Bereov a>? 6V.

HE.

Mr) TOLVVV fU)S' eVt^etpto/zei' dpi9fjiov TO IV 77/00? TO pr) 6 EAI. OVKOVV aV opOaJs ye, cu? eoiKev,
(frrjaiv

pot/xev, a!? HE. rico?

ow

av

6 Aoyo?. Sta rou arojLtaro? ?}


Xd/3ot,

aV rt? T) /cat rr^ Siavoi'a TO Trapdrrav 6Vra r^ TO ju.r) 6V ^CU/H? apiOfJiov;


EAI.

ra

Aeye

Trry;

EE.

Mi] 6VTa /xev eVetSav Aeycoftey, apa ou

7Tixeipovfjiv dpid^ov TTpocmQeva.1 ; EAI. Tt fti]v; *rt > T EE. Mr) ov oe, apa ou TO ev au; EAI. Sa^ecrTaTa ye.

TVTV^O/T
Kat
/xr)v

SE.

ouVe StVatoy ye ouVe opOov

6Tt
EAI.

Aeyet? d

SE.

Swvoet? cu? oi>Ve <f)0y>acr0at, ovvarov s OUT* ei77eu> ouVe oiavorjOrjvai TO /xr) 6V auTO

ow

T)

auTo, aAA' cmv aStavor^Tov T /cat apprjTov a<j>9eyKTov /cat a Aoyo v; EAI. ITavTdVaat /zev ouv. " / / T A -P \/ / SE. Ap ovv ej/feuo-a/zrp apTt Aeycov Tr)y jLteyt^'
l

ryv

aTTOpiav epeiv EAI Toi> Se 1 eVt


-

avrov
i^.it,(jj

rrepi;

nvd Ae'yetv d'AA^v e^o/z-ev;


OVK eV^oet? auTot? Tot?
;

SE.

Tt
^

2 Se',

to

davfjidaie;

in
5^)

marg.

r65e

BT
dr/

TO 5e

ri 5

in

rb
2

8k

(ri

...

marg.

al.

^x
;

^"

attributed to the Stranger

Winckelmann and
ri 5^

by

others.

ri dal

T nVa

Winckelmann and

others.

342

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. Certainly not.
STR. Now we assume that all number is among the things which are. THEAET. Yes, if anything can be assumed to be. STR. Then let us not even undertake to attribute either the singular or the plural of number to not-

THEAET. We should, apparently, not be right in undertaking that, as our argument shows. STR. How then could a man either utter in speech or even so much as conceive in his mind things which are not, or not-being, apart from number ? THEAET. Tell me how number is involved in such
conceptions.
STR. When we say " things which are not," do not attribute plurality to them ? THEAET. Certainly.
STR.

being.

we

And in saying "a thing which is not/' do equally attribute the singular number ? THEAET. Obviously. STR. And yet we assert that it is neither right nor fair to undertake to attribute being to not-being. THEAET. Very true. STR. Do you see, then, that it is impossible rightly to utter or to say or to think of not-being without any attribute, but it is a thing inconceivable, inexwe not
pressible, unspeakable, irrational
?

THEAET. Absolutely.
STR. Then was I mistaken just now in saying that the difficulty I was going to speak of was the greatest in our subject ? THEAET. But is there a still greater one that we can mention ? STR. Why, my dear fellow, don't you see, by the

343

PLATO
on
OTT]Crt
/cat

rov eAey^o^ra ei? OLTTOpiav KaOi-

Tt?

6V OVTCOS, O)OT, OTTOTCLV OLVTO 7n%l.pfj eAey^ety, cvavria avrov aura) Trept e/ceu>o
fJLr)

TO

aVay/caecr#at
0EAI.
EE.
IlaJs
1

Ae'yeti';

>s"

eiVe ert

OuSev
jLtev

Set TO

oa^tarepov cv

e/^ot

eyai

yap
fJLrj

TO

VTroOep^evos ovre eV6? ouVe 6V detV /zeTe^etv, apTt Te /cat

OUTCO? eV atrro etp^/ca*


Tot;
EAI.

TO

jit 17

6V yap

Nat.
fjLrjv

EE.

Kat

av

/cat

a^iKpov
/cat

fjL7rpoa9ev a^

KTOV Te auTo
0EAI.
SE.

/cat

apprjTOV
TTO)?

a'Aoyov

e^v

etrat.

E we77O//.at

yap

Ou/cow TO ye
OatVet.
Se';

etVat 7rpocra77Tetv

239 eVavTta Tot? TrpoaOev e'Aeyov;


0EAI.
EE.

Tt

TOVTO TrpoadiTTajv ofy co?

evt SteAe-

0EAI.
SE.

Nat.
/>t?^v

Kat

a'Aoyov Te Aeycov /cat apprjTOV


1

/cat

OeyKTOV
0EAI.
EE.

a>s

ye Trpos ev TOV Aoyov


Se'

eTroiovfjirjv.

Ilaj? 8* ou;

Oa/zev

ye

Seti^,

etVep opdo)$ ris


et'Set

Ae'^et,

co? eV /xT^Te co? TroAAa Stop/^etv auTO, /x^8e

TO

Trapdrrav avro /caAetv

evo? yap

/cat

/cara

av
EAI.

rrjv Trpoaprjcnv

TrpoaayopeuotTO.

avTaTracrt ye.

344

THE SOPHIST
very arguments

we have

him who would refute

when he attempts
contradict himself?

used, that not-being reduces it to such difficulties that to refute it he is forced to


?

THEAET.
clearly. STR.

What do you mean

Speak

still

more

You must not look for more clearness in me ; although I maintained that not-being could have nothing to do with either the singular or the plural number, I spoke of it just now, and am still speaking You of it, as one; for I say "that which is not." understand surely ? THEAET. Yes. STR. And again a little while ago I said it was
for

inexpressible, follow me ?

unspeakable,

irrational.

Do

you

THEAET. Yes, of course. STR Then when I undertook to attach the verb

"to be" to not-being


said before.

was contradicting what

THEAET. Evidently. when I attached this verb to STR. Well, then did I not address it in the singular ? THEAET. Yes.
;

it,

STR.

And when

called

it

irrational, inexpressible,

and unspeakable,
singular.

addressed

my

speech to

it

as

Of course you did. But we say that, if one is to speak correctly, one must not define it as either singular or plural, and must not even call it "it" at all; for even by this manner of referring to it one would be giving it the form of the singular.
THEAET.
STR.

THEAET. Certainly.

345

PLATO
27.
HE.

oV Ae'yot;
eupot
Trept

/cat

T6v /J,V Toivvv yap TraAat /cat


> <

e/ze TO,

y*

eVt

ri

rt?

vw

^TT^/xeVov aV
tocrre

roy rov /z^ 6Vro? e'Aey^ov.


ecVroi',
fir]

ev
\

Kadarrep e/zotye Aeyovrt, \*/ / n \

opuoAoyiav
EAI.

Trepi

TO

/XT)

ot',

'iVfas* aAA eta * or) vvv zv

O7co77(%tei> rrjv s
crot,

HE.

"10 L

/zaAtcrra

V KOL ye^yatco?, are ^eo? aiv, ort rjfjilv Swacrat cruyretVa? 7TLpdd'r)Ti, fjitjre ovcriav
V
,rT6

TO

Trros aiJiov TroaTies


3

TO>

OVTL, KCLTOL TO opOov (^Oey^aaOaL TL rrepl aurou 0EAI. FIoAA^ jLteVr' dV /xe /cat OLTOTTOS e^ot
L

CT

auro? eVt^etpot^v. EE. *AAA' et 8o/<ret, ae /xe^ /cat e/ze ^atpetv e'cu/xev ecu? S* aV Tti^t Suva/xeVa) 3pav TOVTO evTvy^dvcofiev, T VTOV Aeycojite^ to? Trayros" /xaAAov Travovpytos (LTTOpOV 6 O~Orf)lO~Trj$ TOTTOV KCLTaO6OVKV.
0EAI.
HE.

Kat

Totyapow
4

jLtaAa S^ ^atVerat. et rtra </>7]cro/xey


e'/c
1

aurov

TacrriKrjV Te^vr^v, paoicos rtov AoycDV avrtAa/x/Sayo/xeyos


oL7TOO~TpiJjL

Taurus'
rjfjiutv

etV TOVVCLVTIOV

TOU? Aoyous", oray etSojAoTTOtov dvepujTaJv TL Trore TO rcapdrrav

> ovv, TOJ veavta Trpo? TO epcoTtofJievov 0EAI. A^AoV OTl (f)-)jaO^V TO,

.V

/cat

/caTOTTTpot?

ct'StoAa,

eVt

/cat
6'cra

TO,

yeypa/x/xeva

/cat TO. TTV7TO}fJL,pa /cat

TaAAa

TTOU TOtauT* ecr^'

7'
TIS

I'rt

ri TIS]

^^

re ri r/s
2

W.

eta

B ; e/i^ 76 Irt rts Bessarion's copy ;

T ^^
;

?ri T/

a BT.

346'

THE SOPHIST
STR.

any longer ?

But poor me, what can anyone say of me For you would find me now, as always

before, defeated in the refutation of not-being. So, as I said before, we must not look to me for correct-

ness of speech about not-being. us look to you for it.

But come now,

let

THEAET.
STR.

Come,
as

you are, and try with might and main to say something correctly about not-being, without
it either existence or unity or plurality. THEAET. But I should be possessed of great and absurd eagerness for the attempt, if I were to undertake it with your experience before my eyes. STR. Well, if you like, let us say no more of you but until we find someone who can and me accomplish this, let us confess that the sophist has in most rascally fashion hidden himself in a place we cannot explore. THEAET. That seems to be decidedly the case. STR. And so, if we say he has an art, as it were, of making appearances, he will easily take advantage of our poverty of terms to make a counter attack, twisting our words to the opposite meaning when we call him an image-maker, he will ask us what

young man

What do you mean ? I beg of you, make

a sturdy

effort,

attributing to

we mean by "image," exactly. So, Theaetetus, we must see what reply is to be made to the young
man's question. THEAET. Obviously we shall reply that we mean the images in water and in mirrors, and those in paintings, too, and sculptures, and all the other things of the same sort.
3

rb dpSbv
'ei

rbv 6p6bv \byov T.

corr.

T;

airorpfyei.

BTW.
34-7

PLATO
E
28. 0EAI.
EE. EE.

Oavepo?,
817;
o-ot

c5

0eatVi]Te,

ei

cro(f)i.<JTr]v

Tt

Ad^et

{Jiveiv

77

TravraTraaiv

OVK

EAI.

EE.
ej^

T^y

arroKpiaiv orav OVTOJS avra> StSaj? eav

KCiTOTTTpois T] TrAacT/xacrt AeyT]? rt, KarayeAaaerat crou ra>v Adyojv, orar oj? jSAeVovrt Aeyr^? aura),

240

oure KaroTrrpa ovre v3ara yiyvaiTtOV Ad (JKIV OVT6 TO TTapdlTOiV OlftlV, TO 8' epCDTTjaei oe (JLOVOV.
TTpoarroLoviJLevos
/<T

EAI.

EE.

TOVTOJV a TroAAa xras evi TrpoaeiTrelv OVO^CLTI (frQey^dnevos

To

Ilotov; Sta Tfdi>TO)v

et'

em
EAI.

Tracriv co? eV 6V.

Ae'ye

ow

/cat

a^ivvov
^>at^tev efvat

OV ai'opa.

Tt

OTJTOL,

co

ev,

et'ScoAov

av

TrA^r ye TO Trpos* raA^^trop' d^co/xotco/zeVov e

TOIOUTOV;
SE.

TtVi

"Erepov 8e Ae'yet? TOLOVTOV d TO TOIOUTOV etTT-e?;


T

EAI.

EE.

Apa

O^Sa/xcu? dA^^tvdv ye, dAA* eoiKos TO aXrfQivov oVrcus 6V Ae'ycu^;


1 1

/LteV.

EAI.

OuTCOS".
/x, ))

EE.

Tt Se'; TO EAI. Tt /Ltryv;


ye
/XT)

dA7]^tv'6v dp* evavriov aXrjOovs;

EE.

Oi5r OVTCOS

6V

d'pa Ae'yet?
e'pet?.

TO

e'ot/cds, et

dA^^tvov

W
2

ftvruv

om. T.
'6v

ov

OVKQV

OVK

W.

348

THE SOPHIST
STR. It
is

evident,

Theaetetus, that you never

saw a

sophist.

THEAET.
STR.

He

Why ?
will

make you think


all.
?

his eyes are shut

or

he has none at
THEAET.
STR.

HOW

SO

this answer, if you speak of something in mirrors or works of art, he will laugh at your words, when you talk to him as if he

When

you give

could see.

He

will

feign

ignorance

of

mirrors

and water and of sight altogether, and will question you only about that which is deduced from your
words. THEAET.
STR.

What

is

that

throughout all these things which you say are many but which you saw fit to " " call by one name, when you said image of them all one if were So speak as all, thing. they and defend yourself. Do not give way to the man
exists

That which

at

all.

Why, Stranger, what can we say an except another such thing fashioned in the likeness of the true one ? STR. Do you mean another such true one, or in " what sense did you say " such ? THEAET. Not a true one by any means, but only one like the true. STR. And by the true you mean that which
THEAET.
is,

image

really

is ?

THEAET. Exactly. STR. And the not true THEAET. Of course.


STR.

is

the opposite of the true

That which

is

like, then,
it is

you say does not

really exist, if

you say

not true.

349

PLATO
0EAI.
SE.
EAI.

'AAA* eort ye

IJLTJV

77-60? -

QVKOVV
/"v >
ix

dXr)9cos ye,
"

</>i7?.

EE.

(JVK ov

Ou yap ow* 3 v d
apa

* "

cn>T60?. 77A^v y' et/C6oi> v \ / OVTOJS ecrrtv OVTCJS rjv Ae


\ c\

CLKOVO. ;

EAI.

Ktv8weuet TOiavrriv riva

TrXoKrjV TO pr) ov TO) 6Vrt, KCU p,dXa aronov. SE. 110)? ya/D ov AC OLTOTTOV; opqs yovv cm /cat

Sta TT^? eVaAAa^ew? ravrrjs 6 7ToXvK6<f)aXos TO fjir) ov ov% KovTa$

evai
'

EAI.

SE.

0/>a> Tn/o\o' 1 oe
1

/cat
^

or);

TT)^

Te^vr^v

avTOV

>r

TLVCL

EAI.

/cat

crvfJL(f)a)i>iv OLOL re ecro/xe^a; TO TTOLOV rt (oovevos OVTCO

Ae'yet?; SE. "Orav


/cat

Tre/ot

TO

(^avTaafJia

CLVTOV

T^V r^y^v elvat TLVCL dTraTrjTLKrjv CLVTOV, TOT 7TOTpOV lfjVof) So^d^LV TrjV lfjV)(T]V rjfJLOJV V7TO Tf]S 6KELVOV T)(y7)S, ^ Tt 7TOT' 6pOVfJLV ; <f)TJO~OfJtV 0EAI. TOUTO' Tt yap dv dXXo etTrat/zer; EE. ^YevSrjs S' av So^a ecrTat Tava^Tta Tot? ouat
Sofa^oucra,
EAI.
r)

TTCOS;

Tdvaima.
apa
TO, /zr)

SE.

Ae'yet?

ovTa 8ofa^etv

TT)V

^ av;
EAI.

SE.
TTCOS"

IloTeov
Hermann

etvat

Ta

oi/Ta

etvat TO, /z^Sa/xco? OVTOL;


;

TTWJ;

BT (the previous words being given


otf/co/'

to the stranger). 2 oijKovv OVKOVV

B.

350

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. But it does exist, in a way. STR. But not truly, you mean. THEAET. No, except that it is really a likeness.
STR. Then what we call a likeness, though not really existing, really does exist ? THEAET. Not-being does seem to have got into

some such entanglement with being, and


absurd.
SIR.

it is

very
rate,

Of

course

it is

absurd.

You

see, at

any

interchange of words the many-headed sophist has once more forced us against our will to admit that not-being exists in a way. THEAET. Yes, I see that very well. STR. Well then, how can we define his art without
this

how by

contradicting ourselves

THEAET. afraid of?

Why

do you say that

What

are you

STR. When, in talking about appearance, we say that he deceives and that his art is an art of deception, shall we say that our mind is misled by his art to hold a false opinion, or what shall we say ? What else could we THEAET. We shall say that.

say?
STR. But, again, false opinion will be that which thinks the opposite of reality, will it not ? THEAET. Yes. STR. You mean, then, that false opinion thinks things which are not ?

THEAET. Necessarily. STR. Does it think that things which are not, are not, or that things which are not at all, in some sense are ?
3

oflK 8z>]

OVKOV

B
;

&pa

Badham

OVK OVV T. apa OVK BT.


J

351

PLATO
EAI.

EtWu mo? rd
rt's

rat Trore
HE.

Tt

S';

ovra Set ye, etVep /eufir) rt /cat /card fipaxv. ou /cat fjirjoafjitos etvat rd rcdvrajs ovra

0EAI.
HE.

Nat.

Kat rovro or) 0EAI. Kat rovro. HE. Kat Aoyo?, ot/xat, 241 vofjiicr9ri<Jr(u rd re 6Vra
6Vra efvat.
0EAI.
HE.
Ila)?

i/feuS^? OUTO) /cara

Ae'ycov
2

^,17

eti/at /<rat

raura ra

yap av

d'AAaj?

rotouro? yeVotro;
ao(f)t,crrr}$

S^eSov
Tj

ouSa^Lta)?'

aAAa ravra 6
/<rat

ov
/cat
\

(f)ijcrL.

ris jLti^av^

cruy^ajpetv rtva raiv ev

(frpovovvraiv ,

orav a^^ey/cra

apprjra
3

/cat

d'Aoya
77/30

aStavo^ra
/

TrpoStco^toAoyr^/xeVa

ra

TOUTCUV o/zoAoyT]^eVra;
4 a Aeyet*;
c\

^avddvofjiev, d)

eatr^re,

0EAI.
(frrjacL

ITajs

yap
7]/i,a?

01;

/zai'^dVo/zei'

ort

rdyavrta

Aeyetv
ct>?

rot?

pw

Sry, i/jevorj roXfJLijcravras

L7Tiv

<JTiv ev

B ydp

/ar)

6Vrt

rd

So^ai? re /cat /card Aoyou?; ro) 6V Trpoaarrreiv ^/xa? TroAAd/ct?

a.vay/caeo-$at, Sto/zoAoyr^o-a/xeVoys' elvai Trdvrajv dovvarwrarov


.

vw

8^

TTOU

rovro
5

29.
817

HE.

'OpOtos
6

dTrefjLvrjfjLovevaas.

dAA*

cupa

fiovXevcracrOai

rt

rd? ydp
,

dvriXrjtpeis

^17 Spav ro> oo^iarov Trepi' /cat aTropta?, e'd^ avrdv Ste-

eV r^ rcuv tfjevoovpyajv /cat yo7]rcoi> T^X V V opas ws evrropoi /cat TroAAat.

1 rai/ra
2
3

AXXwy

Stobaeus ravra ravra B raOra W, Stobaeus #XAos BT.


; ; ;

Tai)rd

ravra

W.

TrpoSn>}fj.o\oyr)/n^va

irpoa8iwiJ.o\oyr]^va

&8iai>&r)Ta

om. Madvig, Schanz, Burnet.

352

THE SOPHIST
in

THEAET. It must think that things which are not some sense are that is, if anyone is ever to think

falsely at all, even in a slight degree. STR. And does it not also think that things certainly are, are not at all ?

which

THEAET. Yes.
STR.
STR.

And

this too
it is.

is

falsehood

THEAET. Yes,

therefore a statement will likewise be declares that things which are, are not, or that things which are not, are. THEAET. In what other way could a statement be

And

considered

false, if it

made

false

?
;

but the sophist Virtually in no other way will not assent to this. Or how can any reasonable man assent to it, when the expressions we just agreed upon were previously agreed to be inexpressible,
STR.

unspeakable, irrational, and inconceivable? Do we understand his meaning, Theaetetus ? THEAET. Of course we understand that he will say we are contradicting our recent statements, since we dare to say that falsehood exists in opinions and words for he will say that we are thus forced
;

repeatedly to attribute being to not-being, although we agreed a while ago that nothing could be more impossible than that.
are quite right to remind me. But I high time to consider what ought to be done about the sophist for you see how easily and repeatedly he can raise objections and difficulties, if we conduct our search by putting him in the guild of false- workers and jugglers.
STR.

You

think

it is

Ae'7] \eyeis BT.


6

I3ov\evffa.ffdai

f3ov\eue<r0cu

6 &pa] Spa BT. om. Burnet.

353

PLATO
EAI.

Kat

/xaAa.
/xe'po?

HE.

Mt/cpov

roivvv GLVTOJV
I/

ovaajv to? 7ros elrrelv aTrepavrajv. V I / f >AO/ EAI. AOVVGLTOV y eu? eot/cei>, av,
r^y eAety,
HE.
EAI.
et

V et?7

TOP

raura ovrco?
vvv
(frrj/ju,

Tt

ow;

o.7TOorT7]<j6fJiOa

QVKOVV iyayye

Setv, et /cat /card o/u-

otot T* eTnXaljfEaOai
HE.

rrrj

ravSpos

ecr/xev.

"E^et? ovv avyyva)fjir]v /cat KaOaTrep vvv etW? ayaTTT^crets eav 7717 /cat /card ^S/ja^i) TrapacrTracrco/xe^a
1

OVTOJS L(T)(vpov Aoyou;


EAI.

II a>? yd/o ou^; e^co;

HE.

ToSe roivvv

ert /zaAAov Trapatrou^tat

ere.

EAI.

To

770 toy; /xe

HE.

M^
Tt

otov

TrarpaXoiav

VTroXd^rjs

ytyve-

cr^at rtva.

EAI.

817;

HE.

Tdv rou
rjfj.lv

Katov

Trarpos TlapfieviSov Aoyov aVaydpvvofjLVOis ecrrat fiaoavi^tiv , /cat TO re fna 6V co? eart /caret rt /cat TO 6

av rrdXiv
EAI.

cos OVK eari TTY). OatVerat TO roiovrov 8tajLta^Teov ev rols

Aoyot?.
HE.
Sr)

Heos"

yap

TOVTO

rv(f)Xa>;

ou <^atVeTat TOVTOJV yap

/cat

TO

fjir^re

ofJioXoyrjOevraiv cr^oA^ TTOTC Tt? oto? Te earou

Trept

Aoyeov

ifsevScov

Xeywv

TJ

S6r]s, etVe
etVe

et'StoAajv

etVe

eLKovcov

etre

fJLLfjirjfjidra>v

(f)avTacrfjLdra)v

fjLrj

/cat Trept Te^ra;^ TCO^ 6'crat Trept ravra r) /caTayeAacrTO? eivcu rd evavrua d avra> Aeyetv. 1 ^ap d^ al. 7' fi^ Burnet 7 dp BT dp'

avrwv,

354

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. Very true. STR. Yes, we have gone through only a small part of them, and they are, if I may say so, infinite. THEAET. It would, apparently, be impossible to catch the sophist, if that is the case. STR. Well, then, shall we weaken and give up the
struggle

now ?
;

THEAET. No, I say we must not do that, if we can in any way get the slightest hold of the fellow. STR. Will you then pardon me, and, as your words imply, be content if I somehow withdraw just for a short distance from this strong argument of his ? THEAET. Of course I will. STR. I have another still more urgent request to make of you. THEAET. What is it ? STR. Do not assume that I am becoming a sort
of parricide.

THEAET. What do you mean ? STR. In defending myself I shall have to test the theory of my father Parmenides, and contend forcibly that after a fashion not-being is and on the other hand in a sense being is not. THEAET. It is plain that some such contention is
necessary.

Yes, plain even to a blind man, as they say statements are either disproved or accepted, no one who speaks about false words, or false opinion whether images or likenesses or imitations or appearances or about the arts which have to do with them, can ever help being forced to contradict himself and make himself ridiculous.
STR.
;

for unless these

355

PLATO
'

EAI

242

ToX[JirjTov TO) TrarpLKO) Aoyoj vvv, 7} TO TrapaTrav eareov, et TOVTO TLS etpyet opdv OKVOS.
-

HE

AXrjOearaTa Ata TOLVTCL fievTOi


.

EAI.

HE.
crojLtat.

'AAA' rjjJias TOVTO ye TpiTOV roivvv ert ere

o~{iu<p6v

rt

0EAI.
EE.

Aeye
Et770J^ 77OU VVV O7) Ae'yCOV CO? 77/90?
e'yto

TOV

7T6pl
/<:at

raur* eAey^ov det re aTreiprjKajs


ST) /cat

ryy^avcu

ra

vuv.
Trore Sta

EAI.

EtTie?.
Oo/3ouyit,at ST^ TO, et/o^fteVa,
JU,T]

HE.
crot

raura

jJLOLViKos

eivai

$6aj

irapa.

77080,
17

/jiavTov aVco /cat /carco.

cri]v

yap

X P iV
L

e'Ae'

O^ Aoyov
EAI.

.TfiOr^a6i.ieQcL y

eavirep eAey^co/xev.
/jirjSaiJifj

'O? roivvv
,

efjioiye

So^cov

30.

aV eVt rov e'Aey^ov TOUTOP' /cat WL TOVTOV ye eVe/ca. tT]?, OappaJv EE. Oepe 817, rtVa a/o^^ Tts av ap
1

irapaKivovvevTiKov Xoyov; Trat, T^V oSop' a^ay/catOTari]^


EAI.

So/cai /xev
7]//,tv

yap

T7]^8

a>

etvat

EE.

Ta

Ootav ST^; So/cowra vuv eVapya)? e^etv


fir)
Trrj

TrpajTov,

raura, paoia>$
EAI.

S'

rera/oay/xeVot /Ltev c5ftev dAA^Aots* oftoAoyco/xev to? ev

EE.

Ae'ye aa^eaTepov o Eu/coAa)? ftot So/cet Hap/j,VLOr)s


/cat

rjfJLLV

Stet-

vra?
1

ocrrts

TrcuTrore

e?7t

Kpiaiv

/U^P

w aei'
/

fj^vufMfv

BT.

356

<*

THE SOPHIST
^THEAET. Very
STR.
true.

And

so

we must take courage and


and now, or
else, if

attack our

father's theory here

prevent us from doing this, thing up. THEAET. But nothing in the world must prevent us. STR. Then I have a third little request to make
of you.

any scruples we must give the whole

THEAET.
STR.
I

You have only

to utter

it.

said a while ago that I always have been too faint-hearted for the refutation of this theory,
so I am now. THEAET, Yes, so you did. STR. I am afraid that on account of what I have said you will think I am mad because I have at once You see it is for your sake reversed my position. that I am going to undertake the refutation, if I succeed in it. THEAET. I certainly shall not think you are doing

and

anything improper if you proceed to your refutation and proof; so go ahead boldly, so far as that is concerned. STR. Well, what would be a good beginning of a Ah, my boy, I believe the way perilous argument ? we certainly must take is this. THEAET. What way ? STR. We must first examine the points which now seem clear, lest we may have fallen into some confusion about them and may therefore carelessly agree with one another, thinking that we are judging
correctly.
STR. It seems to me that Parmenides and ever undertook a critical definition of the

THEAET. Express your meaning more clearly.


all

who
3.57

number

PLATO
rov
eoriv.
EAI.
TO,

ovra.

Stopicracr$at

Trocra

re

KCLL

TTOIOL

IT^;
TWO, e'/caoTO? (j>aivTat
r)p<iv,
(JLOL

EE.
TTCLLVW

Mvdov
a>?

St^yetcrflat

ovacv

TToAe/Zet Se

D Kol

dAA^Aot?

VLOT

rpia rd ovra, CLVTOJV CtTTtt TTrj , TOT6


/zey

a>s

yiyvo^fvo. ya/zous re KO! TOKOVS KOI $vo Se erepo? rpo(f)as ra>v eKyovaiv TT-ape^erat* CLTTtov, vypov KOL rjpov rj Qepjjiov /cat i^v^po >\ IY ^'o'C ^c>^ TO oe Trap ot/ct^et re aura /cat e/cotoa>crr
1

(fjiXa

EAeart/cov

6vos,

aVo
a>?

^evo^avovs
evo?

re

/cat

ert

dp^dfjievov,

OVTOS TOJV
2

Se

/cat St/ceAat'

OVTCU Ste^ep^erat rots' [ivOois. rtve? varepov Mouaat vvvor)crav

ort avfjLTT\Kiv do^aXearcLTov d/x^orepa /cat ' \\ \r/5 < O\ \\/ >'/1 /cat ev eCTTtv, e^c/pa oe /cat cos* TO ov 7TO/\Aa T

crwe^eTat.
at

Sta^epo/xe^ov yap det ^v/jL^eperai, <f)aaiv ovvTovwTpai ra>v M.ov(ja>v at Se jitaAa/ccoTepat

TO p:ev det ravra OVTCDS e^etv e^dXacrav, ev jLtepet Se TOTe p:ei^ e^ etvat ^acrt TO Trav /cat (>i\ov viS 'A<^po243 StV^s", TOTe Se TroAAd /cat TroAe/xtor auTO avra) Std
yet/cos Tt.

ravra Se Trdvra
/cat

et

:ev

dA7^cD? Tt?

TOUTCO^ etp^/ce, ^aAe?7ov

/cat

TT-A^^/^eAe? OUTCO

dXa
0EAI.
EE.
2

/cAetvot?

TraAatot?

dvSpdaw

e/cetvo Se dv7Ti<f>Qovov d7T

To

TTOLOV;

"OTt

AtW

TCOV
al.

7roAAah>
;

Eusebius

r/ /xcDi'
;

BTW.
%vvvevor)Ka.<riv

j-vvvb't}<ja.v

T, Eusebius, Simplicius

B.

358

THE SOPHIST
and nature of
carelessly.
realities

have talked to us rather

THEAET.
STR.

HOW

SO

Every one of them seems to tell us a story, One says there are three as if we were children. principles, that some of them are sometimes waging a sort of war with each other, and sometimes become friends and marry and have children and bring them up and another says there are two, wet and dry or hot and cold, which he settles together and unites
;

And the Eleatic sect in our region, beginning with Xenophanes and even earlier, have their story that all things, as they are called, are really
in marriage. 1

Then some Ionian 2 and later some Sicilian 3 Muses reflected that it was safest to combine the two tales and to say that being is many and one, and is (or are) held together by enmity and friendship. For the more strenuous Muses say it is always simultaneously coming together and separating but
one.
;

the gentler ones relaxed the strictness of the doctrine of perpetual strife they say that the all is sometimes one and friendly, under the influence of Aphrodite, and sometimes many and at variance with itself by Now whether any of reason of some sort of strife. them spoke the truth in all this, or not, it is harsh and improper to impute to famous men of old such But one assertion can a great wrong as falsehood. be made without offence. THEAET. What is that ? STR. That they paid too little attention and con;

This refers apparently to Pherecydes and the early


Heracleitus and his followers.

lonians.
2

Empedocles and

his disciples.

359

PLATO
ovoev

yap

(f)povri<javTS
e/caorot,

etr*

aKoXovOovfJiev avTols Xeyovcriv etVe a77oAei77o/ze#a,

Trepaivovcri TO a^erepov EAI. Hois' Xeyeis;


E.
/

avTwv

"Orav

Tt? avTaJv (f)9eyr)Tai Xeycav a>?


/

ecmv

1]

yeyovev i] yiyverai TToAAa 77 ev i] ovo, au ifjvxpa) ovyKepavvvfjievov, aXXoOi 7777


/cat

\ \

i\

5\

/cat

avyKpioeis

vrroriOeis,

TOVTOJV,

a)

0eatT7^re,

e/cacrrore
fjiev

au

rt Trpos Oecov ^vvirjs 6 TL \eyovcriv ; eyaj

/xev 17^ vecorepo?, TOVTO re TO vw O77OT6 Tt? CtTTOt, TO JU-T^ 6V, d/Cpt^OJ? GLTTOpOVfJieVOV vvievai. vvv Be opas Iv ea^ev avrov wept, a)[j,r)V

yap ore

rfjs

0EAI.
EE. Ta^a roivvv tcrcos" ow^; rJTrov Kara TO ov ravrov TOVTO rrddos zlXrjfioTes ev TTJ ^XT) ^^P^ TOVTO evTTOpeiv <f)ajjiv /cat [jiai'Odveiv oiroTav TIS fjiev avTO (frOey^TaL, rrepl Se Odrtpov ov, rrpos d
EAI.

EE.

Kat

rrepl TOJV

aXXtov

Srj

TOJV

TavTOV TOVTO
EAI.

31.

EE.

Tldvv ye. Ta>v IJLZV


/cat

TOIVVV

TroXXajv
&6gr),

Trepi

/cat

D jLteTa

TOVTO T

CTKeifjo/jLeO* ,

av

rrepl

8e

TOU

EAI.

TtVos* $r) Aeyet?;

dp^riyov rrpcoTOV vvv ovce77Te. 6Vt TO 6V 77 S^Aov


ol

ocw
O SrjXovv

Stepeuy^cracj^at Tt TfoQ*

360

THE SOPHIST
to the mass of people like ourselves. For they go on to the end, each in his own way, without caring whether their arguments carry us along with them, or whether we are left behind. THEAET. What do you mean ? STR. When one of them says in his talk that many, or one, or two are, or have become, or are becoming, and again speaks of hot mingling with cold, and in some other part of his discourse suggests separations and combinations, for heaven's sake, Theaetetus, do you ever understand what they mean by any of these I used to think, when I was younger, that things ? I understood perfectly whenever anyone used this
sideration

But term "not-being," which now perplexes us. you see what a slough of perplexity we are in about it now.
THEAET. Yes, I see. STR. And perhaps our minds are in this same condition as regards being also we may think that it is plain sailing and that we understand when the word is used, though we are in difficulties about notbeing, whereas really we understand equally little of both. THEAET. Perhaps. STR. And we may say the same of all the subjects about which we have been speaking. THEAET. Certainly. STR. We will consider most of them later, if you please, but now the greatest and foremost chief of
;

them must be considered.


THEAET. What do you mean ? Or, obviously, do you mean that we must first investigate the term "being," and see what those who use it think it
signifies
?

361

PLATO
HE.
Ae'ya>
rjfjids,

Kara
yap
Srj

irooa

ye, c5 eair^re, ravrrj oelv 7roteto-#at

olov

avTO)v

Trapovraiv

c58e*

<f>pc, oTroaoL 0p/j,ov /cat i/jv^pov


TO, TTOLVT* elvac <f)ar, rt 77ore

dva7TVv9avofJLevovs rive Suo TJ

TOLOVTOJ

apa TOVT

a/x^otv (frOeyyeaOe, Xeyovres ap>(f>a) Kal eKa eivaL; ri TO etvat rovro VTroXafiajfJiev u/itaJv; irorepov

Tpirov Trapa ra Svo e/cetva,


eVt
A<ra^'

/cat

vjjids
<

riOwfjiev ;

rpta TO Trap aAAa, ov yap rrov rov ye


tr

8volv KoXovvTts Oarepov ov afJL^oTepa o/xotaj? elvai

A/ eycTe*
" 2

a^eoov yap av a[A(poT6pa>s


'AXrjdfj Aeyet?.

\i\5i'/

ev, aA/\

'\\>>O/ ov ovo

eiT-^vr
EAI.

EE.

'AAA' apa
"Icrtos".

TO,

a/z^o) fiovXeoOe KaXelv ov;

0EAI.

244
\
'

HE.
*

'AAA',
3

AeyotT
0EAI.
HE.

J av ffaipearara

c5 <f>iXoi, <f>r)o~o[.iV, " '

Kav OVTOJ ra Svo

ev.

'QpOorara
Tret-

ToLvvv

^/zets" rjTTOpTJKafiev, vfiels

avra

LKavaJs TL TTOTC fiovXeoOe

onorav ov (frOeyyTjoOe. orjXov yap cos ravra vraAat ytyytocr/ceTe, rjfJieis Se 77p6 TOU
StSacr/ceTe ouv coo/jueOa, vvv 8* ^7rop^KafJiv. TOVT' avTO ^/xa?, tva /x^ oo^d^cop.ev ^avQdveiv fj,v TOL Xey6fJLva Trap* vfjiojv, TO Se TOVTOV yiyvr^Tai TTO.V TOvvavTLOV. TavTa Srj XeyovTes T /cat d^covvTes

Trapd T TOVTCOV Kal Trapa TOJV aXXa>v, oaoi TfXelov evos Xeyovcri TO Tfdv elvai, fjt,a>v, co irai, TL
1

7r65a

T
2

(emend.)
ei'r^

W
;

W;
;

Tro\\d

X^oir'] X^otTo

pr. T.

BT.

X^yere

X<?yer'

W.

362

THE SOPHIST
STR. You have caught ray meaning at once, For I certainly do mean that this is Theaetetus. the best method for us to use, by questioning them so here directly, as if they were present in person goes Come now, all you who say that hot and cold or any two such principles are the universe, what is this that you attribute to both of them when you say that both and each are ? What are we to understand by this "being" (or "are") of yours? Is this a third principle besides those two others, and shall we suppose that the universe is three, and not two any longer, according to your doctrine ? For " surely when you call one only of the two " being you do not mean that both of them equally are for in both cases 1 they would pretty certainly be one and not two. THEAET. True. STR. Well, then, do you wish to call both of them
; :

together being ? THEAET. Perhaps.


STR. But, friends, we will say, even in that way you would very clearly be saying that the two are one.

THEAET.
STR.

You are perfectly Then since we are in


what you wish
For
it is

right.

us plainly

perplexity, do to designate when

you tell you say


this

"being."
all

clear that

you have known

along, whereas we formerly thought we knew, but are now perplexed. So first give us this information, that we may not think we understand what you say, when the exact opposite is the case. If we speak in this way and make this request of them

and of

one, shall we, " In both 1

say that the universe is more than boy, be doing anything improper ? cases," i.e. whether you say that one only is or that both are, they would both be one, namely being.
all

who

my

363

PLATO
EAI. ''UK Lard ye. HE. Tt oe; 32. rrapa TWV ev TO TTOV AeyoVTCJV a/)' ov TTevcrTeov el? SuVa/Atv Tt TTOTC Xeyovcn TO
V

ov;
EAI.

HE.

ITco? yap ou; ToSe TOLVVV aTTOKpiveoQtov}(fxzjjiev

ev
rj

TTOV

(f>aT

IJLOVOV etvat;

yap, ^oovaiv.

yap;

EE.

Nat. Tt 5e; 6V KaXelre TI; EAI. Nat.


EAI.

HE.

HoTpOV O7Tp V , 77t TO) aUTOJ ovoiv ovofjiaaiv, r) TTOJS; EAI. Tts ow aurots" ^ jLtera, TOUT', c5
1

OeatV^Te, OTt TO) Tavrrjv Trjv vrroTrpos TO vvv epajTrjOev KOLI rrpos aAAo oe OTLOVV ov TrdvTOJv pacrTOV aTTOKpivaadcLi.
EE.

A^Aov,

a>

Oecriv

VTTodefJLeva)

EAI.

rico?;

SE.

To

Te Suo

OVO/JLCLTCL

ofjioXoyclv etvat firjoev


TTOV.
z

depevov
EAI.

TrXrjv eV Da)? 8'

KaTayeXaaTov
ou;

SE.

Kat

TO

XeyovTos ws
EAI.

TOV TTapdTTav ye arrooexeaOai eaTiv ovofnd Tt, Aoyov OVK av e^ov.


TOVVO^CL TOV TTpdyfJLCLTOS

HE.

11^; Tt^et? T

TpOV

Aeyet
EE.

7701) Tti^e.

EAI.

Nat.

Kat

fjLrjv

av TavTov ye avTO)
Simplicius
;

TiOfj

a-n-oKpLvfodwo-av
;

BTW.

TOU

Hermann

TOV

BT.

364

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. Not in the
STR.
least.

Well then, must we not, so far as we can, that the universe is try to learn from those who say " one l what they mean when they say " being ?
THEAET.
STR.
will

Of course we must. Then let them answer


is ?

this

you say that one only


they not ? THEAET. Yes.
STR.

We

question

Do
;

do, they will say

Well then, do you give the name of being


?

to anything
STR.
for the

THEAET. Yes.
" Is it what you call one," using two names same thing, or how is this ?

THEAET.
STR. It

What
is

is

their next answer, Stranger

maintains plain, Theaetetus, that he who their theory will not find it the easiest thing in to our present question or to any the world to
reply
other.

THEAET.
STR.
It

names
unity.

not ? rather ridiculous to assert that two exist when you assert that nothing exists but

Why

is

THEAET.
STR. in

Of course it is. And in general there would be no

sense

accepting the statement that a

name has any

existence.

THEAET.
STR.

Because he who asserts that the name is other than the thing, says that there are two
entities.

Why ?

THEAET. Yes.
STR.

And
1

further, if

he

asserts that the


his school.

name

is

The

Eleatic

Zeno and

365

PLATO
7}

jj,r]$v6$ ovofjia

6Vo/za (f)TJaL, ovfjifiijaeTai. *f "\ \ > / o O v [Jiovov, aAAov oe ovozvos ov.


0EAI.
T7-

avTO

dvayKacrO^aeTaL Aeyea>, el 8e TWOS TO oVo/xaTO? 6Vo/za

HE.
/

Kat TO
T
'

\\W ev
av TO
>

*
01^

ye,J/ evos*
V OV.

1 J

ovo/xa

/cat

TOU

OVOfJLOLTOS

0EAI.
HE.
rp
/ o / It oe;

TO oAov erepov rov ovro? evo?


TOVTCO;

>

/\

^ V

M
19

rau-

rov

(f>7JaovaL

EAI.

IlaJ?

yap

01)

^>7^croucrt

re

/<rat

HE.
Ae'yet,

Et Toivvv o\ov

e'crrtV, cocrTrep feat

VKVK\OV
1

4
crcfxiiprjs

our

taoTraAes Trdvrrj' TO yap ovre rt TI jSatorepov TieAeVat xpeov eart r/y ^

TOIOVTOV ye

TO

fjieorov

TC

/cat

eo^aTa
77

TauTa Se
EAI.

Trdaa avay/ci) OUTO)?.


e'^of
jLt7)v
-v ^'x e/

ju,t-p^

e^etv

TT

245

EE.

TOU evo?
0EAI
EE.
.

TO ye ^te/^eptor/xeVov TrdOos ^ 7T ' rots' /xe'pecrt TTO.GIV ov veL, /cat TCLVTTT) ST) Tiav Te 6V /cat 6'Aov eV etvat.

'AAAa

T 1 1
1

'

o 8e

C*5

ou ;
7TTTOvBoS
TaVTOL
OLD*

*'

To

OVK aOVVCLTOV

ye TO ev auTo et^at;
EAI.

^ 3

Apelt
2

fly
;

rot)

BW

/x6'oi'

8v ^6^0^

T.

roOro T.
;

a5 TO Schleiermacher
4
ff(f>alpr]s

airrd

BTW.
BT.

Siraplicius

ff(patpa$

366

THE SOPHIST
the same as the thing, he will be obliged to say that it is the name of nothing, or if he says it is the name of something, the name will turn out to be the name of a name merely and of nothing else. THEAET. True. STR. And the one will turn out to be the name of one and also the one of the name. 1 THEAET. Necessarily. STR. And will they say that the whole is other than the one which exists or the same with it ? THEAET. Of course they will and do say it is the same. STR. If then the whole is, as Parmenides says,

On

all sides like the mass of a well-rounded sphere, equally weighted in every direction from the middle for neither greater nor less must needs be on this or that,
;

then being, being such as he describes it, has a centre and extremes, and, having these, must certainly have parts, must it not ? THEAET. Certainly. STR. But yet nothing hinders that which has parts from possessing the attribute of unity in all its parts

and being

in this way one, since it is all and whole. THEAET. Very true. STR. But is it not impossible for that which is in this condition to be itself absolute unity ? THEAET. Why ? In other words, "one," considered as a word, will be of unity, but considered as a reality, it will be the " one " is the name. The sentence unity of which the word is made somewhat difficult of comprehension, doubtless for the purpose of indicating the confusion caused by the identification of the name with the thing.
1

the

name

367

PLATO
EE.

'A{jLpes OTJTTOV Set TravrcXajs TO ye aXr]Oa)S


elprjaOai.
e/c

Kara TOV opBov \6yov EAI. Aet yap ovv.


HE.

To
.

Se ye TOLOVTOV
TO* Aoyo). 1
.

TroXXcov fJL^pojv ov ou

ov{JL(j)a>VTJcrL

EAI
EE.

MavOdva)
TT
/

llorepov OT) TTCLUOS e^oy TO oi> rou evo? ouTCO? eV re earai KCLL o\ov, rj TTavraTraai fj.rj o TO ov *
>

0\

//)

<

xsf<

f/

j/

EAI.

aeTT

TrpoerjKas

aipecnv.

'AA^^ecrTaTa yLteWot Aeyet?. rr7rov96? re yap 3 TO 6V IV etvat TTOJ?, ow TawTov 6V TO) eVt
EE.
/cat

irXeova
EAI.
TT"
/

Cn
SE.
EAI.

Nat.

J\at

\\/
/ZT)V
\

Srj

ra rravra evos earai.


eav ye TO ov >
>
/

\1\-5>
rj
//j

W\

TO U77 e/cetp'ou rrauo?, rj oe avro TO oAov, TO 6V eavTOV avu ye. EAI. SE. Kat AcaTa TOUTOV orj TOV \6yov eavTOV fjievov OVK 6V eCTTat TO 6V.
TTtTTOi'uevai

/_tr)
<j >

oAoi^
*

ota
x

ON

TO

w\

QvTOJS.
TiAetco TO,

EE.

Kat eVd? ye av
/<:at

TfdvTa yiyveTai, TOV

OVTOS
EAI.

TOW

6'Aou %ajpis iSiav eKasrepov (j)vaiv

SE.

Nat. MT^ OVTOS oe ye TO rrapaTrav TOV

6'Aou,
JUT)

TO> OVTI /cat 77/369 TO) 6V. /u-^S' aV yeveadai TTOT


1

TavTa VTrpxei
ra>

efvat

X67y Simplicius (codd. EF)

ry 6Xy \6yy

ry

2 3

T, Simpl. (cod. D). &> Schleierraacher ; 6'Xo^ BT.


(fraveirai

6A<>

Simplicius

<j>alt>Tai

BT.

368

THE SOPHIST
STR. Why surely that which is really one must, according to right reason, be affirmed to be absolutely without parts. THEAET. Yes, it must. STR. But such a unity consisting of many parts will not harmonize with reason. THEAET. I understand. STR. Then shall we agree that being is one and a whole because it has the attribute of unity, or shall we deny that being is a whole at all ? THEAET. It is a hard choice that you offer me. for being, having in a STR. That is very true way had unity imposed upon it, will evidently not be the same as unity, and the all will be more than one. THEAET. Yes. STR. And further, if being is not a whole through having had the attribute of unity imposed upon it, and the absolute whole exists, then it turns out that being lacks something of being. THEAET. Certainly.
;

STR. And so, by this reasoning, since being is deprived of being, it will be not-being. THEAET. So it Will. STR. And again the all becomes more than the one, since being and the whole have acquired each
its

own

nature.

THEAET. Yes. STR. But if the whole does not exist at all, being is involved in the same difficulties as before, and besides not existing it could not even have ever

come

into existence.

369

PLATO
0EAI.
HE.

Tt

17;

yeyovev oXov t5crre ovr ovaiav ovre yeveaiv ajs ovcrav Set Trpocrayopeueo' TO oXov 1 eV rots' oucrt fj,r) riOevra.
yevofJLevov aet
EAI.

To

HE.

Kat

TlavTaTTaoiv eot/ce ravO* ourco? e^etv. owS* OTTOCTOVOVV rt Set TO JU-T) 6'Aov [J,r}v

TTOCTOV Tt

yap
2

6V, oTroaov

av

T)>

TOCTOVTOV o\ov

avro
EAI.
o/xt

eivai.

ye.
fjLVpia

HE.

Kat roivvv aAAa


>

aVepdWous

eKaarov

etAT]<^os

^aretTat TO> TO 6V etVe Suo


TO,

etVe ev [j,6vov elvai \eyovri. 0EAI. A^Aot o-^eSot' A<rat

vw

VTr
/cat

yap erepov
<j>epov

aXXov, /^et^co
aet

rrepl rcov efJLTrpocrOev

33-

EE.

Tou?
KG!

/xev
firj

roivvv
3
jLtev

OVTOS re
ofjiois

TTepi

TrdvTCis

ou

Se iKava>s

e^eVw

av Oeareov, lv CK TTOLVTOJV 246 OVTOS ovoev evrropcorepov etVetv o Tt


EAI.

TOU? Se aAAco? Xeyovra? et'8a>/xev 6Vt TO 6V TOU


TTOT' eo-riv.

TTOpeveaOai %pr) /cat eVt HE. Kat jLt^ 6OLK6 ye eV auTot? otov jua^t'a Tt? etvat Sta TT)V dft^tcr/^TTycrtv Trept

OUKOW

ovaias Trpos dXXtjXovs.


EAI.
1

r6 6\oi>
2
8

Bekker

r6

^
;

*)

r6

6'Xoi/

BT.

auro

W,

Simplicius; om. BT.

Travras

Eusebius

Trd/'u

BT.,

370

THE SOPHIST
THEAET.
STR.

What do you mean ? That which comes into

existence

always

comes into existence as a whole. Therefore no one who does not reckon the whole among things that
are can speak of existence or generation as being. THEAET. That certainly seems to be true. STR. And moreover, that which is not a whole

cannot have any quantity at all ; for if it has any quantity, whatever that quantity may be, it must necessarily be of that quantity as a whole.
THEAET. Precisely.
STR.

And

so countless other problems, each one


difficulties,
is,

involving who says only one.

infinite

will

confront
it

that

being

whether

be

him two or

THEAET. The problems now in sight make that for each leads up to another which pretty clear brings greater and more grievous wandering in connexion with whatever has previously been said. STH. Now we have not discussed all those who treat accurately of being and not-being l however, let this suffice. But we must turn our eyes to those whose doctrines are less precise, that we may know from all sources that it is no easier to define the nature of being than that of not-being.
;
;

THEAET. Very well, then,


those others
also.

we must proceed towards

STR. And indeed there seems to be a battle like that of the gods and the giants going on among them, because of their disagreement about existence.

THEAET.
1

HOW

SO

Ionic philosophers, the Eleatics, Heracleitus, Erapedocles, the Megarians, Gorgias, Protagoras, and Antisthenes all discussed the problem of being and not-being.

The

371

PLATO
HE.

01

fjii>

els yr\v e

ovpavov

/cat

rov aopdrov

irdvra

rat? "^epalv are^co? rrerpa? /cat ra>v yap roiovrajv e</>a7rro7repiAa Lt/3dVovTes'
e'A/coucrt,
/

rrdvrO>V SttCT^Upt'^OVTat rOVrO elvCLl fJLOVOV O

B\

/cat

ovoiav
2
jLti)

>/

7rpocrf3oAr)V /cat

</>T]<7et

eVa^Tyv rtva, TOLVTOV cra/xa >// /-i '^s^^ v ^^ 1 opt^o/.terot, TOJV oe aAAcov et rt? rt TO etrat, Kara^povovvres craj/.ta e^ov

f^/

Trapd-rrav /cat

ouSev e^eAovre? a'AAo aKOveiv.


Setvous' etp^/ca?

0EAI.

aVSpas"

17817

yap

/cat

o TOUTCOV av^voXs

Totyapow ot Trpo? aurou? Xa evXafiais dvcudev e^ aopdrov iroQev d vorjrd arra /cat daw^ara e'iorj f3ia,6fjL6Voi
EE.

ovaiav eivai'
VTT

rd Se eKeivaiv aaJ^tara /cat avrajv d\TJ0Lav Kara afjuKpd

oiaOpavovres ev rot? Aoyot? yeVecrtv avr' oucrta?

nvd ITpoo-ay opevovaw. ev fJLecra) Se 77ept <f>epo[JiVY]V ravra aTrAero? d^orepajv /Lta^r^ rts", c5 Qeairrjre, del
EAI.

HE.

Ila/)' dfJL(f)olv

Aa/3a>/zev
EAI.

Aoyov
ITccI?

i5rre/3

roivvv rolv ycvolv Kara ficpos T^? ridevrai rfjs ovaias.


Xinfjo^JieOa;

ow
1

817

EE.

Ilapa

/xev TOJV
2

eV et8eatv
;

avrty

om. BT. 077<m B, Eusebius ; ^wt T.


TI al.

372

THE SOPHIST
STR. Some of them 1 drag down everything from heaven and the invisible to earth, actually grasping rocks and trees with their hands for they lay their hands on all such things and maintain stoutly that that alone exists which can be touched and handled for they define existence and body, or matter, as identical, and if anyone says that anything else, which has no body, exists, they despise him utterly, and will not listen to any other theory than their own. THEAET. Terrible men they are of whom you speak. I myself have met with many of them. STR. Therefore those who contend against them defend themselves very cautiously with weapons derived from the invisible world above, maintaining
;

forcibly that real existence consists of certain ideas

which are only conceived by the mind and have no But the bodies of their opponents, and that body. which is called by them truth, they break up into small fragments in their arguments, calling them, not existence, but a kind of generation combined with motion. There is always, Theaetetus, a tremendous battle being fought about these questions between the two parties.
THEAET. True.
STR. Let us, therefore, get from each party in turn a statement in defence of that which they regard as being. THEAET. How shall we get it ?
STR.
It is

comparatively easy to get

it

from those
their fol-

lowers), who taught that nothing exists except the void. Possibly there is a covert reference to

The atomists (Leucippus, Democritus, and


like Plato,

atoms and
Aristippus

who was,

a pupil of Socrates.

378

PLATO
paov

D TrdvTa

rj[jipa)Tpoi yap' Trapd 8e TOJV el? eXifovrajv fiiq ^aAemoTepov, ICTCD? 8e /cat
dSuvaroi/.

aAA' aJoe

yuot

Sea> So/cet

EAI.

HE.

MaAtcrra

JJLZV,

ei

Trrj
i

&UVCLTOV

rjv,
{JLTj

pyu> /8eAey^CO/066,

TLOVS OLVTOVS TTOICLV

TOVTO

Aoya) 7TOia>iJLi>, VTTOTLdejJievoi vo^iifJLCJTepov avrovs vvv edeXovras av aTTOKpLvaaOai. TO yap o/xoAor) ev Trapa fieXriovaiv TTOV Kvpiwrepov r) TO Trapa

ou TOVTOJV
es

(f>povri^ofjLV t

dAAa

TO 7x6 v. 77

EAI.

34-

HE.

'Qpdorara. KeAeue
i

877

TOU?

fieXrcovs

aot, /cat TO \e\0ev Trap* avrcijv dfiep-

0EAI.
EE.

AeyovTcoy

87)

Qvr\Tov

,a>ov et <j>aaiv zlvai TL.

EAI.

ria)? 8' ou;


crtDjLta

EE.

TOUTO Se ou
Ildj'i;

e/z^fu^oy ojJLoXoyovcrw ;

EAI.

EE.

yc. Tt^eVTes" rt TCOV OVTOJV

247

EAI.

Nat.

EE.

Tt Se;

ifrvxrjv

ov

rrjv [Jiev oiKaiav, rr/v


fjiev

S<?

O.SLKOV (f>acnv efi/at, /cat TTJV


a<f>pova;
EAI.

(j>p6vifjLOV t

rrjv 8e

Tt

ju-r)v;

SE. 'AAA' ov OLKaioo-vvr)?

.ei

/cat

Trapovaia rot-

S74

THE SOPHIST
who
say that
;

it

consists in ideas, for they are peace-

who violently drag down everything into matter, it is more difficult, perhaps even almost impossible, to get it. However, this is the way I think we must deal with them. THEAET. What way ? STR. Our first duty would be to make them really but if this better, if it were in any way possible cannot be done, let us pretend that they are better,
ful folk

but from those

by assuming that they would be willing to answer more in accordance with the rules of dialectic than For the acknowledgement of they actually are. anything by better men is more valid than if made But it is not these men that we by worse men. care about we merely seek the truth. THEAET. Quite right. STR. Now tell them, assuming that they have become better, to answer you, and do you interpret what they say. THEAET. I Will do SO. STR. Let them tell whether they say there is
;

such a thing as a mortal animal. THEAET. Of course they do. STR. And they agree that this is a body with a soul in it, do they not ? THEAET. Certainly. STR. Giving to soul a place among things which
exist
?

THEAET. Yes.
STR.

just

Well then, do they not say that one soul is and another unjust, one wise and another foolish ?

THEAET.
STR.

Of

course.

And do

they not say that each soul becomes


justice,

just

by the possession and presence of

and
375

PLATO
avrr^v avrtov eKaarrjv yiyvzaOai, /cat
rrjr
roji'

cvavricuv

zvavriav ;

0EAI.
HE.
/cat

Nat,

KCL\
[JLrjv

ravra

v[L(f>acriv.
1

'AAAa

TO ye Svvarov rco

rrapayiyveudai

arroyiyveadaL rravrcos efvat rt <f>ijaovcnv. EAI. Oaat fj..v ovv.


OucrTys" ovv SiKOLLoavvrjs /cat (f>povrjaU)s /cat d'AA^? dperrjs /cat raw lvavrLa)v y /cat 817 /cat ev fj ravra zyyiyverai, rrorepov oparov /cat

EE.
rrjs

V eivai (f>aoi rt aurcov


EAI.

rravra aopara^ r) S^eSov ouSev rovra)v ye oparov.


(JLOJV crcDyaa
2

EE.

Tt Se TOJV roiovrcov;

ri

Xeyovcnv

EAI.

Tovro OVKCTL Kara ravra

drroKpivovrai

aVy aAAa r^v rt KKrf}<j9ai,

^Ltev i/JV^v avrrjv So/cetv cr^tcrt oaj/Jid e/cacrrov (frpovrjCTiv oe /cat ra)v a'AAcov

(oy rjptorrjKas, alcr^vvovrai

TO roXfJidv ^
rtavr*

fJLrjoev

rtov

ovro)v

avra

o/xoAoyetv

elvai

SE. c5 t Sa^o)? eatV^Te, / W \ TO yap 9 r}[JLW / ^ i av errzi rovraiv ovo yeyovacrtv avopes "eiev ot ye avra>v vrraproi r /cat auTOSuvaTOt Tat? :, aAAa StaretVot^T' av rrdv o ftr)
>'

Tte'^etv etcrtV, ai?

apa rovro ovoev TO TrapaAe'yet?.

?rav ecrTtV.
EAI.

S^eSov ota biavoovvrai

EE.

ITaAtv roivvv dvepwrtofjiev avrovs' t yap /cat a^JLLKpov eOeXovai ra>v 6vra>v avyxatpelv daa)1

T V ] rep

BT

rai)ra]
3

rd ai;rd

; ;

TO

W.
BT.

raOra BT.
fij/Spej

d^Spes

Bekker

376

THE SOPHIST
the opposite by the possession and presence of the opposite ? THEAET. Yes, they agree to this also. STR. But surely they will say that that which is capable of becoming present or absent exists.

THEAET. Yes, they say that.


STR. Granting, then, that justice and wisdom and virtue in general and their opposites exist, and also,

of course, the soul in which they become present, do they say that any of these is visible and tangible, or that they are all invisible ? THEAET. That none of them is visible, or pretty

Do STR. Now here are some other questions. they say they possess any body ? THEAET. They no longer answer the whole of that They say they believe question in the same way. the soul itself has a sort of body, but as to wisdom and the other several qualities about which you ask, they have not the face either to confess that they have no existence or to assert that they are all bodies. STR. It is clear, Theaetetus, that our men have grown better for the aboriginal sons of the dragon's teeth l among them would not shrink from any such utterance they would maintain that nothing which they cannot squeeze with their hands has any existence at all. THEAET. That is pretty nearly what they believe.
; ;

nearly that.

STR. Then let us question them further for if they are willing to admit that any existence, no
;

and then sowed

who killed a dragon from which sprang fierce warriors Born to be his companions. of the dragon's teeth and of earth, they would naturally be of the earth, earthy.
1

This refers to the story of Cadmus,


its

teeth,

377

PLATO

D [LOLTOV,
eV

^apK6L.

TO ya/D

6771

TOVTOL?

ttUtt /Cat

cKeivoLS ocra e'^et cr%ta ^u/x^ues* yeyo^o'?, et$- o pAeTTOvres a/x^orepa etyat Aeyoucrt, TOVTO avrols
priTeov.
y

ec TO.^ ovv LGOJS ay dTiopotey roLovrov TreirovQaai, cr/coTvet, Trporeu-'O/xeVcuv ap eOeXoiev av Se^ecr^at /cat o/xoAoyetv

S?y

rt

TO
EAI.

6i ;

To

TTolov oij;
ST)
1

EE.

Aeyco

ro

/cat

Aeye, KCU ra^a ela6fJL0a. OTTOLCWQVV riva KKrr]/jtevov

E etV

1 TO TTOICIV erepov OTLOVV Suva/xtv etr' ets ei? TO TraOeiv /cat cr/xt/cpoTaroi-' VTTO TOU

AOTCITOU, /cav et [LOVOV els


klva.i'

aVaf

.,

Tray

TOVTO
co? eariv

T/$e/xat

yap opov opt^ety Ta ovTa,


eTietTiep

OUK aAAo
EAI.

Tt TT-A^v ovvafjLis.

'AAA'

avToi ye

ou/c

e^ovaLV ev ra>

TTapovri TQVTOV fi4\Tiov Aeyetf , oe^ovTaL TOVTO.


HE.
/cat

KaAa)?' tcrcDS yap ay et? vaTepov TUJLLV re TOVTOLS eVepoy ay <f>avirj. Trpos fjiev ovv TOVTOVS
7]/xty

248 TOVTO

eWau#a
ITpo?

^teyeVcu ^I'yo/.toAoy^^e'y.

EAI.

MeVet.
HE.
S'*)

35.

TOL>?

eVe'pou?

tco^ey,

TOU?

et8o)y (f>iAov$'

orv S' 7)//-ty /cat TO,

Trapa

EAI.

TOUT' e'cmu.
Fe'yecrty, T?)y

HE.
Afe'y

Se ovaiav ^copt? TTOU SteAd/xeyot


efc

eTe

>*

"^

yc^P*
1
el'r'

er rts

BT.

i..,

between the process of coming into existence and


itself.

existence

It is difficult to

determine exactly who the

idealists are

whose doctrines are here discussed.

Possibly

378

THE SOPHIST
matter

how

small,

is

incorporeal,
tell

that

is

enough.

what that is which is inherent in the incorporeal and the corporeal alike, and which they have in mind when they say that both exist. Perhaps they would be at a loss for an answer and if they are in that condition, consider whether they might not accept a suggestion if we offered it, and might not agree that the nature of

They

will

then have to

being is as follows. THEAET. What is

it

Speak, and

we

shall soon

know.
STR.
I

suggest that everything which possesses

any power of any kind, either to produce a change in anything of any nature or to be affected even in the least degree by the slightest cause, though it For I be only on one occasion, has real existence. set up as a definition which defines being, that it is-' nothing else than power. THEAET. Well, since they have at the moment
nothing better of their
this.
;

own

to

offer,

they accept

for perhaps later something else may STR. Good As between them occur both to them and to us. and us, then, let us assume that this is for the present

agreed upon and settled. THEAET. It is settled.


STR.

ideas
also.

Then let us go to the others, the friends of and do you interpret for us their doctrines
I will.

THEAET.
STR.

You

distinguish

in

your speech
? l

between
own
earlier

generation and being, do you not


Plato
is

restating or

amending some of

his

beliefs.

379

PLATO
EAI.

Nat.

crwfjiaTi ftef rjfjids yeveaei 81* al<j9r)GO)S Koivaivtlv, Std Aoytoyzou 8e $vxfl ^po? TTJV ovrws are > ovaiav, fjv aet Kara ravra tbaaiiTcos ^X iv

HE.

Kat

yevzuw Se

0EAI.
HE.
*

Oa/>tev

d'AAore aXXcusyap ovv.


S?)

To
VfJLa?

Se

KOLvajveiv, a> TTOLVTCOV cLpiaroi, ri

5f

eV

dfjufioiv \iiyeiv (frajfjiev;

ap' ov TO vvv

?ra/)

0EAI.
HE.

To
YldO'ijfxa
r)

Trot^/xa

er SiW/zetas rtvo?
1

raiv Trpos"
co

aAA^Aa ^vviovrcov yiyvo^vov. rdx* ovv, Seairrjre, avrajv rrjv Trpos raura aTTOKpiaiv ov
EAI.

ov KaraKoveLS, eyoj O tcrco? 8ta ovvr^Qeiav. TtV ovv 8^7 \eyovo~i \6yov; EE. Oi) avyxajpovaiv T^LIV TO vvv 817 prjdev TTQOS TOVS yr]yevels ovaias Tre'pt.
fjiev

EAI.

HE.
Trapfj
r)

To Tfolov; 'I/cavov eOe/Jiev


TOV
Tracr^etv
r)

opov TTOV TOJV OVTCJV, OTCLV Bpdv /cat Trpos" TO

TCO

0EAI.
HE.

Nat.

or) raura ro8e \lyovo~iv, OTI yzveoei fJLTOTL TOV TfO-OyjElV KCL\ 7TOL6LV OVvd{JLCOS, TTpOS 8e oucrtW TOVTOJV ovSeTepov TJ\V $VVCL}JLW ap/xdrretv

Upos

EAI.

QVKOVV Xeyov&i
IT/DOS'

TL;

HE.

D aura>v
yovai

ert
T-TJV

o ye XCKTGOV TJ/JLLV ort Sed^Lte^a Trap' TrvBeoOai aa<f>OTpov el Trpoao/jioXo


ifjv)(r)v

/JLCV

yiyvaiaKeiv, TTJV 8' ovcriav

380

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. Yes,
STR.

we

do.

say that with the body, by means of perception, we participate in generation, and with the soul, by means of thought, we participate in real being, which last is always unchanged and the

And you

same, whereas generation


times.

is

different

at

different

THEAET. Yes, that is what we say. STR. But, most excellent men, how shall
this participation
it

we

define
?

which you attribute to both not that of which we were just speaking ?
THEAET.
STR.

Is

some

What is that ? passive or active condition arising out of power which is derived from a combination

of elements. Possibly, Theaetetus, you do not hear their reply to this, but I hear it, perhaps, because I am used to them.

THEAET.
STR.

now

then, that they say ? to us what we said just to the aboriginal giants about being.
is it,

What

They do not concede

THEAET.
STR.

What was
set

it ?

as a satisfactory sort of definition of being, the presence of the power to act or be acted upon in even the slightest degree.

We

up

THEAET. Yes.

they say generation power of acting and of being acted upon, but that neither power is connected with
participates in the

STR.

It is in reply to this that

being.
is there not something in that ? something to which we must reply that we still need to learn more clearly from them whether they agree that the soul knows and that being is known.

THEAET.

And

STR. Yes,

381

PLATO
TOVTO ye. TO yiyvt*HJKW rj ro TO fj,ev T) TTOLrjfjia r) rrdOos rj dufiorepov; <f>a.T TravrdfTaaiv ovSerepov TJ TrdOrjfjLa, TO Se Odrepov; ov^erepov rovrcuv {JLeraXafjipdvew ;
0EAI.
HE.

Oa<7t

[Jirjv

Tt Se;

0EAI.

yap av TOI?
HE.

A^Aoi' ai? ouSeVepoi' ovSerepov 1 efjirrpocrdev Aeyoiev.


rroielv Tt,

ro8e ye, 2 c6? TO TO ytyvtocr/co/^et'ov dvayKalov av ^upfiaivei Trao-^etv. TT)V ovatav S^ /caTa rovrov ytyvcocrACO^u-eVryv UTTO T^S* oorov ytyvtoovceTcu, /caTa roaovrov Sta TO 7rdax LV ) o <j>a<H-V OVK dv yevevQai TO rjpfJLOVV.

Mai>0avar

L7r ep

eWat

0EAI.
HE.

Tt 8e

TT/JO?

Ato?;

to?

aA^^cDs

Kivf]<Jiv

Kal

^wrjv Kal ifjv)(r)V Kal <j>povr]crii> rj paSUos TTeL rat TravTeAdi? ovTt /x^ Trapelvai, /Lt^Se ^P' auTo 249 (f>poviv, dAAa aeuvov Kal ayiov, vovv OVK e ecrTO? zlvai; 0EAI. Aetvov /xeW dV, a) ^eVe, Aoyoy
fJiV.

HE.

0EAI.
HE.

'AAAa ya Kat 770)?; 'AAAa ravra

juev

dfi(f)6rpa

evovr*

avrw

Ae'yojitev,

ou /x^ eV ^v^f] ye

(f>ijao/jiV

avro ^

avrd;
EAI.

HE.

Kat TtV aV eVepov e'^ot rpoTrov; 'AAAa 8^Ta yow jLtei' /cat /cat
. . .

\ty<nev

first

attributed to Theaetetus by

Heindorf.
2

r65e

7 e]

r6 5^

TO 5^

B.

382

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. They certainly assent to that.
STR. Well then, do you say that knowing or being known is an active or passive condition, or both ? Or that one is passive and the other active ? Or that neither has any share at all in either of the

two

THEAET. Clearly they would say that neither has any share in either for otherwise they would be contradicting themselves. this at least is true, that if STR. I understand to know is active, to be known must in turn be
; ;

passive.

Now
is

being, since

theory,
is

known by the
moved,

known,

it is, according to this intelligence, in so far as it since it is acted upon, which

we say cannot be the


state of rest.

case with that which

is

in a

THEAET. Right. STR. But for heaven's sake, shall we let ourselves easily be persuaded that motion and life and soul and mind are really not present to absolute being, that it neither lives nor thinks, but awful and holy, devoid of mind, is fixed and immovable ? THEAET. That would be a shocking admission to

make, Stranger. STR. But shall we


not life ? THEAET.
STR.

say

that

it

has mind, but

How

can

we ?

But do we say that both of these exist in it, and yet go on to say that it does not possess them
in a soul
?

THEAET. But
STR.

how

else can

Then

shall

we

it possess them ? say that it has mind

and

383

PLATO
l
,

OLKLVrjTOV fJLVTOi

TO TTapOLTTaV

fJufiV)(OV

OV

eCTToVat;
EAI.

Hdvra
ovra.

e/xotye d'Aoya ravr* etvat 4>aiverai.

EE.

Kat TO
c

KLVovfjievov or) /cat KIVTJCTIV

auy^tup^-

Teov

cos

EAI.

Do)?

8*

ov;
8* ovv, Jj

SE.

Eu/^atWt

0eatV^Te, aKivrJTWV TC

OVTCOV vovv /X7]8e^t rrepi jjirjoevos eivai 0EAI.


HE.

Kat

JU,T)V

eav av </>epo/zeva /cat /cat rovra)


ra>^ ovra>v

ra>

Aoya

rovro
0EAI.
HE.

e'/c

To

/card

raurd
1

/cat

ajcravrcos /cat Trept

TO

So/cet o*ot ^aj/ots CTTacreco? yevecrOai, rror*


EAI.

av;

Oi58a/xas'.
8';

HE.

Tt

dVeu TOUTCOV
/cat

vow Kadopas

ovra.

rj

vo^vov av
0EAI.
HE.

OTTOVOVV;

"H/CtCTTa.
rravrl Aoya>

Kat fjirjv rrpos ye rovrov

av eVtCTTTu.T
0EAI.
EE.

<)6vr(nv T

vovv

icr%vpir)Tai rrepi rivos orrrjovv.


lL(f)6opa ye.
^>tAocro^>a) /cat

Tracra, cus

ravra fJiaXiara ravra fjLijre rcuv ev TroAAd /cat Ta e't'Sry AeyovTCOV TO nav iarr\KOs rj re av rwv oiTTOoexecrOai, Travra^f] TO ov KLVOVVTOJV
To) 8^
1

COLKCV, avdyKt] Std

tx

"

a dd. Schleiermacher.

384

THE SOPHIST
life

and

soul, but,

although endowed with soul,

is

absolutely immovable ? THEAET. All those things


STR.

And
is

it

seem to me absurd. must be conceded that motion and that

which
STR.
is

THEAET.

moved exist. Of course. Then the result


is

is,

Theaetetus, that
in

if

there

no motion, there anything anywhere.

no mind

anyone about

THEAET. Exactly. STR. And on the other hand, if we admit that all things are in flux and motion, we shall remove mind itself from the number of existing things by this

theory also. THEAET. HOW SO ? STR. Do you think that sameness of quality or nature or relations could ever come into existence without the state of rest ? THEAET. Not at all. STR. What then ? Without these can you see how mind could exist or come into existence any-

where

By no means. yet we certainly must contend by every argument against him who does away with knowledge
THEAET.
STR.

And

or reason or mind and then assertion about anything.

makes any dogmatic

THEAET. Certainly. STR. Then the philosopher, who pays the highest honour to these things, must necessarily, as it seems, because of them refuse to accept the theory of those who say the universe is at rest, whether as a unity
or in
listen

many
to

forms, and must also refuse utterly to those who say that being is universal

N 2

385

PLATO
6

TO rfapdnav aKovew, aXXa Kara


ev^^v, oaa aKivr^ra

TTJV

TOJV

TTGLLoaiv

/cat /ce/ctKxy/xeVa,

TO 6v

re

/cat

TO TraV ^vvafKJiOTepa Aeyetv.


EE.

EAI.

36.

'AA^^eCTrara. Tt ovv ; ap' OVK

7niKaJs

TJor)

fJLe9a Trepii\r}<l)VCLi TOJ

Aoyaj ro 6V;

EAI. HE.

Hdw

}JLV OVV.

Ba/?at jiteW av apa, a> 0eatT?]Te, cos" 8oKovjjLv vvv CLVTOV yvaxjeoOai Trepl Trjv aTropiav

T7S

0EAI.
EE.
T

Ha)? au

/cat rt
oi)/c

TOUT'
ivvoels 6Vt
(j>aLv6fjLe9a

n
TT]

/^a/capte,
TfXeiarr^

dyvota
Aeyetv
0EAI.

7Tpl O.VTOV,
S'

Se Tt

^/xtt'

avTOt?;

'E/xot

yovv
ST)

oirr)

au

XeXrjdafJLev OVTOJS

ov rrdvv
EE.
2/C07761

aa(f>6(JTpOV,

TCLVTCL

VVV

250 ofJioXoyovvTes Stfcatcos" av eTrepcuT^^et/iev ivat, TO a?;TOt TOTe r]pajTa)[jLV TOVS XeyovTas
OepfJiov /cat ifjv%p6v.

TTO.V

EAI.

EE.

Ilota; VTrofj^vrjcrov fji. /cat Tretpaao/^at ye Spav riavu />tev ouv


ere

TOVTO, IptoTujv
Tt /Cat
EAI.

/ca^avrep e/cetVou? ToVe, t^a

SE.

Etev 8^,
IIcD?

KIVTI<JIV /cat aTacriv

ap*

oi)/c

evav-

TtcoTaTa Aeyet? a
EAI.

yap ou;

386

THE SOPHIST
he must quote the children's prayer, 1 " all and in motion/' and must say that immovable things being and the universe consist of both.
motion
;

THEAET. Very true.


STR.

Do we

last a pretty

not, then, seem to have attained at good definition of being ?


!

THEAET. Certainly. I think we are STR. But dear me, Theaetetus now going to discover the difficulty of the inquiry about being. THEAET. What is this again ? What do you mean ? STR. My dear fellow, don't you see that we are now densely ignorant about it, but think that we are saying something worth while ? THEAET. I think so, at any rate, and I do not at all understand what hidden error we have fallen into.
STR. Then watch more closely and see whether, if we make these admissions, we may not justly be asked

the same questions we asked a while ago of those who said the universe was hot and cold. 2

What questions ? Remind me. and I will try to do this by Certainly questioning you, as we questioned them at the time. 1 hope we shall at the same time make a little progress.
THEAET.
STR.
;

THEAET. That
STR.
rest

is

right.
;

Very well, then you say that motion and are most directly opposed to each other, do
?

you not
1

THEAET.

Of course.

Nothing further seems to be known about this prayer. Stallbaum thought the reference was to a game in which the "
children said Baa dKivrjTa nal KeKivrjfj.^a things be moved."
2
el'?;,

may all unmoved


387

Of. 242

D above.

PLATO
HE.
/cat

Kat firjv KaTpov;

elvai ye 6p,oia)s

<f>f]S

dfJL^orepa aura

HE.

EAI. Oi7/ut T

yap ovv.

Apa KivelaOai Ae'yeov d/x^orepa /cat e/cdVepoi',


OvSajLtcus".
1

orav etvat <jvy%a)pr}s ;


EAI.

HE.

'AAA' ecrra^at

cr^jLtatVets

Aeya>v aura d/

re/oa etvat; EAI. Kat TTO)S; HE. Tpirov apa


,

rrjs

Trapa ravra TO ov cv rfl re crracrtv /cat Tr^i/ , CFV\Xaf3a>v /cat aVtStuy avrwv npos rr\v ovaias KOivwviav, OVTOJS etvat TrpocreiTres
co?

iW

e/cetVou

EAI. t^Syvewo/^ev cos dA^^ajs rplrov O.TTO[j,avTvecrOaL TI TO ov, OTO.V /ctV^atv /cat crrdatv eti^at
1

HE.

Ou/c

ct/oa

/ctVrycrtS'

/cat

crrdcrts'

ecrrt

a^oTepov TO
EAI.

ov, dAA' erepov ST^ rt TOifrtuv. "Eot/cev.


(fivaiv

HE.

Kara r^v CLVTOV


Hot

apa TO ov

oz/re

OVT
EAI. HE.
817

^PT)

TT]v

f3ovX6fj,Vov
EAI.

evapyeV ri

Stdvotar ert rpeVetv ?7ept aurou Trap' eaurco

Dot yap;
yap
TL

HE.

D
rovTo ; 388

el Ot)u.at jLtev ovSa/jLoore Irt paoiov. TO 7T6U? OU^ 6(TT^/CV;

ecrros" Trtos- ov/c

au

/ctvetrat;

TO

6V

^TCO^ dfj,(f>oTpa)V ava7T(f)avTai.

y SvvaTOV ovv

THE SOPHIST
STR. And yet you say that both and each of them equally exist ? THEAET. Yes, I do. STR. And in granting that they exist, do you mean to say that both and each are in motion ? THEAET. By no means. STR. But do you mean that they are at rest, when you say that both exist ? TH-EAET. Of course not. STR. Being, then, you consider to be something else in the soul, a third in addition to these two, inasmuch as you think rest and motion are embraced by it and since you comprehend and observe that they participate in existence, you therefore said that
;

they are. THEAET.

Eh ?

We

of being as
STR.

really do seem to have a vague vision some third thing, when we say that
are.

motion and rest

is not motion and rest in combination, but something else, different from them.

Then being

THEAET. Apparently.
STR. According to its own nature, then, being is neither at rest nor in motion. THEAET. You are about right. STR. What is there left, then, to which a man can still turn his mind who wishes to establish within himself any clear conception of being ? THEAET. What indeed ?

nothing left, I think, to which he For if a thing is not in motion, it must surely be at rest and again, what is not at rest, must surely be in motion. But now we find that Is being has emerged outside of both these classes. that possible, then ?
STR.

There

is

can turn

easily.

389

PLATO
EAI.

Ildvrcov Liev ovv dovvarwrarov

HE.

ToSf rolvvv

Livrjadrjvai OIKOLIOV CTTL rourot?.

EAI.

T6

TTOloV;

HE.

"On

rov

Lir)

ovros epairrjOevres Tovvofta

e</'

o Tt TTore Set
EAI.

(frepeiv, Trdar)

avvea^o^eda

E\

HE.

ITa;? yap ov; Ma>v ovv eV eAarrovt


\

Trept TO ov; EAI. 'Ejitot jtteV,

rtvt vuv ecr/zev anropia


et

to

^eW,

Sfvarov etVetv, ev

TrAetoi-'t

(fxiLvoiieOa.
/ 1\

HE. Touro /zev roLvvv evrav9a Keiadat SirjTTOpir)/ 0.\C;\>>>/ 776t07] OG ^ ICTOU TO T6 OI-' /Cat TO jUT) O/^ ttTTO fJLVOV yw eATrt? 7]S^ /ca^' arrep av ptas" jueTetA^aTOi', auTcop ddrepov ctVe dfAvftpoTepov etrc crafiecrTepov KCLL ddrepov ovrtos dvoKpaLveaOaL' KOI dvoL(j)a,Lvr)Tai, 251 eav au fjirj^erepov t'Setv SvvwjjieOa, rov yovv \oyov oloi re d)fjiv ^VTTp^TTearara. Stcocrojue^a oTrrjTrep dv

\\\1\5

OUTOJS
HE.

d[JL(j)OiV

afJLCL.

EAI.

KaAcD?.
81]

Aeyto/zey

/ca^'

ovnvd

TTOTC rpoTrov TroAAot?

ovojitacrt

EAI.

TauTov TOVTO CKaarore Trpoaayopevo^ev. Otov S^ Tt; -rra/oaSety/xa etVe.


Aeyo/xev dvdpuiTTOV OTJ TTOV 77oAA' aTTa rd re xpcbfjiara 7n(f)povrs aura)

37
KCLI TO,

HE.

eTTOVOfJid^ovres,

or^/jLara KCLL fAeyetfr} /cat /ca/cta? /cat dperds, ev ot? 7rao"t /cat erepoL? [J.vp{ois ov i^ovov dvBpcoirov f >\ f '^^ x avrov eivai (pajjiev, aAAa KCLI ayauov /cat ercpa
t

<'/i<

a7Tipa,
ev

/cat

eKaarov

TciAAa 817 /caTa UTrofle^tei'ot TraAtv

TOV ayToV Aoyoi' ovrco?

a^To TroAAa

/cat

TroAAot?

390

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. No, nothing could be more impossible. STR. Then there is this further thing which we

ought to remember.
THEAET.
STR.

What

is it ?

That when we were

asked

to

what the

appellation of not-being should be applied, we were Do you remember ? in the greatest perplexity. THEAET. Of course I do. STR. Well, then, are we now in any less perplexity

we are, if possible, in even greater. STR. This point, then, let us put down definitely But since being and as one of complete perplexity. not-being participate equally in the perplexity, there
now at last some hope that as either of them emerges more dimly or more clearly, so also will the see other emerge. If, however, we are able to neither of them, we will at any rate push our discussion through between both of them at once as creditably
is

about being ? THEAET. It seems to me, stranger, that

as

we

can.

THEAET. Good.
STR. Let us, then, explain how we come to be constantly calling this same thing by many names. Please give an THEAET. What, for instance ?

example.
STR.

speak of man, you know, and give him we attribute to him additional designations colours and forms and sixes and vices and virtues, and in all these cases and countless others we say

We

many

not only that he is man, but we say he is good and numberless other things. So in the same way every single thing which we supposed to be one, we treat as many and call by many names.

391

PLATO
0EAI.
HE.

'AXr)9rj Ae'yet?.
oljj.a.1,

"QQev ye,

Tot9 re veois

/cat

rcuv yepov-

ra>v rot? oi/rtfta$ecrt Qo'ivr\v TrapecrKevaKa/jiev

evOvs

yap aVTtAa/3ea#at
re 77oAAa eV
/cat

Travri Trpoxetpov to?

dSvvaTOV ra
/cat
877

TO ev TroAAa eTvat,

TTOU
}

XaLpovcriv OVK eVovTe.? aya^ot' Aeyetv av9pa>7rov C aAAa TO /zev dya^oy dyaOov, rov Se avdpanrov

avOpumov.
,

evrvyxdveis

ydp,

c5

TroAAa/ct? TO, TOLOLVTOL

ecrTTovSaKocrw, eviore

pois dv0pa)7TOis, /cat UTTO rrevias rrjs


(f>p6vr)<JLV

KTij(JtDS

TI /cat 7rdcrcro(f)ov oto/xeVot?

ra roiavra rcdav/jiaKocn, /cat TOVTO avro dvqvprjKevai.

0EAI.
EE.
1

Ilavi;

jitev

ow.
i^u.ti'

"Iva TOLWV Trpos aTravra?

o Aoyo?

Tous 7TO)7TOT

rrpl oucrta?

/cat /cat

oTiovv StaAe^eVTa?,
77/309

COTOJ

/cat

TT/OOS"

TOUTOU?

TOW? aAAov?,
ej^

ocrot? efJLTrpocrdev StetAey/xe^a,

Ta

^w

a*?

0EAI.
HE.

Ta

TTOta
ju/j^Te

IloTepov

T-^V ovcriav /cti^cret /cat

aAAo aAAaj xSey jLSevt dAA'


cu?
jJLLKra

ovra

/cat

Acov ovrcos

avrd ev Tot?
1

Trap' 77/xtv

Aoyot?

^ Trdvra ets Ta^Toy


vajvelv dXXrjXois;

vvdyo){JiV a)$
fJiev,

Sward
fjiifj

eT
cS

^ rd

rd 8e

rovrwv,

392

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. True.

And it is in this way, I fancy, that we have provided a fine feast for youngsters and for old men whose learning has come to them late in life for example, it is easy enough for anyone to grasp the notion that the many cannot possibly be one, nor the one many, and so, apparently, they take pleasure in saying that we must not call a man good, but must call the good good, and a man man. I fancy, Theaetetus, you often run across people who take such matters seriously sometimes they are elderly men whose poverty of intellect makes them admire such quibbles, and who think this is a perfect mine of wisdom they have discovered. 1 THEAET. Certainly. STR. Then, to include in our discussion all those who have ever engaged in any talk whatsoever about being, let us address our present arguments to these men as well as to all those with whom we were conversing before, and let us employ the form of
STR.
;

questions.

THEAET.
STII.

Shall

What are the arguments ? we attribute neither being

to rest

and

motion, nor any attribute to anything, but shall we in our discussions assume that they do not mingle and cannot participate in one another ? Or shall we gather all things together, believing that they are capable of combining with one another ? Or are some capable of it and others not ? Which of these
the possibility of all were Antisthenes, Euthydemus, and Dionysodorus. The two last are probably those referred to as old men whose learning came late
satirized
1

Those are here


identical

who deny
Such

except

predication.

in life.

393

PLATO
E
eaiTr)T,
EAI.

TI

TTOT'

aV
757763

avrovs 77poatpetcr$at
CLVTCOV

(f)ij

'EtO

Zl>

OV<!)V

IO)

7TOO?

TGLvra
HE.

Tt

ow

ou

/ca$' eV aVo/c/otyo/zei'o?

e</>'

eKacrrov

ra
EAI.

HE.

Kaf.

Tt^iOjiteV

ye OLVTOVS Aeyetv,

et

fiov\i,

et? /x^SeV.

oi)/cow Kivvjcrls re ACCU crracris

rov ovcrias;

252

EAI.

Ou yap
8e';
3
;

oir.
ftry

HE.

Tt

ecrrat irorepov avrajv ovaia.?


ecrrat.
17

rrpoa-

KOLVOJVOVV
EAI.

Ot)/<

avdarara yiyovzv,
TO,

ravrrj ye TT^ crup-o/xoAoyta TTOLVTCL a>? .oiKV, afjia re rcuv TO Trai^ KIVOVVTOJV /cat rcov a>? eV icrTOLvrajv /cat ocrot /car'
Tcr^i)

HE.

6Wa
,

/cara rai'ra cbcravrtjos e^ovra etvat

aer
ol

TTOVTCS
fjii'

yap OVTOL TO ye efmt

Tvpocr-

ovTcos /ctyetcr^at Ae'yo^res', ot Se

EAI.

Ko//,t3^
/xi]v

jLtev

HE.

Kat

/cat

ocrot

rore

/ze^

^WTiBeaari ra

Trdvra, rore Se Statpouatv, etre et? ev /cat e' evo? a,7TLpa etre et? Tre'pa? e^ovra aroi^eta 8tatpoi;aevoi
/cat

TOUTO ndaxji yiyv6[i.vov ,


1

eV rovrajv avvriQzvres, o/xota9 /xev e'ctv ev jLte'pet o/zotco? Se /cat eay act,
otiv
.

Tt

ftricei/'w;

Badham.
2

attributed to the Stranger by

/caXws \tyeis attributed to


irpoffKOivuvovv

Theaetetus by Badham.

TrpoffKOLvuvdv

BT.

394

THE SOPHIST
alternatives,

Theaetetus, should

we

say

is

their

choice
STR.

THEAET.

cannot answer these questions for them.


separately

and see
STR.

Then why did you not answer each w hat the result was in each case ?
r

good suggestion. you please, assume that they say first that nothing has any power to combine with anything else. Then motion and rest will have no

THEAET.

And

let us, if

share in being, will they THEAET. No.

STR. Well, then, will either of

them

be, if

it

has

no share in being

THEAET. It Will not.


STR. See how by this admission everything is overturned at once, as it seems the doctrine of those who advocate universal motion, that of the

partisans of unity

and

rest,

and that of the men who

teach that
invariable

all

and

existing things are distributed into For all of these everlasting kinds.

use of being as an attribute. One party says " that the universe " is in motion, another that it " is "
at rest.

make

THEAET. Exactly.
STR. And further, all who teach that things combine at one time and separate at another, whether infinite elements combine in unity and are derived

from unity or

elements separate and then of whether they say that these changes take place successively or without interrupfinite

unite, regardless

395

PLATO
Kara iravra ravra Xeyoizv av ovSev, etWp
cart
0EAI.
HE.

"En

TOLVVV av avrol Trdvrtov /caTayeAacrro*

rov Aoyov oi firj^ev etovres KOLVOJVLO. Tra^yLtaro? erepov Odrepov Trpocrayopevcw. @EAI. Da)?; " elvai " TTOL' Travra HE. Ta> re ^ ~ " 77ep6 - ct avay/ca^ovrat Kat TOJ c< cot? /cat rco rav
> x *

rara ^rioiev

A<ra^' ai'ro /cat fivpiois Tpot,s t ovres c'ipyeaQai /cat /r?] crvvaTTTeiv eV rot? Aoyot? OZ'AC aAAcov Seo^rat ro)v e^eAey^ovrcui', aAAa TO Aeyo/xevov oiKoOev ror 77oAe u,to^ /cat e

TO)

tc

'

cro/xei^ov

e^ovTe?, euros' VTrofiOeyyofJLevov cjcnrep rov


Trepifiepovres det
KojLtt7J!
S',

aronov FjVpvi<Aca

EAI.
EE.

Tt

Aeyet? OJJLOIOV re KOI d aV Trdvra aAA^Aot? e'cD/zev S


/zev otos
1
1

0EAI.
EE.

Touro
Ila)?;

re /cdyco StaAuetv.
3
aT^rii)

0EAI.

"Ort

ActV^crts

re

77-avraTracrtv to-ratr*

/cat crrdcns

av TrdXiv avrr) KWOITO,

eiTrep eVtyt-

eV
EE.

'AAAa

^v TOUTO ye TTOU rat? jLteytcrratS" aVdy/ctV^crtV

re

loraaBai

/cat

ardcriv

EAI.

Hois'

yap ow;
$r) JJLOVOV

EE.

To

rpirov

XOLTTOV.

EAI.

Nat.
1

^uer/otez'] fJierioL^ev 2 TWJ/ fiXXw^ #\Xwj> ;


8

BTW.
T.

re]

B 7 e BTW.

396

THE SOPHIST
tion,
if

would be talking nonsense in there is no intermingling. THEAET. Quite right. STR. Then, too, the very men

all

these doctrines,

who

forbid us to

anything by another name because it participates in the effect produced by another, would be made most especially ridiculous by this doctrine. THEAET. HOW SO ? STR. Because they are obliged in speaking of any" from " " apart/' thing to use the expressions to be/' the rest/' "by itself/' and countless others; they are powerless to keep away from them or avoid
call

and therefore working them into their discourse there is no need of others to refute them, but, as the saying goes, their enemy and future opponent
;

of their own household whom they always carry about with them as they go, giving forth speech from within them, like the wonderful Eurycles. 1 THEAET. That is a remarkably accurate illustration. STR. But what if we ascribe to all things the power of participation in one another ? THEAET. Even I can dispose of that assumption.
is

STR.

How ?

THEAET. Because motion itself would be wholly at rest, and rest in turn would itself be in motion, if these two could be joined with one another.
STR. But surely this at least is most absolutely rest be in impossible, that motion be at rest and

motion
STR.

THEAET.

Of course. Then only the

third possibility

is left.

THEAET. Yes.
1

fifth

Eurycles was a ventriloquist and soothsayer of the century, cf. Aristophanes, Wasps, 1019.

397

PLATO
E
38.
HE.

Kat
r)

prjr

eV
?}

ye'

rt

TOVTWV
eWAety,
rd,

avaySe

rrdvra
0EAI.
EE.
eus

/zrjSev

rd

/tev

Kat

jar)v

yap oi>; ra ye

St'o

a8uvarov evpeOrj.

EAI.

Nat. 1
Has- a/aa o flovXo^evos opO&s a
TplOJl'

HE.

TO XoiTTCV TO)V
EAI.

Ko/xtS^ ftev
Si)

HE.

"Ore

ra

/xev

eWAet TOWTO

Spat',

ra
irj.

'

ov,
KO.L

253

O"X e ^^ y

ofov ra ypa/^^tara TrcrrovOor


t

av

yap
TO,

Kiva)v ra aev avap/jLOGTcl TTOV TTpos a'AA^Aa, Se ^urap/torret. EAI. Tla)? S' ou; HE. Ta Se ye ^cov^e^ra Sta^epovra)? TO>^ aAAwv otov Secr/xo? Sta Travrcoi-' K'e^a/3i7/<:ev, ojcrre ctVeu rivo? t' apfjiorreiv KCLI TOJV aAAcov erepov
EAI.

HE.
vc.lv }
7}

Kat /xaAa ye. ITa? ovv otSet^ oTrota oTrotot?


Texi'^S".
IIota.9;

Sward

KOLVOJ-

rexvrjs Set ra) [jLcXXovri Spa^ LKCLVOJS

aura;

EAI.

HE.
EAI.

Try?

ypOLfJifJLCLTlK'YJS.

HE.

Tt Se;
re

(f>96yyov$ ap'
[Jievovs

KOL Trept rou? rdiv oetov ou^ OVTOJS; 6 ^ev rovs

o Se

/XT)

/cat />tr) re^vr^v e ^urtet? CL/JLOVOOS:

EAI.

Oura)?.
Heindorf;
evpeOijvai

BT

fvpeOfyai'

398

THE SOPHIST
And certainly one of these three must be either all things will mingle with one another, or none will do so, or some will and others will
STR.
;

true

not.

THEAET.
STR.

Of course. And certainly

the

first

two were found

to

be

impossible.

THEAET. Yes.
STR. Then everybody who wishes to answer correctly will adopt the remaining one of the three
possibilities.

THEAET. Precisely.

Now since some things will commingle and STR. others will not, they are in much the same condition as the letters of the alphabet; for some of these do not fit each other, and others do.
THEAET.
STR.

to a greater degree than the others, run through them all as a bond, so that without one of the vowels the other letters cannot be joined one to another. THEAET. Certainly. STR. Now does eveiybody know which letters can Or does he who is to join join with which others ? them properly have need of art ? THEAET. He has need of art.
STR. STR.

Of course. And the vowels,

What

art

THEAET.

The
is

art of

grammar.

not the same true in connexion with high and low sounds ? Is not he who has the art to know the sounds which mingle and those which do not, musical, and he who does not know unmusical ? THEAET. Yes.

And

399

PLATO
HE.

Kat Kara

ra>v dXXajv

Br)

rzyy&v Kal
"i
v

roiavra
0EAI.
HE.
rp
1

evptjao/jiev " erepa. TT <?> ov ; 11 a;? o


/

o. >

>

o.

CTTZib-rj

/cat

ra

~\

"i

yevr] rrpos aAArjAa

Kara

ravra

KCCI

e^etv ca/zoAoyr)/<:a/x^, a/j' ou /zer TCMOJ avayKalov Sta ra)v Aoycov Tropzverov 6p9a>s /XffAAovra Set^etv m>ta TTOLOIS vel TOJV j'va)i> Kal TTola aAA^Aa ou Se^erat; 9 1 V > / > / O \ O \ arr avr et avv.)(ovT -^ctt ota TTCLVTOIV 01)
fti^etos
'

e&TLV, ware uv^iyvvoQcLi Svvara eivai, Kal TraXiv cv rat? Statpecrecrtv, el (H* 6'Acov erepa TTJS' 3tatpecrectJS'

atrta;

0EAI.

Hco? yap OUK


HE.

eVto-TT]/^^? Set, /cat cr^eSov


aj

yc

tcrco? r^s" fteytcrr?]?;

39.

TtV ouv au
r)

7rpo(Tpov[jLV,

0eat-

rr)T, ravr^v;

TTpos Ato? eXaBofiev


eTTLGTTJfJLrjV,

et? TT^V TCOV

v e/^Trecrcrres

Kal KLvSvvevouev TTporepov aviqvpriKevcLi rov

EAI.

HE.

To

efSo? erepov rjyijaaaOai.

/card yeVry 8iatpetcr^at /cat ft^Te raurov erepov ov ravrov fjLo>v

^re

ov

rfjs SiaXeKTLKrjs (frtjcrofjiev eTncrr'rju'r]? et^at; EAI. Nat, (f)tj(JOfJLV.

HE.

QVKOVV 6 ye rovro

Std TioAAcuF, evo?

Starera/zeV^v erepa? aAA^Acov ^770 ftta?


/cat jittW

Sui/aro? Spav fj^iav toeav t<darov KCIUCVOV ^coptV, rravrrj t'/cavco? Stata^averat, /cat TroAAd?

ea)6ev
l'

TrepiexuiJLevas,

au

Si' 6'Aojv 77oAAa>i' ev eVt ^W7]/i/>tn7^, /cat


'

Wagner
400

(rvj>tx

Ta

TCLVT'

BTW.

THE SOPHIST
STR.

And we
Of

shall find similar conditions, then,

in all the other arts

and processes which are devoid

course. since we have agreed that the classes or genera also commingle with one another, or do not commingle, in the same way, must not he possess some science and proceed by the processes of reason who is to show correctly which of the classes
STR.

of art ? THEAET.

Now

harmonize with which, and which reject one another, and also if he is to show whether there are some elements extending through all and holding them together so that they can mingle, and again, when they separate, whether there are other universal
causes of separation ? THEAET. Certainly he needs science, and perhaps even the greatest of sciences.

Then, Theaetetus, what name shall we give ? Or, by Zeus, have we unwittingly stumbled upon the science that belongs to free men and perhaps found the philosopher while we were
STR.

to this science

looking for the sophist ? THEAET. What do you mean ? STR. Shall we not say that the division of things by classes and the avoidance of the belief that the same class is another, or another the same, belongs to the science of dialectic ? THEAET. Yes, we shall. STR. Then he who is able to do this has a clear perception of one form or idea extending entirely through many individuals each of which lies apart, and of many forms differing from one another but included in one greater form, and again of one form evolved by the union of many wholes, and of many

401

PLATO
E
TToXXas ^copt? Trdvrr} StojpioyzeVas" TOUTO S* eartv, re Koivcovelv e/cacrra Swarat /cat 07777 [Atj,

Kara yevos IrrioraaBai.


0EAI.
HE.

YlaVTCLTTaOl fJLV OVV

'AAAd

fjirjv

TO ye OLaXeKTiKOV OVK aXXco Sa>ra> Kadapaj$ re KO.L St/catco? rjv


SOIT^ rt?;

EAI.

TIco?

yap av aAAa)
7}

EE.
/cat

Tov
/cat

jLtet*

<{)iX6cro(f)OV

ev TOLOVTOJ

nvl

TOTTOJ

vvv

eVetra

dvi>pri<jo[jLi>,

cav erepov re TOUTOU.

254

/^ev

^aAevrov eVapytD? /cat rovrov, r rov cro^torou ^aXeTrorrjs rj


EAI.

r\

EE.

Ha;?; '0 ftev aVoSiSpacr/ctoi'


Tpi-flf}

et? TT)V

rou

/XT)

ovros

cr/coretFOT^ra,
cr/coretro/''

irpoaaTTTOfjievos avrrjs, Sid TO


Karavofjcrcn, ^aAeTros"

ro> TOTTOU

EAI.

"Eot/cev.

EE.

'0 Se ye

>

<^>tAo<7O<^os

rr]

row ovros aet


TO.

Trpocr/cetyLte^os' t'Sea,

Sid TO XafjiTrpov av rrjs

V7Trrjs o&OrjvaL'

yap

B TroAAojv
opcovTa
EAI.

fax?)? o'/^uaTa /capTepeiv vrpo? TO

dSwaTa. Kat ravra

ei/co? 02)^ rjTrov e/ceiVay ovrcos

Ou/cow Trepi /zev rovrov /cat Ta^a a aa^eWepov, dv ert /^ouAo/zeVois 7] Se TO o-o<>tcrTou 7701; SrAov co? ou/c
EE.
1

eVia/cei/ro

O.VTOV

402

THE SOPHIST
forms
entirely

apart

and

separate.

This

is

the

knowledge and

ability to distinguish

by

classes

how

individual things can or cannot be associated with one another.

THEAET. Certainly
STR.

it is.

surely, I suppose, will not grant the art of dialectic to any but the man who pursues philosophy in purity and righteousness.

But you

it be granted to anyone else ? some region like this that we shall always, both now and hereafter, discover the philosopher, if we look for him he also is hard to see clearly, but the difficulty is not the same in his

THEAET.
STR.

How
it

could
in

Then

is

case and that of the sophist.

THEAET.
STR.

How

do they

differ?

sophist runs away into the darkness of not-being, feeling his way in it by practice, 1 and is hard to discern on account of the darkness of Don't you think so ? the place.

The

THEAET. It seems likely. STR. But the philosopher, always devoting himself through reason to the idea of being, is also very difficult to see on account of the brilliant light of the place for the eyes of the soul of the multitude are not strong enough to endure the sight of the divine. THEAET. This also seems no less true than what you said about the sophist. STR. Now we will make more accurate investigations about the philosopher hereafter, if we still care to do so but as to the sophist, it is clear that we must not relax our efforts until we have a satisfactory view of him.
;

By

practice,

i.e.,

by empirical knowledge as opposed

to

reason.

403

PLATO
KaAoj? 1776? "Or* ovv $r) ra /zei> i),uti> ra)v eOeXew dAA^Aot?, TO, 8e AovT^rat Koivajvelv ' >*/ \ ^^^ ra ra /ze^ err oAtyov, ra o errt TroAAa, oe
9EAI.
.

40.
'

EE.

\o>\

"\

^77, /cat ^
*

/cat

ota

TT&VTOJV OV^kv ACOjAueil' TOt? 7TaCT6 KKOlVa)Vr)KVai, TO 817 /zero, TOITO vve77L(J7Tco/.JLda TO) Aoya> r;^Se

(TKO7TOVVT6S ,

JJLr)

TTpl TTOVTUiV TOJV

et'ScOJ',

tVtt

jJ,rj

a Iv TroAAct?, dAAa 77/30 eAo/xei'ot Aeyo/zeVa>v arra, TTpaJrov /zef


e/cacrra ecrrtv, eVecra Koivtovias aXAtjXajv t^a TO re 6V /cat ti 6V et
TTCOS"

8vvdfJLe9a

Aa^Set^,

aAA'

ouv

Aoyou ye
6'croi/
6"

apa

1 TO fjir) 6V Aeyoucrtv c6? GOTIV oVrco? irapeLxdQr) 6V aOtoois aTraAAarretv.

EAI.

Ou/cow XP 7?a
p'Ov
Sry

HE.

TO T
HE.
77/36?

rcov yevajv, jLt^P 6V awTO /cat CTTacrt? /cat

Meytcrra

EAI.

IloAu ye.

Kat

ja^v Tea

ye 8uo ^a/xep CLVTOLV


1

OL/JLLKTCD

dAA^Ao).
2</>o8pa ye.
Se'

0EAI.
HE.

To
7TOV.

ye 6V
C>>

[JLLKTOV

dfjL<f>OLV

IGTOV yap

0EAI.
HE.
EAI.

f-f Ha)? o

ou;

EE.
,

Tpta ST; ytyveTat TavTa. Tt ftr^v; Ow/cow avTcop e/cacrToy TOtv avTo 8' eauTai TatVoV.
1

/aev

8uoa'

Tpov

TrapeiKadrj

Boeckh

TrapetKaffdfj

BT.

404

THE SOPHIST
You are right. STR. Since, therefore, we are agreed that some of the classes will mingle with one another, and others
THEAET.
will not, and some will mingle with few and others with many, and that there is nothing to hinder some from mingling universally with all, let us next proceed with our discussion by investigating, not all the forms or ideas, lest we become confused among so many, but some only, selecting them from those that are considered the most important let us first consider their several natures, then what their power of mingling with one another is, and so, if we cannot grasp being and not-being with perfect clearness, we shall at any rate not fail to reason fully about them, so far as the method of our present inquiry
;

permits.
after
is,

Let us in

this

way

see

whether

it

is,

permitted us to say that not-being really although not being, and yet come off unscathed. THEAET. Yes that is the proper thing for us
all,
;

to do.
STR.

The most
rest

important, surely, of the classes or


;

genera are those which


itself

we just mentioned being and motion. THEAET. Yes, by far. STR. And further, two of them, we say, cannot
and

mingle with each other. THEAET. Decidedly not. STR. But being can mingle with both of them, for they both are.

Of course. Then these prove to be three. THEAET. To be sure. STR. Each of them is, then, other than the remainTHEAET.
STR.

ing two, but the same as

itself.

405

PLATO
E
0EAI.
HE.

QvTCDS.

77or' av vvv OVTCOS etpr^/ca/zev TO re TavTov 1 Odrcpov ; Trorepa ovo yevr) rive avTO), TCOV uev e CKCWOLS aXXco, rpiujv ^vfJiULyvvueva) \^v dvdyKt]<s aet, KOI Trepl Trevre aAA' ov rrepl rpicov 0*9 OVTOJV avT&v cr/ceTrreor, r) TO re TavToi' TOVTO KOL Oarcpov

Tt

/cat

255

co?

eKeivajv TL Trpoaayopevoi'T'Es

Aa

CLVTOVS; 0EAI. "Icrco?.


HE.

>A\\>/ AAA ou
OVT

/
1

tint

TL jLrv /ctv^ats

ye

/cat crraCTts"

oucr

TOLVTOV
/ctV^CTtv /cat

EAI.

HE.

"OrtTrep av KOivfl
,

7rpocret77a>/.Aev

TOVTO ovoeTepov avTolv olov re elvai. 0EAI. Tt HE. KtV)](TtV re crr^CTerat /cat crracri? au
crerat'
7re/ot

yap

yiyvoyizvov avTolv dvayKdaei yLtera/5aAAetv au TpOV 67TL TOVVOLVTiOV TT)S GLVTOV <f>VCreO)S, O.T6

TOU
EAI.

op,t?

ye.
/z^v ap-fito TOLVTOU /cat OaTcpov.

HE.
EAI.

Mere^erov
Nat.

17

M/} TOIVVV Ae'yco/xev /ctV^atV y' etvat ra^Tov 6a.Tpov, ftTyS' av crracrtv. EAI. MT] yap. & >\ JAN-VJT aE. AAA apa ro ov /cat TO TCLVTOV cos ev rt otaHE.
<

\\

tt

0EAI.
HE.

'AAA'

et

TO oV
1

crr)fjiaiVTov, Kivrjo-iv

/cat TO TauTov /z/^Sev av TrdXiv /cat awrw] auroO B ayroO T.


;

Staf/>opov

40b'

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. YeS.

But what do we mean by these words, "the same" and "other/ which we have just used? Are they two new classes, different from the other
STR.
1

three, but always of necessity mingled with them, and must we conduct our inquiry on the assumption

that there are five classes, not three, or are we unof one of those three when we consciously speaking " the same " or " other " ? say THEAET. Perhaps. STR. But certainly motion and rest are neither other nor the same.

THEAET.
STR. in

How

SO

to rest and motion be either of those two. THEAET. Why not ? STR. Because motion would be at rest and rest would be in motion in respect of both, for whichever of the two became "other" would force the other to change its nature into that of its opposite,

Whatever term we apply

common cannot

since

it

would participate
so.

in its opposite.

THEAET. Exactly
STR.

Both certainly partake of the same and the

other. 1

THEAET. Yes.
either,

same

say that motion, or rest the same or other. THEAET. No. " STR. But should we conceive of " being and " the "
STR.
is

Then we must not

as

one

THEAET. Perhaps. STR. But if " being


1

"

and " the same

"

have no

difference of meaning, then


i.e.,

say sameness and difference can be predicated of both.


4-07

when we go on and

PLATO
C
clvai XeyovTes d/x^orepa OVTOJS OVTCL TTpOCrepOV/jieV. 0EAI.
EE.

aura TCLVTOV
.

cos

'AAAd

fjirjv

'ASwaTOV apa
S^fSdV.
Srj

TOVTO ye O&VVCLTOV TCLVTOV /cat TO 6V ev efvat.


rrpos

0EAI.
EE.

Teraprov raurov
EAI.

rot?

rpiuiv 6tSecrt

TO

ITavu

*
17

Ti 8e; TO Odrepov apa ?y//tv XeKreov TT^JLTTTOV; s 5/>f\ >/ VL TOVTO KCLL TO Ol' CDS OV aTTtt OVO^lCLTa
SE.

\1\fC>/V
>/

(f)

OiavoeLcrOai oei; 5 / 0EAI.


EE.

'AAA' otaat
'

cr

CLVTOL, TOL

T/ to
EE.

o>>

crwyxtopelv TOJV OVTOJV TO, Se vrpos ct'AAa 2 aei Aeyea^at.


1

>/

ou;

To
>

3' f.Tepov del 77/>o?


>/ >/

6Tpov ^ yap ;
\

0EAI.
SE.

OyTCO?. /-\ UJJK ap', et

ye TO ov
O.AA'
a)O"rrep

->\

KO.L

/} TO uarepov

>

Totv elooiv
TO)V
r/fJili't

GL7Tp OciTCpOV TO 6v, r\v av '/TOTC TL

KCLL

TpO)V TpOV OV

TTpOS

OTLTrep av crepov fj, T<OOV TOVTO O7Tp lo'TU' civOLl. EAI. Aeyets* KaOdrrcp e^et. EE. [Te)u,77TOf or} T^V OaTepov

VVV Sc ClTe^CU? crvj.if3J3r)i<i' e^ a.vdyKi]s

.TpOV

(frvaiv

XZKTCOV ev

E TOI?

etSeo-tv ovcrav, ev ols TrpoaipovfJieOa. EAI. Na6.

EE.

Kat Sta
1

SieXrjXvdvLav

rrdvTCov ye avTrjv CLVTUJV (f)TJo~o[jLV ev eKacrTOV yap eTepov eivai,

et'5e<rt

BT

TW

e'ioecnv eldos
;

W.

dXXTjAa B.

408

THE SOPHIST
that both rest and motion are, we shall be saying that they are both the same, since they are. THEAET. But surely that is impossible. STR. Then it is impossible for being and the same
to

be one.

THEAET. Pretty nearly. " STR. So we shall consider " the same a fourth class in addition to the other three ? THEAET. Certainly. STR. Then shall we call "the other" a fifth class? Or must we conceive of this and "being" as two

names
STR.

for

one

class

THEAET.
entities

May

be.

But I fancy you admit that among the some are always conceived as absolute, and

some

as relative.

THEAET.
STR.

Of course. And other is

always relative to other,

is

it

not ? THEAET. Yes.


STR. It would not be so, if being and the other were not utterly different. If the other, like being, partook of both absolute and relative existence, there would be also among the others that exist another not in relation to any other but as it is, we find that whatever is other is just what it is through com;

pulsion of

some

other.

THEAET.
other
STR. "

The facts are as you say. Then we must place the nature of "the as a fifth among the classes in which we

select our examples.

THEAET. Yes.
STR.
for

And we

shall say that it


is

permeates them

all

each of them

other than the rest, not by reason o 409

PLATO
ra>v aAAojv ov ota rrjv
/*

w\\

>

~ J ' *\\ aAAa ota TO avrov (pvoiv,


'
^

SJ

fjL6TXiv
EAI.

rrjs iSe'a? rfjs


r

Oarcpov.

out*. l\ojJiLofl yLte^

41. eV
EAI.

HE.
i

He
(

S-)]

Aeyto/zev e'm

rwv

TreVre

a va Aa/
I

HE.

npalro^ aev
(jTaaeojs.
77

KIVYJCTIV,

ws

ecrrt

Travrdrracriv

Tpov
0EAI.
HE.
EAI.

TT^?
5
1

Xeyw^v ;
f

OvTOJS.
/^

Uu

V
1

crracrts

ap

ecrrtv.

OuSa/^aj?.

256

HE.

"Ecrrt 8e ye Std TO ^ere^eiv EAI. "Eo-Ttv.

rov 6vro$.
ecrriv.

HE.

Avdis

ST)
1

TTaXiv
.

rj

/ctVryat?

erepov ravrov

EAI.

L^eSoi
Oi)

HE.

Ou

TauToi-'

apa
<7

ecrriv.
J

EAI.
HE.

yap 5A\\\\

AAAa
Kat

fjirjv

avrrj

TJV

ravrov ota TO

>

auToi7.
EAI.

HE.

T^v

Svor^epavreov. ov yap 6Vav L7TO)fLV CLVTrjV TGLVTOV KOL fJLT) TaVTOV, OfJLOLO)? , dAA' OTTOTOV ^ev ravrov, oia rrjv TavTOu 77-po? eavrrjv OVTOJ AeyojLtev,1 orav oe

Kivf]csiv ST) Acat ou

TawTot' Te etvat

:at

fj,r)

ravrov

ravrov,

8td

Koivojviav av 6arpoi>, St' rjv ravrov yeyovev OVK e/cetvo dAA' op6a)? av Ae'yeTat rrdXiv ov ravrov.
rrjv

EAI.

HE.

FldVu yaev ow. Ou/couv /cdV et


1

\yofj.V

7777
;

fJicreXdijL^avev

avrrj

\yb}[j.ev

BT.

410

THE SOPHIST
of its own nature, but because of the other.
it

partakes of the idea

THEAET. Exactly.
STR. Let us now state our conclusions, taking up the five classes one at a time. THEAET. HOW ? we say that it is entirely STR. Take motion first other than rest, do we not ? THEAET. We do. STR. Then it is not rest. THEAET. Not at all. STR. But it exists, by reason of its participation in
;

being.

THEAET. Yes,
STR.

it exists.

motion again is other than the same. THEAET. You're about right. STR. Therefore it is not the same. THEAET. No, it is not. STR. But yet we found it was the same, because
all

Now

things partake of the same. THEAET. Certainly.


STR.
is

and

Then we must admit that motion is the same not the same, and we must not be disturbed thereby for when we say it is the same and not When the same, we do not use the words alike. we call it the same, we do so because it partakes of the same in relation to itself, and when we call it not the same, we do so on account of its participation in the other, by which it is separated from the same and becomes not that but other, so that it is correctly spoken of in turn as not the same. THEAET. Yes, certainly. STR. Then even if absolute motion partook in
;

411

PLATO
av O.TOTTOV
r\v

crrdcnfjiov

avrrjv Trpoaayopeveiv; 0EAI. 'QpOorard ye, e'tVep ru)v yevtov cruy;\;a>p77cjoue#a ra fj.ev dAA^Aot? eOeXeiv fjiiyvvaQai, ra

Se

IJLTJ.

HE.

Kat

fj,r)v

8etftv T) raiv a</>uco/ze#a, e'Aey^o^re? /cara <f>vaiv ravrrj. 0EAI. nco? yap ov;
EE.

em vw

ye

TT^V

rouroy -nporepov osnocos"

eart

AeyajLiev

Sr)

TraXiv

rj

KLVIJCTLS
r^v

ecrnv crepov

rov erepov, KadaTrep ravrov re


crracrecos';

a'AAo /cat

0EAI.
EE.
817

Oux
TI

erepov ap*
#77.

ecm
*

7717

/cat

erepov /cara

Aoyoi-'.

EAI.

SE.

It ou^

'A A?? /TO\

077

TO /xera rovro;

"

erepov avTrjv ^Tyao/zet'

ap ai> TOJI/ ef^at, rou Se rerdprou

?'?1*
A

, o/.ioAoy^cravres' avra etvat TreVre, Trept OJV /cat ev ot? Trpou^e/.te^a OKOTrelv ; EAI. KatTTto?; dSbWroy yap cnjy^copeu' eAarrco

rov

apiOf-iov rov vvv Srj (fravevros. SE. 'ASeal? apa r^v Kivr^aiv erepov
EAI.

etrai

rou

'ASee'crrara /zev

ow.
^7

HE.

Oy/cou^

897

cra^aj?

KLVYJCTIS

ovrcos OVK ov

cart
HE.
creaj?

/cat 6V, eTretVep

rou oVro? juere^et;

EAI.

Sa^ecrrara ye. apa dvdyKf]? TO p,^ 6V em Te /ctVT^efyat /cat AcaTa TTO.VTCL ra yt'vr). Kara. Trdvra
"Ecrrtv
e'

yap
412

77

dcLTepov
1

<f)vois

o5 Heindorf ;

eVepov a77epya^o/teVry ot) BT.

THE SOPHIST
any way of
at rest
to
?

rest, it

would not be absurd to say

it

was

THEAET. It would be perfectly right, if we are admit that some of the classes will mingle with

one another, and others will not. STR. And surely we demonstrated that before we took up our present points we proved that it was
;

according to nature. THEAET. Yes, of course.


STR. Then let us recapitulate Motion is other than the other, just as we found it to be other than the same and than rest. Is that true ? THEAET. Inevitably. STR. Then it is in a sense not other and also other, according to our present reasoning. THEAET. True. STR. Now how about the next point ? Shall we say next that motion is other than the three, but not other than the fourth, that is, if we have agreed that the classes about which and within which we undertook to carry on our inquiry are five in number ? THEAET. How can we say that ? For we cannot admit that the number is less than was shown just now.
:

STR.

Then we may
is

fearlessly persist in

contending

other than being ? THEAET. Yes, most fearlessly. STR. It is clear, then, that motion really is not, and also that it is, since it partakes of being ? THEAET. That is perfectly clear. STR. In relation to motion, then, not-being is That is inevitable. And this extends to all the classes for in all of them the nature of other so operates as to make each one other than being, and 1 See 251 E ff.
;

that motion

413

PLATO
OVTOS
KCL(JTOV

OVK 6V

77Ot6t, KO.I

v{.l7T(LVTa Or) KCLTO.

vra OVTCOS OVK o TCLvra ovra. op6a>s epovpcv, /cat on jLteTe^et TOV oVro oVro?, clvai re /cat ovra,. 0EAI. KtvSuveuet.
HE.

TO
257

<>/

e/CaCTTOV &pCL TOJV 6t8o)V TToAl) jUeV Tlepl v' v < \ o\ '\'/5 ov, a.TTipov be TrArjuei, TO prj ov.

CTTt

0EAI.
HE.

"Eot/cev.

OVKOW
TT
\
\

/cat

TO 6V auro rwv aXXaji' erepov

elvai
0EAI.
HE.

Ivat TO ov

ap

Wf>
17/4 tv,

\V\\

Kara rocravra OVK ccrrw

ocrarrcp ecrri TO, aAAa, e/cetva yap ow/c 6V Iv

auTO ecrTtv, aTrepavra 8e TOI^ dpLO/JLov TaAAa OVK eariv av. 0EAI. ZveSo> OUTCD?. HE. Oi5/couv Si^ /cat ravra ov ova^pavreov, eT t Koivajviav dAA^Aot? r) ra>v yev&v <f)vais. Tt? ravra fj,r) avy^copet, Tretaa? r)fjia>v r Aoyo^s ovra) TreiOerco ra fiera ravra.
1

0EAI.

At/catoTaTa
x

HE.

"ISa^ey

S?)

/cat

0EAI.

To

TTOIOV ;

HE. *077OTa^ TO jLtT^ 6V Aeyco/xev, cu? eot/cev, oi)/c tvavTiov Tt Aeyo/xev TOU ovros, aAA' zrepov (JLOVOV.

EAI.

ricos;

W
1

el8u>/j.i'

ei'5w/ie^

T.

is many, for each and every thing in all the but not-being is infinite, for not only is it true that every thing in each of the classes is not, but not-being extends also to all conceptions which do not and cannot

Being
is
;

classes

have any

reality.

414

THE SOPHIST
therefore not-being. So we may, from this point of view, rightly say of all of them alike that they are not ; and again, since they partake of being, that they are and have being. THEAET. Yes, I suppose so. STR. And so, in relation to each of the classes,

being is many, and not-being THEAET. So it seems.

is

infinite in

number. 1

STR. Then being itself must also be said to be other than all other things. THEAET. Yes, it must. STR. And we conclude that whatever the number of other things is, just that is the number of the things in relation to which being is not for not being those things, it is itself one, and again, those other things are not unlimited in number. THEAET. That is not far from the truth. STR. Then we must not be disturbed by this either, since by their nature the classes have participation in one another. But if anyone refuses to accept our present results, let him reckon with our previous arguments and then proceed to reckon with the next step. 2 THEAET. That is very fair. STR. Then here is a point to consider. THEAET. What is it ?
;

STR. When we say not-being, we speak, I think, not of something that is the opposite of being, but only of something different. THEAET. What do you mean ?

he will not accept our proof that being is not, he must disprove our arguments respecting the participation of ideas in one another, and then proceed to draw
i.e., if

etc.

his inference.

415

PLATO
HE.

Ofov orav

etVojfieV TI

jLf))

rt crot </>atvojU,e0a

TO a^iKpov

77

[leya, rore ju TO taov S^Aow TOJ

0EAI.
HE.

Kat
a/o'>

OUK
t

zvavriov orav
l
jL

a77o</>ao-t?

(jvyx a) P rl cr

O a > TOVOVTOV Se povov,


fjirj

on

a'AAtot' TI [jir)vvcL

TO

/cat

TO ou 7TpoTiQ4p,tva

CTTLOVTOJV ovofiOLTOJV, fJidXXoi' 3e TO>J^ Trpa-y^d-

arr* av Kf]rai TO. eVt^eyyojuei'a vvrepov rfjs a7Torf)d<Jco<; o^o/^aTa. 0EAI. YlaVTaLTTaOL fJLV OVV 6 KXU o-ot HE. TdSe Se Stavo^^a>/zev, 42.
7T6pl
.

So/cet.

0EAI.
HE.

To

TTolov;
/zoi e
<f)i'<Jis

'H Oarepov Ka6a7Tp

^atVeTai

/c

EAI.

HE.

Mia

1 zeV eo-Tt TTOU Kat e/ceiVq, TO 8' eVt

yiyv[ivov jj,pos vv^iav lax^ TWO.


T* etCT6
2

avrrjs eKaarov a^opiaSkv Te eavrrjs L&LCLV 8to vroAAac

0EAI.
HE.
jLtta?

Flav?.' /xev

ow.

Ta T^? do.rcpov fivcrecjs ftopta TOVTO. ovarjs TCLVTOV KfTrovOe 3 ^ a) LtV EAI. Tax' <"'* "^' o 77 ?? ^^
rat

OUKOW

HE.

"Eo-Tt TO> /caAai TI

6ciTpov

fjbopiov

avr

0EAI.
HE.

TOUT' ovv dva)WfJiov


^T?
3

epovfjicv

TJ

T''

^/cet'^

BT.

2
;

dXX'

^TTTy 5rj

r^
7T

<ri

Tc/ai
TT^

TUHV B.

fi\X6

a\Xo

B.

416

THE SOPHIST
STR. For instance, when we speak of a thing as not great, do we seem to you to mean by the expression what is small any more than what is of

middle size ? THEAET. No, of COUrSC not.

Then when we are told that the negative the opposite, we shall not admit it we shall admit only that the particle "not" l indicates someSTR.
signifies
;

thing different from the words to which it is prefixed, or rather from the things denoted by the words that follow the negative. THEAET. Certainly. STR. Let us consider another point and see if you agree with me. THEAET. What is it ? STR. It seems to me that the nature of the other is all cut up into little bits, like knowledge. THEAET. What do you mean ? STR. Knowledge, like other, is one, but each separate part of it which applies to some particular subject has a name of its own hence there are many arts, as they are called, and kinds of knowledge,
;

or sciences.

THEAET. Yes, certainly. STR. And the same is true, by their nature, of the parts of the other, though it also is one concept. THEAET. Perhaps but let us discuss the matter
;

and see how


STR.
Is

it

comes about.
is

there a part of the other which


? is.

opposed

to the beautiful
STR.

THEAET. There
Shall
1

we

say that this


particles ov

is

nameless or that
fj.rj

it

has a

name ?
The two
and
in

Greek.

o 2

417

PLATO
0EAI.
eOoij

"Fj^ov o yap pf) KaXov e/cctcrrore TOVTO OVK dXXov TWOS irepov ecmv
jitot

<j>Qeyr)

rrjs

TOV KaXov <f)V<JO)S. HE. "Wi vvv roSe

Aeye.

0EAI.
HE.

To

770 10 V;

l TL TOJV OVTCOV TWOS vo$ y<ivov$ rraXiv cwTireQev Kal TL T(OV av OVTOIV dfkopicrOei' rrpos 2 TO p,r) KaXov ; OVTCH) vj.i/3e(:)-r]KV elvai

"AAAo

0EAI.
HE.

QvTQJS.
/~\

avTLvecris, 07] rrpos ov clvai TLS 4 crvfjifialvei TO p,rj KaXov. 0EAI. 'Op^oraTa.

&

<

i\

(JVTOS

>

in

'

>

cos

eot/c

HE.
fJLV

Tt ovv ; KaTa TOVTOV TOV Xoyov apa fiaXXov TO KaXoV rjfJLLV O~Tl TOJV OVTCDV } TjTTOV O6 TO jLtTJ

KaXov;
0EAI.

QvOV.
'O/xotco?

258

HE.

apa TO

firj

ficya Kal TO jjieya avTO

eivai
0EAI.
HE.

OVKOVV Kal TO

fjirj

OLKaiov TO) oiKaia)

ravTa

0Tov Trpos TO /^t^SeV TL fiaXXov elvaL


Tt nrjv ;

OaTepov

darepov ;
EAI.

HE.

Kat rdAAa 8^
(f)vo~i$

da/rcpov

<f)dvr)

TavTr) Xe^otJiev, eneLTrep 77 TOJV OVTOJV ovaa, CKCLVTJS oe


fj,6pia avTrjs [JLtjoevos
rj

dvdyKrj

or)

Kal ra

oVra
0EAI.
fla>?

yap ov;
TTJS
1

HE.

OvKOVV, WS
Kal

(f)vo-ea)s

OIKV, T! TTJS OaTpOV [LOpLOV TOV OVTOS Trpos aXXrjXa dvTi7^0115

ei>6s

7^01^5 B.
;

2
%v/ui,l3tf3r]Kf]>

dvai Stephanas

v/j,/3fpr)Kti>ai

BT.

418

THE SOPHIST
for that which in each surely the other of the nature of the beautiful and of nothing else.
it

THEAET. That

has one

case

we

call not-beautiful

is

STR.
STR.

Now, then,

tell

me

something more.

THEAET.
beautiful
is

What ?

it not result from this that the nota distinct part of some one class of being and also, again, opposed to some class of being ? THEAET. Yes. STR. Then, apparently, it follows that the notbeautiful is a contrast of being with being. THEAET. Quite right. STR. Can we, then, in that case, say that the beautiful is more and the not-beautiful less a part of being ?

Does

THEAET. Not at all. STR. Hence the not-great must be said to be no less truly than the great ? THEAET. No less truly. STR. And so we must recognize the same relation between the just and the not-just, in so far as neither has any more being than the other ? THEAET. Of course. STR. And we shall, then, say the same of other things, since the nature of the other is proved to and if it has being, we must possess real being
;

necessarily ascribe being in no less degree to its parts also. THEAET. Of course. STR. Then, as it seems, the opposition of the nature of a part of the other, and of the nature of

being,
8 to

when they

are opposed to one another,


TIS

is

no

to

BT.

Apelt

BT.

419

PLATO
dvrtOeais ovoev r^rroVy
i

avTOV TOV OVTOS ovcria eaTtV, OVK Ivavriov e'/cetVa> 0r)fjLaLVOvaa> aXXa TOCTOVTOV JJLOVOV, erepov e/cetVou.
EAI.

Sa^ecrrara ye.
A-jyAov OTL
}

HE.

TtV ovv

0EAI.
HE.

avrrjv rrpo aeiWo/zei'; TO fjur) 6V, o Std rov


ecrrt

avro

TOVTO.

oTCpOV OW, fjLHJTTCp et7T?, COTW Dv aAAajv ovaias eXAeLTro/jievov, /cat Set Oappovvra w VP. \/ ort TO /xr/ of pepaiojs eart TT]V avrov 7)077 Aeyetv riv c^ov, ojVTrep TO /xe'ya T^V ^tteya /cat TO /caAov /cat TO /XT) /xe'ya /XT) /te'ya x /cat TO /XT) 2 OVTO> 8e /cat TO /xr) 6V /caTa TauTO ) /caAoV,

>^^OD'

)\\

f/

/cat

eWt
77

/XT)

6V, eVapt$/xoi> TCOV TroAAcDv OVTCOV


1

eV;
0EAI.

Ttva eVt 77POS aiVro,

c5

0eatT7jT, d-

43EAI.

HE.

Ofcr$'

ow

6Vt

Tt

ST^;
77

EE.

IlAetov

'/cetvoj aVetTre a/co7retv,

Ty

TO TrpoaOcv eVt
EAI.

ricos;
jLteV

HE.

"OTt O
fiTJ
\

77OU

(f)r](JW,
JU,T)

ov yap JNXN

aAAa

o~v TTTCTO

/so>/jfo>**<i'V/ ooow
a^>

TTOTS TOVTO oaufj, 3 etvat e


oiL.rjO'iOS

eoi/Ta,
/

etpye voT^/xa.

EAI.

Ae'yet ya/o
2

ow

OUTCOS".

^77
8

add. Boeckh. Ka\6v add. Boeckh.


TOUT'
ovda.fj.fj

rouro

oa/AT; Simplicius ; 4 <?6j>Ta Aristot. ;

BT.

6^Ta

BT.

Stfjjatos

BT(cf. 23TA).

420

THE SOPHIST
than is being itself, if it is not say so, for it signifies not the opposite of being, but only the other of being, and
less truly existence

wrong

for

me

to

nothing more. THEAET. That


STR.

is

perfectly clear.
shall

Then what

we

call this ?

THEAET. Evidently this is precisely not-being, which we were looking for because of the sophist.

you were saying, as fully anything else, and shall we henceforth say with confidence that not-being has an assured existence and a nature of its own ? Just as we found that the great was great and the beautiful was beautiful, the not- great was not-great and the not-beautiful was not-beautiful, shall we in the same way say that not-being was and is not-being, to be counted as one class among the many classes of being ? Or have we, Theaetetus, any remaining distrust about the matter ? THEAET. None whatever. STR. Do you observe, then, that we have gone farther in our distrust of Parmenides than the limit
STR.
is

And

this,

as

endowed with being

as

set

by
STR.

his prohibition

THEAET.
tion

We have proceeded farther in our investigaand have shown him more than that which lie
Because he says somewhere
l
:

What do you mean?

forbade us to examine. THEAET. HOW SO ?


STR.

Never shall this thought prevail, that not-being is Nay, keep your mind from this path of investigation.
;

THEAET. Yes, that


1

is

what he
f.,

says.

Parmenides, 52

ed. Mullach.

421

PLATO
HE.

d-7reSetajuei>,

8e ye ov /idVor ajs efori TO. fir; 6Vra dXXd /cat TO et8o? o Tuy^dVet 6V rod OVTOS dVc^ra/zefla TJ\V yap Oarepou <j>vo*iv
1

'Hjitets

ovcrdv re

/cat

E eVt

77avra ra 6Vra
x

77-/OO9

a'AAr^Aa,

TO Trpo?

TO 6V

fj.opiov avrrj?

L7Tlv CU? aUTO TOVTO (3Til> OVTOJS TO jLtT^ OV. 0EAI. Kcu TravroLTraai ye, c5 ^eVe, dXrjdearard
OTl TOUVaVTtOV TOU HE. Mo) TOIVVV rjfJLds L7Tr) Tt? / O VTO? TO /XT) 6V a,7To</atvo/zevot ToA/zcDjuev Aeyetv co? Ivavriov TWOS avrw ecrTtv. r)[J,L$ yap Trepi \j,zv

259 e^ov

^atpetv 77-aAat Aeyo/zev, etV eWtv etVe /i^, Aoyov /cat TravTaTracm' aAoyoy o Se vw et/o^/ca/zev -^
efvat TO
/AT)
TJ

6V,

?}

7TL<jdrcL> Tt? co? 02) /caA<iu? Xeyo/Jiev

p.^pi7Tp av dBwarfj, XCKTCOV KCLL e/cetVoj OTL avfJLfJLiywrai TC dAAr;rjfJLcls Xeyopev, 6V /cat OaTepov 8ta Aots" Ta yeVry /cat TO T /cat St* aAA^Acov SteA^Aw^oTa TO ftev eVepov fteTa TOO 6'vTO? CTTt jLteV StO, TaVTTjV TTjV [JLfOe^LV, OV TO Kivo ye ou u.eT(Jxev aAA* erepov, eTepov
eXey^as, KaOdirep

OVTOS 6V

eWt aa^eCTTaTa

e'

avay/cr]? etvat

B TO

8e ov au daTepov jLteTetATi^o? erepov TOJV aAAcov aV t^ yevcov, tTtpov 8' e/cetVcov drrdvTOiV ov OVK vu,7ravTa TO. aAAa 7rAr) <rTiv e/cacrTOV auToiv owSe a>OT TO 6V avau^toyjr/T^Ta)? av pvpia CTTL OVK eo*Tt, /cat TaAAa 8^ /ca$' e/cacrTOV OVTCO
/cat gvfJLTravTa

troXXaxfj ftev ecrTt^ TroXXa^f/ 8*

oi5/c

EAI.
1 ZxaffTov

Simplicius

e/cd(rrou

BT.

422

THE SOPHIST
STR. But we have not only pointed out that tilings which are not exist, but we have even shown what the form or class of not- being is for we have pointed out that the nature of the other exists and is distributed in small bits throughout all existing things in their relations to one another, and we have ventured to say that each part of the other which is contrasted
;

with being, really is exactly not-being. THEAET. And certainly, Stranger, I think that what we have said is perfectly true. STR. Then let not anyone assert that we declare that not-being is the opposite of being, and hence are For we long so rash as to say that not-being exists. ago gave up speaking of any opposite of being, whether it exists or not and is capable or totally But as for our present incapable of definition. definition of not-being, a man must either refute
us and

show that we are wrong, or, so long as he cannot do that, he too must say, as we do, that the classes mingle with one another, and being and the other permeate all things, including each other, and the other, since it participates in being, is, by reason of this participation, yet is not that in which it participates, but other, and since it is other than But being, in being, must inevitably be not-being. turn, participates in the other and is therefore other than the rest of the classes, and since it is other than all of them, it is not each one of them or all the rest, but only itself; there is therefore no doubt that there are thousands and thousands of things which being is not, and just so all other things, both
and
individually and collectively, in in many are not.

many

relations are,

THEAET. True.

423

PLATO
HE.

Kat

TCLVTOLIS

crret TLS, a/ce-Trreoj'

8^ Tat? evavTiwo'cariv eire dViavra) /cat XGKTCOV /je'Artoy rt rah'

vuv elprjfievajr' etVe a'j? rt ^aAeTTO rore 8' eVt Odrepa ^at'pet rore jitey eVt OaTCpa e Aoyous" eA/ccov, ou/c a^ia TioAA^? cr77ou87]? rovro p,ev yap ovre TL ot vOi^ Aoyot <^a.ai. ovre ^aAeTrov vpii' J K6ivo 8' r}'8^ /cat
a^ua
0EAI.
HE.
cos"

/cat /caAov.

To TTolov; *0 /cat TrpocrQev

etp^rat, TO TCLVTCL eaaavTa


T*
ett'at

SwaTO, x Tot? Aeyo/xeVot? ofov cKaarov eAey^op'Ta cTraKoXovOelv,


erepov ov

/ca$'

/cat ^>?] Try TOLVTOV eiVat 5 zrepov, cKeivr) /cat /caT e/ceti'o o ^>7]crt TOUTCOV TO oe ravrov erepov evcLi TTorepov. ye 7717 /ca ' T(^ Odrepov TCLVTOV /cat TO jLteya

orav re TI? OTav TauTov 6v

/cat

TO

ofjioiov avo^ioiov, /cat


.V

TOLVaVTLCL d-t TTpoficpOl'TCL

OUTO?
0EAI.

dAr^^tt'os'

^aipeiv ovrco TOt? AoyOt?, OWT6 Tt? a/)Tt TC TO)I> OVTCDV TWOS

K.OfJLLofj fjL6V

OVV.

44- HE. Kat yap, ajyaOe, TO ye 77av a?7O os 7n^ipeLV aTTO^Mpi^iv ccAAcu? T ou/c
1

E /cat

877

/cat

TTavTOLTrao-LV

ayiovaov TWOS

/cat

a(/>tAo-

cro^ou. 0EAI.
EE.

Tt

817;

TeAecoTaTT^ TTOLVTUJV Xoycov IOTIV 8ta yap TO StaAuetv e/caCTToy avro TTOLVTCDV'

BTW
Svvarbv
/jLaXicrra

8waT&Ta.Ta.
;

Schanz
?

Campbell

Stov avra

Possibly OVK 8i>Ta tainly wrong. tion adopted in the translation).

dviywra Badham Apelt. dvvara. is ceror OVK ata (the interpreta;

424

THE SOPHIST
STR.

And

if

any man has doubts about these


;

oppositions, he must make investigations and advance or if he finds better doctrines than these of ours

pleasure in dragging words about and applying them to different things at different times, with the notion that he has invented something difficult to explain, our present argument asserts that he has taken up seriously matters which are not worth serious attention ; for this process is neither clever nor difficult,

whereas here now


beautiful.

is

something both

difficult

and

THEAET.
STR.
let

of before the ability those quibbles go as of no account and to follow and refute in detail the arguments of a man who says that other is in a sense the same, or that the same is other, and to do this from that point of view and with regard for those relations which he preBut to show supposes for either of these conditions. that in some sort of fashion the same is the other, and the other the same, and the great small, and the like unlike, and to take pleasure in thus always bringing forward opposites in the argument, all that is no true refutation, but is plainly the newborn to lay offspring of some brain that has just begun hold upon the problem of realities. THEAET. Exactly so.
to
STR.

What is it ? What I have spoken

For certainly,

my

friend,

the attempt to

separate everything from everything else is not only not in good taste but also shows that a man is utterly uncultivated and unphilosophical. THEAET. Why SO ? STR. The complete separation of each thing from all is the utterly final obliteration of all discourse.

425

PLATO
rwv
EAi.

elocov

crvfjLTrXoKTjv

6 Aoyo? ycyovev

260

EE.

S/coTret

TOLVVV

cos

ev

Kaipoj vvv

orj

rot?
e'dV

TOIOVTOIS oLfj,ax6n0a

/cat

TT-pocrr^ay/ca^o^itei'

krepov
0EAI.
HE.

eVe'paj fjiiyvvcrOai.

Ilpo? Si) rt; J 1130? TO TOV

AoOV
yap

eiWu.
;

rovrov

7AtV TO)V OVTOJV V TL crrep^^eVres , TO


1

<j)iXoao(f)ias

av ar^pr^del^ev, eri

8' ev TO>

Trapovri Set Aoyov 7]/xa? Sto/xoAoy^o-ao-^at rt TTOT* ecrriv, et Se d(f)r)p6r][jiV avro fti]S' efvat TO TrapaTrav,
oz)Sei>

av eVt TTOU Aeyetv otot


t

T' rjfjLev
^tr^Se^ttav

d<f)r)pe6r]fjLV

B 8'

oV,
y

avvexojpriv&H'ZV

etvat

EAI.

Qp6a>$ TOVTO ye* OVK


10x09 TT^O
\ \

Aoyov Se
~
>

St'

o Tt r
//)

aE.

'A^^'" AAA
II77; T<\

e7TOf.ivos

paar av
f/

/.tafots".

0EAI.
sE.

lo

jLtev

OT)

fjirj

ov

rjfJLLV

V Tt TOJV aAAaiv

^.

\\

yeVo? oV dvefidvr) , /caTa Trdvra ra


EAI.

HE.
KO.L

Ou/COW TO
Tt

jLteTO,

TOVTO GKCTTTeOV

o6r] T

Xoyco
EAI.

W
1

om. BT.

all interrelations of ideas leads to purely negative results. Examples of this are the exclusive antithesis of being and not-being and the mutual The difficulty is solved at exclusion of rest and motion.

The

denial, that

is

to say, of

426

THE SOPHIST
For our power of discourse is derived from the interweaving of the classes or ideas with one another. 1
THEAET. True.
STR. Observe, then, that we have now been just in time in carrying our point against the supporters

of such doctrine, and in forcing one thing mingles with another. THEAET. What was our object
STR.

them
?

to admit that

object was to establish discourse as one of our classes of being. For if we were deprived of this, we should be deprived of philosophy, which would

Our

be the greatest calamity moreover, we must at the present moment come to an agreement about the nature of discourse, and if we were robbed of it by its absolute non-existence, we could no longer discourse and we should be robbed of it if we agreed that there is no mixture of anything with
; ;

anything. THEAET. That is true enough but I do not understand why we must come to an agreement about discourse just now.
;

STR.
is

by following

Perhaps the easiest way for you to understand this line of argument. THEAET. What line ? STR. We found that not-being was one of the

classes of being,

permeating

all

being.
it

THEAET. Yes. STR. So the next thing is to inquire whether mingles with opinion and speech THEAET. Why?

once when we recognize that positive and negative are necessarily interwoven in the nature of things, that the negative has only a relative existence and is not the opposite of the positive, but only different from it.

427

PLATO
HE.
M.rf

/Jiiyvvfjievov

fjiev

avrov TOVTOIS dvaySe

Kalov

aXr]9rj Trdvr' eu'at, jittyvu/xeVou

Soa

re

yiyvera.L /cat Aoyos"


r)

Ae'yety,

TO yap ra [Jir) OVTCL TOUT' eort m>u TO ifsevSos eV

Siavoia r
0EAI.

/cat Aoyois*

yiyvo^vov.
OLTTOLTTJ.

QvTCOS. HE. "OvTO? Se ye 0euSou? tariv 0EAI. Nat.


HE.
i>a>v

Kat /A^V dTrdrrjs OU'O-^T ei'Sc<jAajv Te /cat et/coTjS^ /cat (fravTaaLCLs Trdvra dVay/ci) ^LtecrTa efvat. 0EAI. rTa)? yap ou;
HE.

D TO)
i>at

Tov Se ye x oo(f)iaTr)v e^>a/xev ev rovra) TTOV TO77O) /caTa77e</>euyeVat fteV, e^apvov Se yeyoveTO TTapaTrav
/u,7]8'

etvat i/feuSo?'

6V ouVe Stavoeto-^at Ttva ot>Ve Ae'yetv ou8e^ ovSa/jifj TO />n) 6V fj,Te%LV.


0EAI.
HE.

TO yap /Lt^ ovoias yap

^Hv ravra.

Se' ye rovro [lev TOV <f>dvr) \LZ~iyov ovros, a)crre ravrr) ^ev tcrco? ou/c aV /za^otTO erf 8' av </>at77 TOJV etScov TO, jite^ fteTe^etv TOI> /XT] Ta^a v ^O> " ? *\' ^> *<J' OTTOS', TO o ov, /cat Aoyov or) /cat oo^ai' etvat
'

Nw

fa

ou /xeTe^o^TCov,

cocrTe TT^V et8coAo77ott/ci7V /cat

^a/zev auTov elvai, Sta/za^ot TrdXiv cu? Tra^TaTraatv ou/c CCTTIV, eVetS^ So^a /cat ou Koivojvel TOV fjirj 6Wo?' iffevSos ydp TO Aoyo? /
racTTtACTyv, ev
T)

TTapCLTTCLV

OVK CtVat

-P

TttUTT]?

^Lt7)

OWtO'TajU.ei'T]?
Iva.

KQivan'lcLS*
/cat

(fravTaolav

8td ravr* ovv Aoyov Trpcorov /cat ^Lepevvr]reov o ri TTOT' eariv, 1 dt ye 5^ BT.

identical with the

The English word " fancy," though etymologically Greek <pa.vTaaia, has lost the close con-

428

THE SOPHIST
mingle with them, the necessary things are true, but if it does, then false opinion and false discourse come into being for to think or say what is not that is, I suppose, falsehood arising in mind or in words. THEAET. So it is. STR. But if falsehood exists, deceit exists. THEAET. YeS. STR. And if deceit exists, all things must be henceforth full of images and likenesses and fancies. THEAET. Of course. STR. But we said that the sophist had taken refuge in this region and had absolutely denied the existence of falsehood for he said that not-being could be neither conceived nor uttered, since not-being did not in any way participate in being. THEAET. Yes, so it was. STR. But now not-being has been found to partake of being, and so, perhaps, he would no longer keep up the fight in this direction but he might say that some ideas partake of not-being and some do not, and that speech and opinion are among those which do not ; and he would therefore again contend that the image-making and fantastic art, in which we placed him, has absolutely no existence, since opinion and
STR.

If it does not

result

is

that

all

speech have no participation in not-being for falsehood cannot possibly exist unless such participation takes place. For this reason we must first inquire into the nature of speech and opinion and fancy, 1 in order
;

that

when they are nexion with " seeming "

made

clear

we may

perceive

(0cuVecr0cu) which the Greek retains. The Greek word is therefore more comprehensive than the English, denoting that which appears to be, whether as the

result of imagination or of sensation.

Cf. 235

ff.

429

PLATO
avVTO)V Kal TTV /coivtovta> avr&v rco fjurj OVTI 261 KaTiOCDllZV, KO,TL$6VTS 8e TO IJJ6VOOS 6V * Se rov croc/>tcr77}i> els avTo Kal etWp eVo^d? eartv, 77
eV aXXa) yeVet ^iq 2 0EAI. Ko/xt?y ye,
co

eW

eot/cev

aArOss etvat
}

TO

77/Ot TOP' OCXJJlCTTrjV KCLT* OLpX^-S


Lr)

\^QcV

OTi

pevrov
ye/xetv,

TO yeVo?.

^atVeTat yap
Trpo^dXr],
77ptv
ftei/

cuv

eTretSav Tt
Sta/^cx^ecr^at

avayKcilov
a(f>iK<icr6ai.

eV

vvv yap /xoyt?

TOVTO Trporepov auTOV eKelvov TO /z^ 6V co? our

crepov Se TrpofieecrTt /cat ?re/ot Aoyov /8A?^Tat, /cat Set ST] ifievSos cu? /cat Tiept Sd^a^ a.77o8et^at, /cat fieTa, TOVTO tacu? /cat Trepas, a)S /cat eV aAAo JU-CT' e/cetvo'
e'crri

TrpofiAriOev

8ie77epao-a/^ev,

OLKV, ouSev ^av^creTat TTOTC. EE. Qappelv, to GeatV^Te, XP 9? TI SiW utvoi' tV TO TrpooOev aL Trpoievcu,. Tt yap o y' aOv}.ia)V ev TOVTOLS Spaaeiev av ev aAAot?, -^ [JLTjSev ev e'/cetVot? avvTOJV 7} /cat miAtv et? TOvmaSev OJTTcocr^ei?; ayotfl 7TOV ro KaTa Tr^v vrapot/ztav Aeyovw 8' aV TTOTe e'Aot 77oAty. IJLZVOV, o ye TOIOUTOS' TOL TO o TOVTO Aeyeis SiaTTeTrepavTai, cuya^e', 8' aAAa fjiyio~Tov rjfiXv Tet^o? r\p~f]^ivov av CLT), TO.
j

>

paco
EAI.

/cat

KaAtu?
HE.

etT/e?.
817

45-

Adyov
T,
3

vvv

a/oj/zey,

TrpaJTOV /cat 8dfav, tva eapyecrrepov


ft?)

TroTepov auToiv a77TTat TO


1

6V

oiJri
2

&7ro\oyi.crufj.eOa

5<? 7 e B. 7e Heindorf d7ro\o7?/crcj/x6^a BT.


; ;

TW

atfrdi'

BT.

430

THE SOPHIST
that they participate in not-being, and when we have perceived that, may prove the existence of falsehood, and after proving that, may imprison the sophist therein, if he can be held on that charge, and if not,
set him free and seek him in another class. THEAET. It certainly seems, Stranger, that what you said at first about the sophist that he was a hard kind of creature to catch is true for he seems to have no end of defences, 1 and when he throws one of them up, his opponent has first to fight through it before he can reach the man himself; for now, you see, we have barely passed through the non-existence of being, which was his first prepared line of defence, when we find another line ready and so we must prove that falsehood exists in relation to opinion and to speech and after this, perhaps, there will be another line, and still another after that and it seems no end will ever appear. STR. No one should be discouraged, Theaetetus, who can make constant progress, even though it be slow. For if a man is discouraged under these if he conditions, what would he do under others did not get ahead at all or were even pressed back ? It would be a long time, as the saying is, before such a man would ever take a city. But now, my friend, since we have passed the line you speak of, the main defences would surely be in our hands, and the rest will now be smaller and easier to take. THEAET. Good. STR. First, then, let us take up speech and opinion, as I said just now, in order to come to a clearer understanding whether not -being touches

may

1 Perhaps a sort of pun is intended, for 7rp6^\-rj/j.a was " already beginning to have the meaning of problem."

4-31

PLATO
O6 OVO67TOT
0EAI.
'OpfloJ?.
Srj,

'

lanv a^orepa \ii\> Q OVOTpOV.


'
1

ravra

'

HE.

Oepe

ypa/z/zara>v

eAeyojitev,

KaOoLTrep Trepi rwv elfttov KOI TOJV rrepl TOJV ovofjidrcDV TrdAiv

e'mov<:ei/fa>/ze#a.

^atverat ycxp

7797

ravrr]

TO VVV
0EAI.

To
Eire
"

7TOLOV OVV Sr) 7Tpl TO)V oVo/iaTCO^ VTT TTaivra


1

EE. O /
[Jirjoev,

LT

0EAI.

Sy OV.
EE.
rp
1
<

Q fiev efeAet, ra oe /U,T), ATlAoV TOUTO V, OTl TO, /ACt'

ra

*Q f\

dAA^Aot? *

^vvapjji6rTL '
\

etre

0\L
/Ltej^

TO.

o TOIOVOZ Aeyet?
/cat

'^N'

"

tcra>?,

on ra

"

^>*>x*
ecpcgrjs

Aeyo/zeva
EAI.

S^Aowra

rt ^vvapiiorrei,

ra Se r^

ajs rt

TOUT' et776?;

"O^re/o wtjOrjv VTroXaf^ovra ere TTpocrofJLoXoyeli'. eart yap T^/^IV TTOU raiv r?y (frcovfj rrepl rr^v ovcriav

EE.

SryAco/zarcov StrroV yeVo?. 0EAI. ITa)?;

262

SE.

To

EAI.

ftei^ ovo^ara, TO Se p^ftara EtVe cKarepov.


/zet'

KXrjOev.

EE.

To

77t

rats' Trpd^eaiv

oV 8^Aw/,ta

prjfjid

TTOV Xeyofjitv. EAI. Nat.


1

^vvap/aoTTfi

^vvap/j-OTTeiv

BT.

1 The science of language, in all its branches, was young in the time of Plato. Words of general meaning were So here 5vofj.a and necessarily used in a technical sense. are used as of prjfj-a parts grammatical terminology in the

432

THE SOPHIST
them, or they are both entirely true, and neither
ever false. THEAET. Very well.
STR. Then let us now investigate names, we spoke a while ago about ideas and letters
is

coming

that direction the object of our in sight.

present

just as for in search is


;

THEAET.

What do we need
all

to understand about

names

STR. Whether they none of them, or some


will not.

unite with one another, or

will

THEAET. Evidently the last

and some will not. some will and some


;

STR. This, perhaps, is what you mean, that those which are spoken in order and mean something do unite, but those that mean nothing in their sequence do not unite. THEAET. How so, and what do you mean by

that?
STR.

What
;

supposed you had

in

mind when you

assented for we have two kinds of vocal indications of being. THEAET. HOW SO ? STR. One called nouns, the other verbs. 1 THEAET. Define each of them.
STR.

The

indication

which

relates to action

we

may

call a verb.

THEAET. Yes.

"verb" and "noun," though Piato elsewhere employs them with their ordinary meanings. Similarly the distinction between vowels and consonants (Theaetetus, 203; cf. The Sophist, 253) was at least relatively new, as was that between the active and the passive voice. How important Plato's part was in the development of linguistic study can no longer be accurately determined.
sense of

433

PLATO
HE.

To

8e y*

77'

avrois
OUt'.

rots'

e/cetva TTpdrrovcn

(jr]fjLiov rrjs (fjcovrjs

eTTiredev 6Vo/u,a.

0EAI.
HE.

KojU(S?7

/LteV

ovofjidrcuv jjLev fJiovcov Aeyo/zeVa>i' ou/c ecrrt TTOTG Aoyo?, ouS' au prjud
OVO/JLOLTCOV

QVKOVV

Ae
a>? 77/009

0EAI.

Taur'

ou/c e

HE.

A^Aov yap

erepov rt jSAeVcov aprt

eVet TOUT' auTO e/3ouAo/x7yv etTretv, ^yvco/j-oAoyet? OTI cru^e^aj? c5Se Aeyo/xeva ravra OVK eon Aoyo?.
EAI.

Ha)?;

HE.
Krat

Ofov TaAAa

"jSaSi'W
ocra

"
"T^e'xei,"
<jr][JLaivi
}

ica^u'Sci,"
1

TTpd^eis
/L7rrj

Tt? efie^rjs auT*


EAI.

Aoyov

pr/f^ara, KO.V ovBev TL jitaAAoi-

Ha)? yap;
OUACOUV
Acat

HE.
>/\
i

TraAiv
?
</

<t

6Vav Aey^Tat " /


re
>

eAa9O9,

LOTTOS,

ocra

ovo^ara

ra>v

TTparrovTO^v wvofJidaOrj, KO.I Kara. ravTrjv $r) rrjv avve^iav ouSet? TTCO ^vvearrf Aoyos" ov$[J(,lav yap ovre OVTOJS OUT' IKCLVCDS Trpd^iv ouS'

au

arrpagiav ouoe ouatap' OVTOS* ouoe ju.-^ OVTOS" o^Aot Ta TTpv dv TLS TOLS ovo/zacrt TO, TOTt S' rip^oaev re KOI Aoyo? eye Kepdarj evdvs r) 7Tpa>Tr) av/JLTrXoKr), cr^eSov rwv \6ya)v 6
x->

>/

'o\

>

'

\v

^^''

/cat

O *

EAI.

HE.

"OTay

IIcD? a/a' cSSe Aeyetj; " etVrj Tts" dvQpanros

pavOdveiS

Adyoj/ eivai ^TJ? rovrov eXd^Lorrov T


EAI.

/cat Trpcorov;

"Eyajye.
1

aurois ro?5 B, Stobaeus ; auTo?s T. re frai Stobaeus ; ei /cat Kal B. ;

W,

434

THE SOPHIST
STR.

And

perform the actions THEAET. Exactly.


STR.

the vocal sign applied to those iii question we call a noun.

who

Hence discourse is never composed of nouns spoken in succession, nor of verbs spoken without nouns. THEAET. I do not understand that. STR. I see you evidently had something else in mind when you assented just now for what I wished to say was just this, that verbs and nouns do not
alone
;
;

make

discourse

if

spoken successively in

this

way.

THEAET. In what

way

STR. For instance, "walks," "runs," "sleeps" and the other verbs which denote actions, even if you utter all there are of them in succession, do not

make

discourse for

all that.

THEAET. No, of course not.


again, when "lion," "stag," "horse," other names of those who perform these actions are uttered, such a succession of words does not yet make discourse for in neither case do the words uttered indicate action or inaction or existence of anything that exists or does not exist, until the verbs are mingled with the nouns then the words
STR.

And

and

all

and their first combination is a sentence, about the first and shortest form of discourse. THEAET. What do you mean by that ? STR. When one says "a man learns," you agree that this is the least and first of sentences, do
fit,

you not ?
THEAET. Yes.

435

PLATO
HE.

A^Aot vdp
/
->\

rfSr?
f

TTOV

rore
M
rj

rrepl rcov ovrajv


\ \
/
*

T)

OVK ra ovo/jid^L [JLOVOV, dXXd rt TrepatVet, avjJLTrXeKtov ov auroy dAA' re Sto rot? Aeyctv ovojjiacn. prj/jLaTa
yt,yvo[JLva)V
77

yeyovoraiv

^AAovrcjv

/cat

IJLOVOV ovo/jid^iv etTroae^,

/cat 817 /cat TO) TrXey/JLari

TOVTCO TO
0EAI.

ovofjia. ecfiOey^dfJieda

Xoyov.

'QpOcoSHE.
Ot'rct)
1

46.
/>tev

ST)

KaOoiTrep
TO, 8'

dAAi^Aots 7]piJLOTT,

<f>covfjs

av

(jrfiJLela

ra

/zev

ra Trpdypara 2 ra ot>', /cat Trept ra TT^S ou^; ap^toTret, ra Se

dpfjiorrovra avrcov Xoyov aTreipydoaro. 0EAI. HayTa-TracTi /zet' ow. HE. "En or] afiLKpov rooe.
0EAI.
HE.

To

rcolov;
f},

Aoyov
/UT7

yov,
HE.

avay/catov, oravrrep Se rtvo? dSwarov.

rivos ctvai Ad-

EAI.

Qvrajs. Oi5/cow /cat rroiov V n-N to? o ou;


<>

nva avrov

etVat Set;

HE.

Ilpoo-e^cofiev 817 rov vovv r^Jilv aurot?.

0EAI.
HE.
et

Aet yovv. Ae^a> roivvv aoi Xoyov avvdtis repay pa rrpd8t* d^d/zaro? /cat pharos' orov 8' dv d Aoyo?
1

uot (bpdttiv. n. cru r J> rrV C ? v

263

0EAI.
HE.

avr

2 eorat /cara ovva^iv.


X

'

0eatT7yTO?

KaOrjrai.

IJLOJV

fir)

fjiaKpos

Adyo?;
EAI.

EE.

Ov/c, aAAa jLterpto?. Hov epyov Srj (frpdtew

rrepl

ov r

e'crrt

/cat

OTOV.
0EAI.

A^Aov
1

erTTOAief

drt Trept e'/zou re /cat e/zd?. Stobaeus ; diroi^ev BT.

436

THE SOPHIST
STR. For when he says that, he makes a statement about that which is or is becoming or has become or is to be he does not merely give names, but he reaches a conclusion by combining verbs with nouns. That is why we said that he discourses and does not merely give names, and therefore we gave to this combination the name of discourse. THEAET. That was right. STR. So, then, just as of things some fit each other and some do not, so too some vocal signs do not fit, but some of them do fit and form discourse. THEAET. Certainly. STR. Now there is another little point. THEAET. What is it ? STR. A sentence, if it is to be a sentence, must have a subject; without a subject it is impossible. THEAET. True. STR. And it must also be of some quality, must it not ? THEAET. Of course. STR. Now let us pay attention to each other. THEAET. Yes, at any rate we ought to do so. STR. Now, then, I will speak a sentence to you in which an action and the result of action are combined by means of a noun and a verb, and whatever the subject of the sentence is do you tell me. THEAET. I will, to the best of my ability. STR. " Theaetetus sits." It isn't a long sentence,
;

is

it?

THEAET. No,
STR.

it is

Now

fairly short.

it is

for

you to say what

it is

about and

what
2

its

subject

is.

THEAET. Clearly
irpdyfj-ara

it is
;

BTW

ypd/j,/ji.aTa,

about me, and I am its subject. letters, Bury (cf. 253).

437

PLATO
EE.
T''

It oe oo

<^ >

w ^>

av;
a)

0EAI.
HE.

IToto?;

Oeatr^ros",

0EAI.

Kat rovrov

vw> eya> SfaAe'yo/zat, Tre'rerai. ouS' av et? a'AAco? etVot TrA^v


ava.yKO.lov e/caorov

c/zoV re /cat Trept efiov.


HE.

ITotov 8e ye rtva

(f>a{JLV

eu/at rcDv Aoycov.

EAI.

HE.

Nat. TOWTCOV

Si)

770 toy

rtva

KaTpov
TOV Se s ^/^^

<f)aTov etvat;
dXrjOrj.
\

EAI.

Tov
/

HE.
ecrrt

\ Aeyet oe avrwv o

/xer (/feuS?y 77OU, * \ >/^ ^\


fjiev

aArjurjs TOL

ovra

*/

cos

vreH

croy.

EAI.

HE.

Tt '0 Se
Nat.

17

ijjev$r]s
>r

erepa raiv OVTOJV.


r

EAI.

HE.

rp

la

JUT)

ovr

apa

co?

ovra Aeyet.

EAI.

HE.
O

S^eSov. "Ovrcov 1 Se ye 6Vra erepa Trept crou. TroAAa yap e^a/xev 6Vra 77ept eKaarov etvat TTOU, TroAAa
>

oe OVK ovra.
EAI.

Ko/xi87y

jLtev

ouv.
817

HE.

*Qv varepov
jU,eV,

7rpo)TOV
EAI.

e'^

Aoyov etp^/ca ?7ept aov, cov tt>ptcra/.ie#a rt vror' ecrrt Aoyo?,

avay/catorarov avrov eva rc5v ^Spa^urarcuv etVat.


HE.
817 yow ravrrj "ETretra 8e ye rtvo?.

Nw

EAI.

Our a;?.
fJLr)
1

HE.

Et Se

ecrrt cro?,

OVK
;

ct'AAou

ye

OVTUV Cornarius

S^rwj

BT.

438

THE SOPHIST
And how about this sentence ? THEAET. What one ? STR. " Theaetetus, with whom I am
STR.
flies."

now

talking,

THEAET. Every one would agree that this also is about me and I am its subject. STR. But we agree that every sentence must have

some

quality.

THEAET. Yes.
STR. Now what quality shall be ascribed to each of these sentences ? THEAET. One is false, I suppose, the other true STR. The true one states facts as they are about

you.

THEAET. Certainly. STR. And the false one states things that are other than the facts. THEAET. Yes. STR. In other words, it speaks of things that are not as if they were. THEAET. Yes, that is pretty much what it does. STR. And states with reference to you that things are which are other than things which actually are for we said, you know, that in respect to everything there are many things that are and many that are not. THEAET. To be sure. STR. Now the second of my sentences about you is in the first place by sheer necessity one of the shortest which conform to our definition of sentence. THEAET. At any rate we just now agreed on
;

that point.

And secondly THEAET. Yes.


STR.

it

has a subject.
is

STR.

And

if

you are not the subject, there

none.

439

PLATO
EAI.

Ylajs
v.
\

yap;
<Z \

HE.
TTCLV'

\ir M^oeyo? be

\ 1

cov

ouo

^<1

i\

cu>

\ Aoyo? zn] TO rrapa\

a.7T(f)ini>>afjiV

yap on

TOJV

aSwdVcov

r^v

6Vra
HE.

/jLrjSevos etvat Aoyoi^.

OEAI.

'QpOoTara.
Ilept

crou Aeyo^eva, 817 Bdrepa a? ra avra /<at /XT] 6Vra a*? ovra, nuvraTracnv eoLKev 3 ^ TOiavTTj crvvdeais K re pi /cat yiyvo[i4.vr\ /cat ovo^arajv oWcos T
1

yiyveoOai Aoyo?

'AA^ Tt Se 8^; Stai'ota r /cat 8ofa LVTaoia, n&v OVK rjbr) SrjXov on raura TO,
47HE.
i/Jv8fj

0EAI.

/cat

re

/cat

aX^Orj 77aV0'

rjfji&v

ev rat?

eyylyverai ;
EAI.

HE.

?/

Hois'; f/ M \ /O v<J. i2o etaet paov, av Trptorov Aaprjs aura,

/d' TI

77or' ecrrt /cat rt Sta^epouCTtv EAI. At'Sou IJLOVOV.

e/caara aAA^Aajv.

HE.

Ou/cow Stavota
evros rrjs
1

/^ev /cat

Aoyo? raurov

jj,ev

ifjvxfjs

irpos avrrjv SeaAoyo?

(frcvvfjs

ytyvoyLtei/os

TOUT' auTo

StdVota;
EAI.

HE.

To

na^Li /xev ow. Se y' 0.77' e/cetV^?

p^vfJia.

Sta TOU

,6Ta (f)96yyov /ce/cA^Tat


EAI.

Aoyoj;
icr^ev ov

'AA??#7].

HE.

Kat

EAI.

To

^t^v eV Adyot? TTOLOV;

auTo

HE.
1

Oacriv Te /cat arro^aaiv\ emend, apogr. Parisinum 1811; ye

BT

5^ or 5^ ye

Heindorf.

440

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. Certainly not. STR. And if there is no subject, it would not be a for we showed that a sentence sentence at all without a subject is impossible. THEAET. Quite right. STR. Now when things are said about you, but things o other are said as the same and things that are not as things that are, it appears that when such a combination is formed of verbs and nouns we have
;
f-J

really

and truly

false discourse.

THEAET. Yes, very truly. STR. Is it, then, not already plain that the three classes, thought, opinion, and fancy, all arise in our minds as both false and true ? THEAET. How is it plain ? STR. You will understand more easily if you first grasp their natures and the several differences between them. THEAET. Give me an opportunity. STR. Well, then, thought and speech are the same only the former, which is a silent inner conversation of the soul with itself, has been given Is not that true ? the special name of thought. THEAET. Certainly. STR. But the stream that flows from the soul in vocal utterance through the mouth has the name of speech ? THEAET. True. STR. And in speech we know there is just THEAET. What ?
;

STR.

Affirmation and negation.


2

\eyo/jii>a
3

oiKv

add.
;

ws ZoiKev
;

* ew)rd

W,

Stobaeus P

Badham. BT. om. BT.


44,1

PLATO
EAI.

"lapev.
lv
^t>X?7

264

HE.

"Qrav ovv rovro

Kara StdVotap

EAI.

Kat
^J
1
1
\

rr-i /

HE. ~
r)

o orap'

TIVI

/)> 't1\\^ L avro aAAa ot ai Kau t f f f '/3~ TO roiovTov av TTO.VOS, ap OLOV re opucos
r/

770)$;

'

/XT)

r\

>

'

rt TrA^y <f>avracriav ;
EAI.

OuSeV.

HE.

OUKOW
S'
'

7Ti7Tp Aoyo? dXrjOrjs

TIV /cat

j/re

efidvr)

Stai^oia /tev avrrjs Trpos e

StaAoyo?, So^a Se Siavoias d Se o Aeyo/xei/ cry/x/zt^ts' atcr^creco? ^atWrat /cat So^rjs, dvdyKT) 8^ /cat TOVTOJV rw Aoya) OVTCDV ifjV$r} re aurtSv eVta /cat eWore etvat.

"

@EAI.
HE.
/cat

ncus

S'

ou;

Karayoet?
Aoyo?
[irj
T)

ow

ort -rrporepov rjvp

o^a

apri,
EAI.

/card TT)V TrpouSoKiai^ Travrdrraaiv dvTJvvrov cpyov errt-

a ,r)TOVVT$ avro; Kara^ocD.


y

48.

HE.

MT)

roivvv

j.ir]$

etV

TO,

AotTid

yd/o Tie^avrat
EAI.

ravra, TOJ

/car' et'8^ Statpecrecof.

nottoi^ 8ry;
7V,

HE.

AtetAo//,e$a

r^? ei'ScoAoTroit/ci]? T ))^ 8e


1

et'Sr^

Suo,

EAI.

Nat.
CTO^tCTT^V
L7TOfJieV d)S dTTOpotjJieV

HE.

Kat TOV

IS

OTTorepav

^/^cro/xev.
1

avrd Stobaeus

ayrr?!'

BT.

442

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. Yes,
STR.

we know

that.

Now when

this arises in

way of thought, can you give

the soul silently by it any other name

than opinion ? THEAET. Certainly not. STR. And when such a condition is brought about in anyone, not independently, but through sensation, can it properly be called anything but seeming, or
fancy ? THEAET. No.

Then since speech, as we found, is true and and we saw that thought is conversation of the soul with itself, and opinion is the final result of " thought, and what we mean when we say "it seems is a mixture of sensation and opinion, it is inevitable that, since these are all akin to speech, some of them must sometimes be false.
STR.
false,

THEAET. Certainly. Do you see, then, that false opinion and false discourse were found sooner than we expected when we feared a few moments ago that in looking for them we were undertaking an endless task ? THEAET. Yes, I see. STR. Then let us not be discouraged about the for now that these points rest of our search, either are settled, we have only to revert to our previous
STR.
;

divisions into classes. THEAET. What divisions


STR.

image-making, the 1 likeness-making and the fantastic. THEAET. Yes. STR. And we said that we did not know to which of the two the sophist should be assigned. 1 See 235 n ff.

We

made two

classes of

443

PLATO
0EAI.
SE.
T

Hy

ravra.
rjfJLtov

Kat Tovd*

dTTOpovfievcov ert

ovcoroSm'a,

(^aveVro?

OVT

TOV Aoyot> LKMV OVT

TOV
TO

D OVT6
EE.

^avracr/ia

117

TO irapaTrav ovSev Sta

0EAI.

Nw

Aeyeis a
8e
y'
67Ti.Srj

TTZ^OLVTOLI

[LV

Aoyo?,

.VTOU 8' ovcra

8of a iAeu7]?, eyX co


e'/c

e^
/

/^*ft^/*ttTa

OVTCOV et^at /cat rexyrjv


0EAI.
SE.
,

ravrrj? yiyvzoOat, rijs

Kat /t^
Nat.

6Vt y* 77^ o cro^taT?)? TOUTCOV TTOTC-

8ia>fJLO\o'yr)iJLvov r^^lv ev

rols TrpoaQev

r\v.

EAI.

SE.

IlaAtv TOLVVV

m%etptti.fj,V, cr^Ltflvr^s

St^

TO

TrporeOev yeVo?, TropzvecrOai


[Jiepos

Kara

TOVTTL St^ta det

rov

TfJirjOevTOS,

KOlVtOVLO-S,

iyo^evoi rrjs TOV aofiio-Tov O)g OLV CLVTOV TO, KOIVCL TTQ.VTCL 7Tpl\6vTS ,
(ftvaiv

Tny oiKeiav XITTOVTCS


265
^Liey
7]/>ttv

eTrtSet^w/zev jLtaAtcrra
/cat

aurots",

eVetTa Se

rot? eyy^TaTO)

yeVet Trjs TOLavTrjs ne66$ov iretfivKocrLV.


EAI.

'Qp9a>s.

EE.

OuK"OW TOTC
Nat.

ftev

rjpxofJieOa

7roirjTU<r)v

KCLL

EAI.

SE.

Kat

TTJS KTTjTLKrjs ev OrjpevTiKfj

KOL

/cat e.fjiTTOpiKfj

Kal ayojviq Ttatv eV Totourots" et'Seatv e

THE SOPHIST
THEAET.
STR.

You
in

are right.

And

the midst of our perplexity about

we were overwhelmed by a still greater dizziness when the doctrine appeared which challenges everythat,

body and asserts that neither likeness nor image nor appearance exists at all, because falsehood never exists anywhere in any way. THEAET. True. STR. But now, since the existence of false speech

and

imitations

false opinion has been proved, it is possible for of realities to exist and for an art of

deception to arise from this condition of mind. THEAET. Yes, it is possible. STR. And we decided some time ago that the sophist was in one of those two divisions of the

image-making
STR.

class.

THEAET. Yes.

Then let us try again let us divide in two we have taken up for discussion, and proceed always by way of the right-hand part of the thing divided, clinging close to the company to which the sophist belongs, until, having stripped him of all common properties and left him only his own peculiar nature, we shall show him plainly first to ourselves and secondly to those who are most closely akin to
;

the class

the dialectic method. THEAET. Right.

STR. We began by making two divisions of art, the x productive and the acquisitive, did we not ? THEAET. Yes. STR. And the sophist showed himself to us in the arts of hunting, contests, commerce, and the like, which were subdivisions of acquisitive art ?
1

See

219.

445

PLATO
EAI.
HE.

Hdw
8e

y' 67Tt,or) fJLifJLTjTUcr) orjXov to? avrrjis rrjv TroirjTLKrjv Siaipereov 7TpcoT7]V. rj yap TTOV T19 ecrrtv, et'ScoAtoj' jiteVrot, (^a/zeV, dAA' ou/c

Nw

fJLV OVV.

avTov

TG'xyr),

eKaarajv
EAI.

rj

yap;

Ilai>Ta7ra(7i yuev ouv.

EE
EE.

EAI.

ITot^TtAC^? 81) TrpajTOV 8vo eo"7a> /^ep 7?* Ilota); ^ o> > /) / f-p /) 1 o f-iV tfeiov, TO o avvpaiTTivov.
>

EAI.

OU'TTXO [Ji[JLdOir]Ka.

eiVep /xe^ti^/xe^a TO, Traaav <f>afjiev elvai ^vva^i Ae^'9eVra, atria ylyvr\rai rot? ff7 frporepov ovaiv varepov ylyveaQai.
49-

-E

IlonjTiKTp/,

EAI.

SE.

Za>a

817

e/c cr7T6/oftara)v /cat

TTai'ra OI'TJTCL /cat </>i>ra ocra r* pi^ajv (frverai /cat orra a


/cat

^WLorrarai aa)fiara r^/cra


Ttp'o?
"^

ar^/cra,

^eot; Srj/jiLovpyovvTOS

(frrjO'Of.iev

varepov

yiyveaOat, rrporepov

OVK ovra;

TOJ rcDv TroAAajy

8oy/xart
EAI.

/cat prjfJLari xpwfJLtvoi

ITotoj;
r>)i> (j>vaiv

EE.

Ta>

avToiJiaLTrjs /cat

avra yzvvav airo TWOS atria? aVeu oiavoias (frvovarj? , r) /zero, Aoyow
Oeias

re

/cat eTnaTTJ/JLif]?

oVo

^eoi} ytyi'o/zeVry?;
-

'Eya> ^Ltev tacos" Sta TT)^ ^At/aW TroAAd/ci? 1 a^oTepa /zeTaSo^a^a*' vw /z^v fiXtTTtov els o-e /cat VTroXafi^on'cov o'UaOai ae /cara ye #eoi> aura
EAI.

yiyveaOai. TavTr) /cat auro? vevofiiKa. EE. KaAco? ye, a) eatTTyre* /cat et 1 /ATJf b ; /XT) BT.

jtteV

ye' a<;

446

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. Certainly.

But now, since imitative art has taken him clear that our first step must be the division of productive art into two parts for imitative art is a kind of production of images, however, we say,
STR.

over,

it is

not of real things in each case. THEAET. By all means.


STR.

Do you

agree

Then
art.

let

us

first

assume

two

parts

of

productive THEAET.
STR.

STR. We said, if we remember the beginning of our conversation, that every power is productive which causes things to come into being which did not exist before. THEAET. Yes, we remember. STR. There are all the animals, and all the plants that grow out of the earth from seeds and roots, and all the lifeless substances, fusible and infusible, that Shall we say that they are formed within the earth. came into being, not having been before, in any other way than through God's workmanship ? Or, accepting the commonly expressed belief THEAET. What belief? STR. That nature brings them forth from some selfOr shall acting cause, without creative intelligence. we say that they are created by reason and by divine knowledge that comes from God ? THEAET. I, perhaps because I am young, often change from one opinion to the other but now, looking at you and considering that you think they are created by God, I also adopt that view. and if I thought you STR. Well said, Theaetetus
;
;

are they ? divine and the human. THEAET. J don't yet understand.

What

The

447

PLATO
a rcov
ei?

elvai, vvv

rov erreira "%povov aAAto? TTOJS av ra> Aoyoj /zero, rreidovs

dvayKaias eTre^eipou/zei' Trotetv o/zoAoyetf e^eiS?) Se aov KarafjiavOdvoj ryv (frvcnv, ori Kal avv TUJV x TTpooeiaw e<^' Trap' r)fj,)V Aoycov aur?)
e'A/cecr^at

^17?,

edcrco'

xpovos

yap

yiyvoir* av aAAa, Qijcraj ra f.iev <f>v<ji TTOielaOai Beia Te^l), TO, 8' eV rourcov WTT'
vi'L<JTciiJLva

dvOpaiTTiVfl,

KOI Kara rovrov


yitev

Srj

TOP

Aoyov Svo TTOirjTLKrjs yeV^, TO TO 8e delov.


0EAI.
HE.
EAI.

avOpannvov

etvai,

'Op^cD?.
ST) 8uoti^
1

Te/xve

ovaaiv
AcaTa

8t'x a

cicarepav avdis.

Hois

266

EE.

Ofov TOTe

^tev

TrAaTos"

reavatv

7roi7]TU<r)V Traaav, vvv Be av 0EAI.

Kara

EE. TeTTapa, /n^ avrrjs OVTCD ra rrdvra yLyverai, Svo fiev rd Trpo? 'rjf-ioJv, dvOpa)TTia f Svo 8' au TO, Trpo? OeaJv, dzla.

0EAI.
HE.

Nat.
1

Se y* cu? erepcos av Siyprj/Jieva, /iepo? ev a,^' e/caTepa? TT?? ftept'Sos avroTTOir^rLKOv, rco 8' cr^eSoj^ yLtaAiCTT' av \eyoioQiqv etScoAo-

Ta

Kal
EAI.

Kara ravra
2

817

rrd\iv

rj

StatpetTat.

Aeye
HE.

OTTT^

e/caTepa avOcs.
TTOU
/<rat

50.

'H/^et? y

/.teV

TaAAa

aia /cat

TO- 7T(f)VKor
,

^eo

Kal vScop Kal rd rovrcov yevvrn^ara rrdvra laaev avrd drreipyaecrrt, rrvp
TJ

eKacrra'
77

rrws;
;

aur?;

avri;

T.

2
STTTJ

inferior MSS.

Swot

BT.

448

THE SOPHIST
were one of those who would think differently by and by, I should try now, by argument and urgent
persuasion, to make you agree with my opinion since I understand your nature and see that
itself inclines,
;

but
it

of

without any words of mine, towards that to which you say you are at present attracted, I will let that go for it would be a waste of time. But I will assume that things which people call natural are made by divine art, and things put together by man out of those as materials are made by human art, and that there are accordingly two kinds of art, the one human and the other divine. THEAET. Quite right. STR. Now that there are two, divide each of
;

them

again.

THEAET.
STR.
it

HOW ?
;

divided all productive art width wise, as were, before now divide it lengthwise. THEAET. Assume that it is done. STR. In that way we now get four parts in all
;

You

two belong to us and are human, and two belong to the gods and are divine.
THEAET. Yes.
STR. And again, when the section is made the other way, one part of each half has to do with the making of real things, and the two remaining parts may very well be called image -making; and so productive art is again divided into two parts. THEAET. Tell me again how each part is dis-

tinguished.
STR.

We know

that

we

and

all

the

other

animals, and fire, water, and their kindred elements, out of which natural objects are formed, are one and all the very offspring and creations of God, do we not ?
p 2
44.9

PLATO
0EAI.
HE.

QvTOJS.
et'ScoAa,

TOVTOJV Se ye eKaarajv
TrapeVerat,
.

dAA* OVK

aura
EAI.

SatjLtovta

/cat

ravra

yeyovora
HE.

Rota,
re eV rot? VITVOLS
/cat

Td

oaa ^e#

(fravrdcrfjiara

ra> TTVpl

avrofivfj Xeyerai,, CTKLOL [Ji6i> orav ev CTKOTOS eyyiyvriTai, StTrAow Se rjVLK* ai'

oiKelov re KOL aXXorpiov rrepl ra Aa/X77pa KOI (f>o)S Aeta et? ev fureA^oy rrjs c/jurpoaOev elcoOvias oi Ivdvriciv aiaOr^aiv Trape^ov elSos aTrepyd^r 0EAI. Auo yap ovv ecrrt ravra Oeias epya avro re /cat TO TrapaKoAovOovv et' ,
HE.

Tt 8e
OIKIOLV

rr)V rjfjLerepav

r^yy^v;

dp* ou/c

OLKoSoLLiKrj

^T^aojucv

Trotetv,

8e rtv' Irepav, olov ovap avdpaimvov eyprjyopovw

EAI.

ITayu /xev ouv.

HE.

OVKOVV

rjfJtercpas

ev,

EAI.

/cat rrlAAa ovrco Kara Svo Strra, epya av Trot^rt/c^? Trpa^ecos TO /ttev 1 avrovpyiKrj, TO Se et'ScuAov et'ScoAoTrott Nuv /xaAAov efjLadov, /cat riOrjfJii 8vo
1

noLrjriKrj?

z'iSr)'

Sclav

/zev /cat dvOpooTTLvrjv

Qdrepov riJirj/Jia, TO Se o/zotco/.taTCot' TtvcDv yvvrjfj,a.


1

Kara Se Odrcpov TO

/xev auTcDv ov,

avrovpyiKy Heindorf ; avrovpyiKrj BT. eldw\OTrouKy Heindorf; el8w\orrouKri BT.


3

fleiW

avdpWTrivr]i>
1

Heindorf ^efa B Heindorf av6pwirLv-q


;

0e/p T.

avQpwjrlvri

T.

This was the current explanation of reflection. Mirrors and smooth objects were supposed to contain a luminous principle which met on the smooth surface with the light

450

THE SOPHIST
THEAET. Yes.
STR. And corresponding to each and all of these there are images, not the things themselves, which are also made by superhuman skill. THEAET. What are they ? STR. The appearances in dreams, and those that a shadow arise by day and are said to be spontaneous when a dark object interrupts the firelight, or when twofold light, from the objects themselves and from outside, meets on smooth and bright surfaces and causes upon our senses an effect the reverse of our 1 ordinary sight, thus producing an image. THEAET. Yes, these are two works of divine creation, the thing itself and the corresponding image

in each case.
STR.

say that

And how about our own we make a house by the

art

Shall

we

not

art of painting make man-made dream produced for those who

by the

art of building, and another house, a sort of

are

awake ?

THEAET. Certainly. STR. And in the same way, we say, all the other works of our creative activity also are twofold and go in pairs the thing itself, produced by the art that creates real things, and the image, produced by the image-making art. THEAET. I understand better now and I agree that there are two kinds of production, each of them twofold the divine and the human by one method of bisection, and by the other real things and the product that consists of a sort of likenesses. coming from the object reflected. So in the act of vision
;

the fire within the eye united with the external fire (Timaeus, 46 A). evoLvriav ai<j6ri<nv refer The words TTJS '^irpoadev to the transposition of right and left in the reflection (cf. Theaetetus, 193 c).
. . .

451

PLATO
51.
HE.

on
Aei>

ro

fjizv

Tfj? roivvv elScoXovpyiKrl? ava[JLvr)<j8a)ei/caoTt/coV, TO Se (fravracrriKov e/zeA-

etvat yevosy el TO J/feuSo? OVTOJS 6V ijsevoos /cat 6vra)v ev TL tfraveir) TT<f>vKos.


v

0EAI.
HE.

ouv.
l

Ou/cow

6(}>dvr)

pijaofJiev

avrd)

re /cat Sta ravra 817 /caTvvv avafjL^ta^riJTOJS etSTy

Suo;
EAI.

Nat.
roivvv
(fxivTacrTiKov

267

HE.

To

avdis

Siopi,a)fJLev

^a.
EAI.

Il^;
fj,V St'

HE.

To

opyavajv yiyvo^vov t TO 8e avrov eavrov opyavov rov TTOLOVVTOS re

EAI.

HE.

"OTav,

otftai,

TO

o*ov

cr^/za Tt? TOJ eavrov


rrjs

Troifj,

/mi/jirjcns

rovro

jLtaAtcrTa /ce/cA^rat TTOU.

0EAI.
HE.

Nat.
ST)

Mt/zTyTt/cov
2<

rovro

avrfjs

Trpocrenrovres
/xaAa/ct-

aTrovetjLtctjjLte^a

TO

8' d'AAo TraV

fx</>a)/xei'

aOevres
/cat

rraptvres erepa) avvayayelv re els ev TTpeTrovacLV eVcovu^Lttav aTroSovvau riv*


/cat

0EAI.
HE.
>tf-

evej(,Toa), TO
t

Kat
~

agiov -))yetac/af ot a oe,


EAI.

/i^y /cat rovro eVt / StTrAow, (S Qeairrjre, OJrtO/ G


cr/coTret.

A eye.
2

HE.

Ta)v

(jLLfJLOVfJLevcov
1 1
i

ot
1
j

//.ei^

et'SoTe? o
1

ai/rtuj

&TTOveifjubfj.e0a

"DT a^ry til.


;

airoveifj-ofjieda

BT.

452

THE SOPHIST
STR. We must remember that there were to be two parts of the image-making class, the likenessmaking and the fantastic, if we should find that falsehood really existed and was in the class of real

being.

THEAET. Yes, there were. STR. But we found that falsehood does exist, and therefore we shall now, without any doubts, number the kinds of image-making art as two, shall we not ? THEAET. Yes. STR. Let us, then, again bisect the fantastic art. THEAET. How ? STR. One kind is that produced by instruments, the other that in which the producer of the appearance offers himself as the instrument. THEAET. What do you mean ?
STR.

When

anyone, by employing his

own

person

as his instrument, makes his own figure or voice seem similar to yours, that kind of fantastic art is called mimetic.

THEAET. Yes.
STR.

Let

of mimetic art

be so self-indulgent as to let it go and leave it for someone else to unify and name appropriately. THEAET. Very well, let us adopt that classification

us, then, classify this part under the but as for all the rest, let us ;

name

and

let the other part go.

But it is surely worth while to consider, Theaetetus, that the mimetic art also has two parts ;
STR.

and

I will tell

you why.

THEAET. Please do.


STR. Some who imitate do so with knowledge of that which they imitate, and others without such

453

PLATO
TOVTO TrpaTTOVCFlV, ol
EAI.
8'

OVK

LOOTS.

KOLLTOL TWO.

/zet<o StatpeCTtv dyvcoaias re KOLL yvcb&eojs 9r)crojJLV ;


OvSc/Jiiav.
SE.

OVKOVV TO ye apri
crov cr^^/za

XeftOev etSoTCOf

rjv pif-ir) jua;


fJii[JLr)-

TO yap
cratro .

rat ere ytyp'ajcrAca)^

av TLS

EAI.

ITto? 8* ou;

HE.
(3$r)v

Tt 8e
dptTrjs;

LKcuoavvr)s TO

ar^fj/jia

/cat

oA^?

vXXrj-

dp' OVK dyvoovvTts jueV, 8oaoyre? 8e' So/cow a(f>Lai 777^, o(f>68pa eTfi^&Lpovoi TroXXoi TO TOVTO 60S" eVo*> aUTOt? 7Tpo9vj.LLO'6aL (f)OLLVo9ai 7TOlLV,
OTL {JLaXlGTCL epyOLS T KO.I AoyOt? EAI. Kat 77avu ye TroAAot.
HE.
LVCLl

flL/JLOVfJ-eVOL

SlKOLlOL (JLySafjiaJS

M.OJV ovv Travre? aTroTuy^avoucrt rou So/ceil^ OVTS ; ?! TOVTOV TfOV TOVVO.V-

TIOV; 0EAI.
HE.

Udv.
oT/xat,

Mi/jL^Trjv

D XcKTeov
EAI.

TOVTOV ye erepov 8r) TOV dyvoouvra TOW

Nat.
EE.

52.

Ilo^eV

OW

OVOfJLCL

KCLTpO) Tt?

Ary^eTat TrpeVov; ^ Sr^Aov 87) ^aAeTrov 6V, StoTt TCOV yeyajp' /COT' ei'S^ Statpe'creco? TraAata Tts,
eot/cev,
CUCTTC

dpyta

Tots' ejJLTrpoaOzv

KOI davvvovs

Traprjv,

/-tT^S*

eVt^etpetv /A^SeVa 8tatpeio-#ar

/ca^o

TCOV

dvofjLaTOjv dvdyKrj p,r) o~(f>6Spa evrropelv. Se, /caV et ToX^poTepov elprjarOai, Stayvcoaeco?

eVe/ca

T^V

/Ltev
1

jtzeTa
d/oy/a

o6rjs
Madvig
;

{JLL/JLTTJO-LV

oWa BT.

454

THE SOPHIST
And yet what division can we imagine knowledge. more complete than that which separates knowledge and ignorance ? THEAET. None. STR. The example I just gave was of imitation by those who know, was it not ? For a man who imitates you would know you and your figure. THEAET. Of course. STR. But what of the figure of justice and, in a Are there not many word, of virtue in general ? who have no knowledge of it, but only a sort of opinion, and who try with the greatest eagerness to make this which they themselves think is virtue seem to exist within them, it in acts and * bv imitating ^j words to the best of their ability ? THEAET. Yes, there are very many such people. STR. Do all of them, then, fail in the attempt to seem to be just when they are not so at all ? Or is quite the opposite the case ? THEAET. Quite the opposite. STR. Then I think we must say that such an imitator is quite distinct from the other, the one who does not know from the one who knows. THEAET. Yes. STR. Where, then, can the fitting name for each of the two be found ? Clearly it is not an easy task, because there was, it seems, among the earlier thinkers a long established and careless indolence in respect to the division of classes or genera into forms or species, so that nobody even tried to make such divisions therefore there cannot be a great abundance of names. However, even though the innovation in language be a trifle bold, let us, for the sake of making a distinction, call the imitation which is
/

455

PLATO
E TrpoaeLTTcojJiev,
TWO. ^l^f](JlV.
EAi.
rrjv

Se

/tier'

eVtcrr^Ty?

"Ecrra>.

EE.

Qarepa) roivvv xprjareov


O.AA' 6V r)V,

6 yap ao

OVK eV TOLS ZiOOaiV


0EAI.
EE.

TO I?
OXJT
/

Kcu jLtctAa. T6V So^O^tt^T^V


*f

S?)

>r

LT

VyirjS
.

LT6

o \ f OLTTAOYfV

CTKOTTCOfJicOa
>/

>/

%O)V TWO.

eavTOj
EAI.

268

einjOrjs

"E^et roivvv KOLL /xaAa cru^i'ryv. o ^tev yet/3 avra)v ecmv, olofjLcvos elSevai raura a So^a^et- TO Se 6arepov crp^/ia Sta r^v i> rot?
EE.

Aoyot? KvXivSrjcnv e^et TroAA^v vrroifjiav KO.L <f>6f$ov } ojs dyvoel ravra a irpos rovs a'AAou? cos et'Sco?
EAI.

Hdvv

IJLGV

ovv

cmv eKarepov yevovs

cuv

SE.

QvKOVV TOV
Et/c

fJLV GLTrXoVV /Zl/A^T7yP TWO.,

TOV

8e clpcovLKov
EAI.

EE.

rpi/

lourou o au TO yevoy ev

>5>X
/cat

*&/
77

ouo

EAI.

"Opa

au.
/xot

HE.

SACOTTCO'

StTTto
Kttt fJLCLKpols

TLV'
TrXrjOr)

TOV fJLV

S^jLtOCTtO,

AoyOt?

Swarov

elpwveveaOat, Ka9opa>, TOV Se tSta

Te KCU fipaxeoi Aoyot? dvayKa^ovTa TOV 77/joaStaAeyojitevov evavTioXoyciv avTov aurai.


EAI.

Aeyet? opOo

456

THE SOPHIST
based on opinion, opinion-imitation, and that which is founded on knowledge, a sort of scientific imitation.

THEAET. Agreed
STR. must therefore apply ourselves to the former, for we found that the sophist was among those who imitate but was not among those who

We

know.
THEAET. Very true. STR. Then let us examine the opinion-imitator as if he were a piece of iron, and see whether he is sound or there is still some seam in him. THEAET. Let us do so. STR. Well, there is a very marked seam. For some of these imitators are simple-minded and think they know that about which they have only opinion, but the other kind because of their experience in the rough and tumble of arguments, strongly suspect and fear that they are ignorant of the things which they pretend before the public to know. THEAET. Certainly the two classes you mention both exist. STR. Then shall we call one the simple imitator and the other the dissembling imitator ? THEAET. That is reasonable, at any rate. STR. And shall we say that the latter forms one
class or

two again ? THEAET. That is your


STR.
I

affair.

I think I can see two see one who can dissemble in long speeches in public before a multitude, and the other who does it in private in short speeches and forces the person who converses with him to contradict himself. THEAET. You are quite right.

am

considering, and

classes.

457

PLATO
HE.

Tiva ovv

drro(f)atva)iji60a
rj

rov

elvai; rrorepa TTO\ITLKOV


EAI.

or)p,oXoyu<6v ;
ao<f>6v
oro<f>icrri-

A-^oAoyt/coV.
r)

HE.

Tt 8e TOP erepov pov[JLv;

KOV;
EAI.

T6

/JiV TTOV CTO<f)6v

dSuvaTOV,
8'

7Tl,7Tp

OVK

etSora

avrov

0fj.V

fjLLfJLrjrrjs

wv rov

oo(f)ov

SfjXov OTL TrapuivvjJLiov CLVTOV TL A^J/ferat^ KOL ore rovrov Set Trpoaenrelv rj$r] jjiefjidd^Ka

avrov
HE.

Kivov rov TravroLTracriv ovrtos OVKOVV avvoTJao^ev avrov, KaOdrrep


,

rovvofjid avfjiTrXe^avres drro reXevrrjs

0EAI.
HE.

aw
2

fJiV OVV.

rrjs evavnoTTOioXoyLKrjs /Jipovs rrjs ooaotriKrjs /zi/z^TiKoV, rov <f>avrao~riKOV yevovs drro rijs eloaiXoTrouKrjs ov Belov aAA dvOpajTTLKOv rfjs rroirjaeajs dcfttopiafJLevov cv Xoyois TO OavfjiaroTrouKov fjiopiov, ravrrjs rfjs yevea? re
/cat

To

8^

ai/maro? o? av

(f)fj

rov ovrws

&o<f)Lcrrr]V etvat,

yOearara,
0EAI.

co? eot/cev, epet.

Yiavrdrfa.cn
1

^ev ovv.

r6

Stephanus ; rbv BT. Schleiermacher ; rbv BT.


r6

458

THE SOPHIST
STR. And what name shall we give to him who makes the longer speeches ? Statesman or popular

orator

THEAET. Popular orator.


STR.

And what
?

shall

we

call

the other?

Philoso-

THEAET. We cannot very well call him philosopher, by our hypothesis he is ignorant but since he is an imitator of the philosopher, he will evidently have a name derived from his, and I think I am sure at last that we must truly call him the absolutely real
since
;

pher or sophist

and actual

sophist. STR. Shall we then


it

before, winding

bind up his name as we did up from the end to the beginning ?

THEAET.
STR.

of the dissembling part of the art of opinion which is part of the art of contradiction and belongs to the fantastic class of the

By all means. The imitative kind

image-making art, and is not divine, but human, and has been defined in arguments as the juggling part of productive activity he who says that the true sophist is of this descent and blood will, in my opinion,
speak the exact truth. THEAET. Yes, he certainly
will.

459

INDEX
Absolute and relative existence, 409 Aeschylus, 193 n. All, 231 ff., 367, 369
Democritus, 373
Dialectic, 4, 401 Difference, 262 not Different,
n.

opposite,

Amphitryon, 125
Angler, 273 if. Antaeus, 103 Antisthenes, 371 n., 393 n. Aphrodite, 359 Aristeides, 37 Aristippus, 373 n. Artemis, 31 Atomists, 373 n. Aviary, in the soul, 207 ff.
Being,
161, 163, 165, 262, 263, 351, 361 ff., 403, 405, 407, 409, 413 ff.
n.

415 ff. Dionysodorus, 393 n. Discourse, 425 ff, 433

Education, 313
Eleatic,

ff.

262,

359,

365 n.,

371

n.

Electra, 193 n. Elements, active and passive, 59 ff. , 149 ; admit of no

explanation,
381, 395

223 ff, 237,

Empedocles, 43,359 n.,371n.


Ephesians, 141

Cadmus, 377
Callias, 89

Epicharmus, 43 Erineum, 11
Eucleides, 3, 7-11

Characteristic,

distinguishing, 249 Classes, or genera, 401, 403,

Euphronius, 15 Eurycles, 397 Euthydemus, 393

n.

409 ff. Combinations of elements, 225 ff, 381; of letters, 227 ff. Condition, passive or active, 381 ff. Cubes, cube roots, 2' n.

443

five classes,

False opinion, 351 ff., 443, 445 Falsehood, 353, 429 f., 453 Fancy, 429 Fantastic art, 335, 429, 443, 453

461

INDEX
Gorgias, 371
n.

Nouns, 433
Oceanus,

ff.

Hera, 51
Heracleitus, 4, 43, 73, 141, 359 n., 371 n. Heracles, 103 n., 105, 125

43, 143

Hesiod, 243 Hipponicus, 89

Opinion, 167-255 passim, 351 ff, 429, 443, 445, 455 ff. Orestes, 193 n. Other, 263, 407 ff.

Homer,

43, 45, 46, 73, 109, 141, 155, 197, 265

Parmenides,

43,

262, 265, 269, 357, 367, 421

145, 337,

155, 355,

Ideas, 4, 401, 403, 405, 433

Image, 347, 319, 451


Imitation, 329 ff., 451 ff. Ionian 359, philosophers, 371 n. 55 Iris,

Perception, 39 ff, 71, 73, 149ff.,157,161,167, 185ff, 225 Phaenarete, 31 Pherecydes, 359 n.

Knowledge, 3-257 passim,


455, 457

Philosopher, 261, 265, 267, 401, 403, 459 Pindar, 121 Plato, 373 n., 379 n., 433 n. Polydeuces, 121 n.

Letters, 227

ff.,

399, 433

Power, 379
Prodicus, 39 Protagoras, 41, 43, 51, 55, 73, 75, >7, 79, 81, 89, 93, 101,
105, 107, 109, 111, 113, 115, 135, 137, 155, 371 n.

Leucippus, 373 n. Lysimachus, 37

man the measure of all things, 41 ff., 95 ff., 135 Megarians, 371 n. Meletus, 257 Melissus, 145, 155 Memory, 4, 85 ff, 185 ff.
Measure,
Midwives, midwifery,
33, 61, 257
3, 31,

Reason, with true opinion, 223 ff. Relative existence, 409 Rest, 263, 387, 389, 393, 395, 405, 407 Roots, 25 ff.

Mimetic

art,

453
133 ff, 263,
ff.

Motion, 43

ff.,

Same, 263, 407


Sciron, 103

ff.

385, 387, 389, 395, 405

Mysians, 253

Sentence, 435

ff.

Not -being,

161, 262, 337, 339 ff, 351, 361, 371,391, 393, 413 ff, 431

Sicilian philosophers, 359 Sight, theory of, 57 f. Socrates, 3-271 passim; the younger, 271

462

INDEX
Sophist, 261-459 passim Speech, 437 ff., 441 f. false,
;

Truth,

Protagoras 's

book,

77, 79, 111

443 f. Squares, square roots, 25 Statesman, 261, 267 Subject, of sentence, 437 Syllables, 227 ff.
Terpsion, 3, 7-11 Tethys, 43, 143 Thales, 121 Thauraas, 55 Theaetetus, 3-459 passim

ff.

Verbs, 433 ff. Vowels, 399

ff.

Wax, block
185
ff.

of in the soul,

Whole, 231

ff, 367, 369, 371

Xenophanes, 359
Zeno, 265, 365 n. Zeus, 9, 47 n., 109, 147, 163, 203, 205, 245, 401

Theodorus, 11-269 passim Theseus, 103 n., 105 Thought and speech the same, 441

Printed

in

Great Britain by R.

&

R. CI.AKK, LIMITED, Edinburgh.

(123)

THE LOEB CLASSICAL


LIBRARY
VOLUMES ALREADY PUBLISHED
LATIN AUTHORS

AMMIANUS MARCELLINUS. J. C. Rolfe. 3 Vols. APULEIUS THE GOLDEN Ass (METAMORPHOSES). W. Adlington (1566). Revised by S. Gaselee. CITY OF GOD. 7 Vols. Vol. I. G. E. ST. AUGUSTINE
: :

Vol. VI. W. C. Greene. ST. AUGUSTINE, CONFESSIONS OF. W. Watts (1631). SELECT LETTERS. J. H. Baxter. ST. AUGUSTINE AUSONIUS. H. G. Evelyn White. 2 Vols. BEDE. J. E. King. 2 Vols.

McCracken.

2 Vols.

TRACTS AND DE CONSOLATIONE PHILOSOPHIAE. BOETHIUS Rev. H. F. Stewart and E. K. Rand. CAESAR ALEXANDRIAN, AFRICAN AND SPANISH WARS. A. G.
:
:

Way.
CAESAR CIVIL WARS. A. G. Peskett. CAESAR GALLIC WAR. H. J. Edwards. CATO AND VARRO DE RE RUSTICA. H. B. Ash and W. D.
: : :

Hooper. CATULLUS. F. W. Cornish TIBULLUS. J. B. Postgate and PERVIGILIUM VENERIS. J. W. Mackail. DE MEDICINA. W. G. Spencer. 3 Vols. CELSUS BRUTUS AND ORATOR. G. L. Hendrickson and CICERO H. M. Hubbell. DE FINIBUS. H. Rackham. CICERO DE INVENTIONS, etc. H. M. Hubbell. CICERO DE NATURA DEORUM AND ACADEMICA. H. RackCICERO
; ;
: : : : :

ham.

THE LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY


CICERO CICERO
:

DE

OFFICIIS.

Walter Miller.
:
:

DE ORATORE, etc. 2 Vols. Vol. I DE ORATORE, Books I and II. E. W. Sutton and H. Rackham Vol. II DE ORATORE, BOOK III DE FATO PARADOXA STOICORUM DE PARTITIONS ORATORIA. H. Rackham. DE REPUBLICA, DE LEGIBUS, SOMNIUM SCIPIONIS. CICERO
:

Clinton
:

W.

DE SENECTUTE, DE AMICITIA, DE DIVINATIONE. CICERO W. A. Falconer. CICERO IN CATILINAM, PRO MURENA, PRO SULLA, PRO FLACCO. Louis E. Lord. CICERO LETTERS TO ATTICUS. E. O. Winstedt. 3 Vols. CICERO LETTERS TO HIS FRIENDS. W. Glynn Williams. 3 Vols. CICERO PHILIPPICS. W. C. A. Ker. PRO ARCHIA, POST REDITUM, DE DOMO, DE HACICERO RUSPICUM RESPONSIS, PRO PLANCIO. N. H. Watts. CICERO PRO CAECINA, PRO LEGE MANILLA, PRO CLUENTIO, PRO RABIRIO. H. Grose Hodge. CICERO PRO CAELIO, DE PROVINCIIS CONSULARIBUS, PRO BALBO. R. Gardner. CICERO PRO MILONE, IN PISONEM, PRO SCAURO, PRO FONTEIO, PRO RABIRIO POSTUMO, PRO MARCELLO, PRO LIGARIO, PRO REGE DEIOTARO. N. H. Watts. CICERO PRO QUINCTIO, PRO Roscio AMERINO, PRO Roscio COMOEDO, CONTRA RULLUM. J. H. Freese. CICERO PRO SESTIO, IN VATINIUM. R. Gardner. RHETORICA AD HERENNIUM. H. Caplan. [CICERO] CICERO TUSCULAN DISPUTATIONS. J. E. King. CICERO VERRINE ORATIONS. L. H. G. Greenwood. 2 Vols. CLAUDIAN. M. Platnauer. 2 Vols. COLUMELLA DE RE RUSTICA DE ARBORIBUS. H. B. Ash, E. S. Forster, E. Heffner. 3 Vols. ^ HISTORY OF ALEXANDER. J. C. Rolfe. 2 Vols. CURTIUS, Q. FLORUS. E. S. Forster and CORNELIUS NEPOS. J. C. Rolfe. FRONTINUS STRATAGEMS AND AQUEDUCTS. C. E. Bennett and M. B. McElwain. FRONTO CORRESPONDENCE. C. R. Haines. 2 Vols.
: : : :
:

Keyes.

GELHUS.
:
:

J. C. Rolfe.

3 Vols.
Fairclough.

HORACE ODES AND EPODES. C. E. Bennett. HORACE SATIRES, EPISTLES, ARS POETICA. H. R. JEROME SELECT LETTERS. F. A. Wright. JUVENAL AND PERSIUS. G. G. Ramsay.
:

THE LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY


LIVY.
B. O. Foster, F. G. Moore,

Schlesinger and R. LUCAN. J. D. Duff.

Evan T. Sage, A. C. M. Geer (General Index). 14 Vols.

W. H. D. Rouse. MARTIAL. W. C. A. Ker. 2 Vols. MINOR LATIN POETS from PUBLILIUS SYRUS to RUTILIUS CALPURNIUS SICULUS, NAMATIANUS, including GRATTIUS, " " Phoenix " and NEMESIANUS, AVIANUS, with Aetna," other poems. J. Wight Duff and Arnold M. Duff. OVID THE ART OF LOVE AND OTHER POEMS. J. H. MozLUCRETIUS.
: :

ley.

OVID OVID OVID OVID

FASTI. Sir James G. Frazer. HEROIDES AND AMORES. Grant Showerman. METAMORPHOSES. F. J. Miller. 2 Vols. TRISTIA AND Ex PONTO. A. L. Wheeler. PETRONIUS. M. Heseltine SENECA APOCOLOCYNTOSIS.
:
:

W. H. D. Rouse. PLAUTUS. Paul Nixon. 5 Vols. PLINY LETTERS. Melmoth's translation revised by W. M. L. Hutchinson. 2 Vols. PLINY NATURAL HISTORY. 10 Vols. Vols. I-V and IX. H. Rackham. Vols. VI and VII. W. H. S. Jones. PROPERTIUS. H. E. Butler. PRUDENTIUS. H. J. Thomson. 2 Vols. QUINTILIAN. H. E. Butler. 4 Vols. REMAINS OF OLD LATIN. E. H. Warmington. 4 Vols. Vol. I (Ennius and Caecilius). Vol. II (Livius, Naevius,
:

Pacuvius, Accius). Vol. Ill (Lucilius, Laws of the XII Tables). Vol. IV (Archaic Inscriptions). SALLUST. J. C. Rolfe. SCRIPTORES HISTORIAE AUGUSTAE. D. Magie. 3 Vols. SENECA APOCOLOCYNTOSIS. Cf. PETRONIUS. SENECA EPISTULAE MORALES. R. M. Gummere. 3 Vols. SENECA MORAL ESSAYS. J. W. Basore. 3 Vols. SENECA TRAGEDIES. F. J. Miller. 2 Vols. SIDONIUS POEMS AND LETTERS. W. B. Anderson. 2 Vols. SILIUS ITALICUS. J. D. Duff. 2 Vols. STATIUS. J. H. Mozley. 2 Vols. SUETONIUS. J. C. Rolfe. 2 Vols. TACITUS DIALOGUS. Sir Win. Peterson and AGRICOLA AND GERMANIA. Maurice Hutton. TACITUS HISTORIES AND ANNALS. C. H. Moore and J. Jackson. 4 Vols.
: :

THE LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY


TERENCE. John Sargeaunt. 2 Vols. TERTULLIAN APOLOGIA AND DE SPECTACULIS. T. R. Glover MINUCIUS FELIX. G. H. Rendall. VALERIUS FLACCUS. J. H. Mozley. VAHRO DE LINGUA LATINA. R. G. Kent. 2 Vols. VELLEIUS PATERCULUS AND RES GESTAE DIVI AUGUST!
:

Shipley. VIRGIL. H. R. Fairclough.

F.

W.

2 Vols.
F. Granger.

VITHUVIUS

DE ARCHITECTURA.

2 Vols.

GREEK AUTHORS
ACHILLES TATIUS.
S. Gaselee.

OF ANIMALS. A. F. Scholfield. 3 Vols. AENEAS TACTICUS, ASCLEPIODOTUS AND ONASANDER. The Illinois Greek Club. AESCHINES. C. D. Adams. AESCHYLUS. H. Weir Smyth. 2 Vols. LETTERS. A. R. ALCIPHRON, AELIAN AND PHILOSTRATUS Benner and F. H. Fobes. APOLLODORUS. Sir James G. Frazer. 2 Vols. APOLLONIUS RHODIUS. R. C. Seaton. THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. Kirsopp Lake. 2 Vols. APPIAN'S ROMAN HISTORY. Horace White. 4 Vols.

AELIAN

ON THE NATURE

AHATUS. Gf. CALLIMACHUS. ARISTOPHANES. Benjamin Bickley Rogers.


trans.
:

3 Vols.

Verse

ARISTOTLE ART OF RHETORIC. J. H. Freese. ATHENIAN CONSTITUTION, EUDEMIAN ETHICS, ARISTOTLE VIRTUES AND VICES. H. Rackham. ARISTOTLE GENERATION OF ANIMALS. A. L. Peck. ARISTOTLE METAPHYSICS. H. Tredennick. 2 Vols. ARISTOTLE METEOROLOGICA. H. D. P. Lee. MINOR WORKS. W. S. Hett. ""On Colours," ARISTOTLE " " On Plants," On Heard," Physiognomies," Things " " Mechanical Problems," On Marvellous Things Heard," " " Situations and Names of On Indivisible Lines," " Winds," On Melissus, Xenophanes, and Gorgias." ARISTOTLE NICOMACHEAN ETHICS. H. Rackham.
: : : : : :

THE LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY


OECONOMICA AND MAGNA MORALIA. G. C. ARISTOTLE Armstrong. (With Metaphysics, Vol. II.) ARISTOTLE ON THE HEAVENS. W. K. C. Guthrie. ARISTOTLE ON THE SOUL, PARVA NATURALIA, ON BREATH.
: : :

W.

S. Hett.
:

ARISTOTLE THE CATEGORIES. ON INTERPRETATION. H. P. Cooke ; PRIOR ANALYTICS. H. Tredennick. H. Tredennick POSTERIOR ANALYTICS. ARISTOTLE
: ;

E. S. Forster. ARISTOTLE SOPHISTICAL REFUTATIONS. COMING-TO-BE AND PASSING-AWAY. E. S. Forster. ON THE COSMOS. D. J.
TOPICS.
:

ARISTOTLE PARTS OF ANIMALS. A. L. Peck ; MOTION AND PROGRESSION OF ANIMALS. E. S. Forster. ARISTOTLE PHYSICS. Rev. P. Wicksteed and F. M. Corn:
:

Furley.

2 Vols. W. POETICS ; LONGINUS ON THE SUBLIME. ARISTOTLE Hamilton Fyfe ; DEMETRIUS ON STYLE. W. Rhys Roberts.
ford.
:

ARISTOTLE POLITICS. H. Rackham. ARISTOTLE PROBLEMS. W. S. Hett. 2 Vols. RHETORICA AD ALEXANDHUM. H. Rackham. ARISTOTLE (With Problems, Vol. II.) ARRIAN : HISTORY OF ALEXANDER AND INDICA. Rev. E. 2 Vols. Iliffe Robson.
:
: :

ATHENAEUS
ST. BASIL
:

DEIPNOSOPHISTAE. C. B. Gulick. 7 Vols. LETTERS. R. J. Deferrari. 4 Vols. CALLIMACHUS FRAGMENTS. C. A. Trypanis. HYMNS AND EPIGRAMS, AND LYCOPHRON. CALLIMACHUS A. W. Mair AHATUS. G. R. Mair. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA. Rev. G. W. Butterworth. COLLUTHUS. Cf. OPPIAN. DAPHNIS AND CHLOE. Cf. LONGUS. DEMOSTHENES I : OLYNTHIACS, PHILIPPICS AND MINOR
: :
:

ORATIONS I-XVII AND XX. J. H. Vince. DEMOSTHENES II DE CORONA AND DE FALSA LEGATIONS. C. A. Vince and J. H. Vince. DEMOSTHENES III MEIDIAS, ANDROTION, ARISTOCRATES, TIMOCRATES, ARISTOGEITON. J. H. Vince. DEMOSTHENES IV-VI PRIVATE ORATIONS AND IN NEAEBAM.
:

A. T. Murray.

DEMOSTHENES VII FUNERAL SPEECH, EROTIC ESSAY, EXORDIA AND LETTERS. N. W. and N. J. DeWitt. Dio CASSIUS ROMAN HISTORY. E. Gary. 9 Vols.
:

THE LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY


Dio CHRYSOSTOM.
Vol. III.
J.

5 Vols.

Vols.

and

II.

J.

W. Cohoon and H. Lamar and V. H. Lamar Crosby.


DIODORUS SICULUS.

Crosby.

W. Cohoon. Vols. IV

12 Vols. Vols. I-VI. C. H. Oldfather. Vol. VII. C. L. Sherman. Vols. IX and X. Russel M. Geer. Vol. XI. F. R. Walton. DIOGENES LAERTIUS. R. D. Hicks. 2 Vols.

ROMAN ANTIQUITIES. SpelDIONYSIUS OF HALICARNASSUS man's translation revised by E. Gary. 7 Vols. EPICTETUS. W. A. Oldfather. 2 Vols. EURIPIDES. A. S. Way. 4 Vols. Verse trans. EUSEBIUS ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY. Kirsopp Lake and
:

J.

E. L. Oulton.
:

2 Vols.

GALEN ON THE NATURAL FACULTIES. A. J. Brock. THE GREEK ANTHOLOGY. W. R. Paton. 5 Vols. THE GREEK BUCOLIC POETS (THEOCRITUS, BION, MOSCHUS). J. M. Edmonds. GREEK ELEGY AND IAMBUS WITH THE ANACREONTEA. J. M. Edmonds. 2 Vols. GREEK MATHEMATICAL WORKS. Ivor Thomas. 2 Vols.
HERODES. Cf. THEOPHRASTUS CHARACTERS. HERODOTUS. A. D. Godley. 4 Vols. HESIOD AND THE HOMERIC HYMNS. H. G. Evelyn White. HIPPOCRATES AND THE FRAGMENTS OF HERACLEITUS. W. H. Jones and E. T. Withington. 4 Vols. HOMER ILIAD. A. T. Murray. 2 Vols. HOMER ODYSSEY. A. T. Murray. 2 Vols.
:

S.

E. S. Forster. ISOCRATES. George Norlin and LaRue Van Hook. 3 Vols. ST. JOHN DAMASCENE BARLAAM AND IOASAPH. Rev. G. R. Woodward and Harold Mattingly. JOSEPHUS. H. St. J. Thackeray and Ralph Marcus. 9 Vols. Vols. I-VII. JULIAN. Wilmer Cave Wright. 3 Vols.
ISAEUS.
:

LONGUS

revised

by

LUCIAN. K. Kilburn; Vol. VIII. M. D. Macleod. LYCOPHRON. Cf. CALLIMACHUS. LYRA GRAECA. J. M. Edmonds. 3 Vols. LYSIAS. W. R. M. Lamb. MANETHO. W. G. Waddell PTOLEMY TETRABIBLOS. F. E. Robbins.
;

DAPHNIS AND CHLOE. Thornley's translation J. M. Edmonds; and PARTHENIUS. S. Gaselee. 8 Vols. Vols. I-V. A. M. Harmon; Vol. VI.

THE LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY


K. J. Maidment and O. Burtt. NONNOS DIONYSIACA. W. H. D. Rouse. 3 Vols. OPPIAN, COLLUTHUS, TRVPHIODORUS. A. W. Mair. PAPYRI. NON-LITERARY SELECTIONS. A. S. Hunt and C. C. Edgar. 2 Vols. LITERARY SELECTIONS (Poetry). D. L. Page. PARTHENIUS. Cf. LONGUS. PAUSANIAS DESCRIPTION OF GREECE. W. H. S. Jones. 5 Vols. and Companion Vol. arranged by R. E. WycherJ.
: :

MARCUS AURELIUS. C. R. Haines. MENANDER. F. G. Allinson. MINOR ATTIC ORATORS. 2 Vols.

ley.

10 Vols. Vols. I-V. F. H. Colson and Rev. G. H. Whitaker Vols. VI-IX. F. H. Colson. Two Supplementary Vols. Translation only from an Armenian Text. Ralph Marcus. PHILOSTRATUS IMAGINES CALLISTRATUS DESCRIPTIONS.

PHILO.

A. Fairbanks. PHILOSTRATUS THE LIFE OF APOLLONIUS OF TYANA. F. C. Conybeare. 2 Vols. PHILOSTRATUS AND EUNAPIUS LIVES OF THE SOPHISTS. Wilmer Cave Wright. PINDAR. Sir J. E. Sandys. PLATO CHARMIDES, ALCIBIADES, HIPPARCHUS, THE LOVERS, THEAGES, MINOS AND EPINOMIS. W. R. M. Lamb. PLATO CRATYLUS, PARMENIDES, GREATER HIPPIAS, LESSER HIPPIAS. H. N. Fowler. PLATO EUTHYPHRO, APOLOGY, CRITO, PHAEDO, PHAEDRUS. H. N. Fowler. PLATO LACHES, PROTAGORAS, MENO, EUTHYDEMUS. W. R. M. Lamb. PLATO LAWS. Rev. R. G. Bury. 2 Vols. PLATO LYSIS, SYMPOSIUM, GORGIAS. W. R. M. Lamb. PLATO REPUBLIC. Paul Shorey. 2 Vols. PLATO H. N. Fowler ION. STATESMAN, PHILEBUS. W. R. M. Lamb. PLATO THEAETETUS AND SOPHIST. H. N. Fowler. PLATO TIMAEUS, CRITIAS, CLITOPHO, MENEXENUS, EPISTULAE. Rev. R. G. Bury.
: :
:

:
:

PLUTARCH

MORALIA. 15 Vols. Vols. I-V. F. C. Babbitt ; Vol. VI. W. C. Helmbold Vol. VII. P. H. De Lacy and B. Einarson Vol. IX. E. L. Minar, Jr., F. H. Sandbach,
: ; ;

THE LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY


W.
Vol. X. H. N. Fowler C. Helmbold Cherniss and W. C. Helmbold.
;
:

Vol. XII.
11 Vols.

H.

PLUTARCH
POLYBIUS. PROCOPIUS

THE PARALLEL LIVES. W. R. Paton. 6 Vols.

B. Perrin.

PTOLEMY

HISTORY OF THE WARS. H. B. Dewing. TETRABIBLOS. Of. MANETHO.


F. Storr.
:

7 Vols.

QUINTUS SMYRNAEUS. A. S. Way. Verse trans. SEXTUS EMPIRICUS. Rev. R. G. Bury. 4 Vols.
SOPHOCLES.
:

2 Vols.

Verse trans.
:

STRABO GEOGRAPHY. Horace L. Jones. 8 Vols. THEOPHRASTUS CHARACTERS. J. M. Edmonds HERODES.


etc. A. D. Knox. THEOPHRASTUS ENQUIRY INTO PLANTS.
:

Sir Arthur Hort.

2 Vols.

THUCYDIDES. C. F. Smith. 4 Vols. TRYPHIODORUS. Cf. OPPIAN. XENOPHON CYROPAEDIA. Walter Miller. 2 Vols. XENOPHON HELLENICA, ANABASIS, APOLOGY, AND SYMPOSIUM. C. L. Brownson and O. J. Todd. 3 Vols. XENOPHON MEMORABILIA AND OECONOMICUS. E. C. Mar:

chant.

XENOPHON

SCRIPTA MINOR A.

E. C. Marchant.

VOLUMES

IN

PREPARATION

GREEK AUTHORS
ARISTOTLE
PLOTINUS.
:

HISTORY OF ANIMALS. A. H. Armstrong


1

A. L. Peck.

LATIN AUTHORS
BABRIUS AND PHAEDRUS.
B. E. Perry.

DESCRIPTIVE PROSPECTUS ON APPLICATION


CAMBRIDGE, MASS.

HARVARD UNIV. PRESS


8

LONDON WILLIAM HEINEMANN LTD

VOLUMES PUBLISHED
CICERO:
Cl CI(
I5E
.

LATIN AUTHORS

continued

KA DEORUM. ACADEMICA
OFFICIIS

CICERO: DE REPUBLICA, DE LEGIBUS CICERO: DE SF.NECTUTE, DE AMICIT1A, Dt DIVJNATIONE CICERO: LETTERS TO ATTICUS. 3 vols CICERO: LETTERS TO HIS FRIENDS. 3 Vols. CICERO: PHILIPPI CICERO: PRO ARCHIA POETA, POST REDITUM IN SENATU,

POST

REDJTUM AD QUJRITES, DE DOMO SUA, DE HARUSPICUM RESPONSIS, I'RO PLANCIO CICERO: PRO CAECINA, PRO LEGE MANILIA, PRO CLUENT1O, PRO
KABIRIO

CICEiRO: PRO QUINCTIO, PRO ROSCIO AMERIND, PRO ROSCIO COMOEDO, CONTRA RULLUM CICERO: PRO MILONE, IN PISONEM, PRO SCAURO, PRO ONTEIO, PRO RAB POSTUMO, PRO MARCELLO. PRO LIOARIO, PRO REGE
DEIOTARO

CICERO: PRO
:

SESTIO. IN

VATINIUM

CICEJRO: PRO GAELIC, DE PROVINaiS CONSULARIBUS, PRO BALBO CICEiRO TUSCULAN DISPUTATIONS CICEiRO: VERRINE ORATIONS. 2 vols.

CLAUDIAN.

2 vols.

COLUMELLA:

DE RE RUSTICA.

3 vols.

CURTIUS: HISTORY OF ALEXANDER. 2 vols. FLORUS. CORNELIUS NEPOS FRONTINUS: STRATAGEMS and AQUEDUCTS

PRONTO: CORRESPONDENCE. 2 vols. -GEL1LIUS, A.: ATTIC NIGHTS. 3 vols. HORACE: ODES and BPODES

HORACE: JEROME:

SATIRES, EPISTLES, ARS POETICA

SELECT LETTERS

JUVENAL

and PERSIUS

LUCAN
LUCRETIUS MARTIAL. 2 vols. MINOR LATIN POETS:
Namatianus,
including

LIVY.

14 vols.

from Publilius Syrus to Rutilius Grattius, Calpurnius, Nemesianus,

Avianus, and others

OVID: ART OP LOVE AND OTHER POEMS OVID: FASTI OVID: HEROIDES. AMORES OVID: METAMORPHOSES. 2 vols. OVID: TRISTIA, EX PONTO PETRONIUS. SENECA: APOCOLOCYNTOSIS

PLAUTUS.

5 vols.

PLINY: LETTERS. 2 vols. PLINY: NATURAL HISTORY.

10 vols. Vols. I-VII and

jX

PROPERTIUS PRUDENTIUS.
QUINTILIAN.

2 vols.

4 vols.

REMAINS OF OLD LATIN. 4 vols. SALLUST SCRIPTORES HISTORIAE AUGUSTAE. SENECA: EPISTULAE MORALES. 3 vols. SENECA: MORAL ESSAYS. 3 vols. SENECA: TRAGEDIES. 2 vols.
SIDONIUS: FORMS AND
SILIUS ITALICUS. STATIUS. 2 vols.

3 vols

LETTERS, 2 vols. Vol. 2 vols.

SUETONIUS. 2 vols. TACITUS: DIALOOUS, AGRICOLA, OERMANIA TACITUS: HISTORIES and ANNALS. 4 vols. TERENCE. 2 vols. TEHTULLIAN: APOLOGY, DE SPECTACULIS. MINUC1US FELIX VAIERIUS FLACCUS
VAK.RO: DE LINGUA
VIlfclL. 2
r
vols.

LATINA. 2 Vols.

VEfLEIUS PATERCULUS. RES GESTAE DIVI AUGUST!


2 vols.

vrrkuvius.

LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY


-

LUMES PUBLISHED
3 vols.

GREEK AUTHORS

continued

LYRA GRAECA.
LYSIAS
HO.

PTOLEMY: MARCUS AURELIUS

TETRABIBLOS

MINOR ATTIC ORATORS.


NONNOS:
PAUSANIAS:
PHILO.

MENANDER

2 vols.

OPPIAN. COL.LUTHUS. TRYPHIODORUS PAPYRI: SELECTIONS. 5 vols. Vols. I-II1


10' vols.

qiONYSiACA. 3 vols.

PINDAR
PLATO:

PHILOSTRATUS: LIFE OF APOLLONIUS OF TYANA. 2 vols. PHILOSTRATUS AND EUNAPIUS: LIVES OF THE SOPHISTS PHILOSTRATUS: IMAGINES. CALLISJRATUS: DESCRIPTIONS
CHARMIDES, ALCIBIADES
I

DESCRIPTION OF GREECE. 5 vols. I-IX. AND 2 supplementary vol

&

IL -HIPPARCHUS, THE LOVERS, THEAGFS, MINOS,

EPINOM1S

PLATO: CRATYLUS. PARMENIDES, GREATER AND LESSER HIPPIAS PLATO: EUTHYPHRO, APOLOGY, CRITO, PHAEjpO, PHAEDRUS PLATO: LACHES, PROTAGORAS, MENO, t IDS PLATO: LAWS. 2 vols. PLATO: LYSIS. SYMPOSIUM. GORGIAS PLATO: REPUBLIC. 2 vols. PLATO: STATESMAN. PHILEBUS, ION PLATO: THEAETETUS, SOPHIST PLATO: TIMAEUS, CRITIAS, CLE1TOPHON, MENEXENUS, EPISTLES

PLUTARCH: PLUTARCH:

PARALLEL LIVES. 11 vols. MORALIA. 15 vols. Vols. I-V1I. IX, X,


vols.

XH

POLYBIUS. 6 PROCOPIUS.

7 vols.

PTOLEMY: TETRABIBLOS (with MANETHO) QUINTUS SMYRNAEUS SEXTUS EMPIRICUS. 4 vols.

THEOCRITUS THEOPHRASTUS: CHARACTERS. HERODES, CERCIDAS, and CHOLIAMBIC POETS THEOPHRASTUS: ENQUIRY INTO PLANTS. 2 vols. THUCYDIDES. 4 vols. XENOPHON: CYROPAEDIA. 2 vols. XENOPHON: HELLENICA, ANABASIS. APOLOGY, SYMPOSIUM. 3 vols. XENOPHON: MEMORABILIA and OECONOMICUS XENOPHON: SCRIPTA MINORA LATIN AUTHORS

SOPHOCLES. 2 vols. STRABO: GEOGRAPHY,

8 vols.

the

GREEK

AMMIANUS MARCJELLINUS.
APULEIUS: THE GOLDEN

3 vols.
I

ST. ST. ST.

AUGUSTINE: AUGUSTINE: AUGUSTINE:

ASS (METAMORPHOSES)

CITY OF GOD. 7 vols. Vols. CONFESSIONS. 2 vols. SELECT LETTERS

and VI.

AUSONIUS. 2 vols. BEDE: HISTORICAL WORKS. 2 vols. BOETHIUS: TRACTATES and DE CONSOLATIONS. IPHILOSOPHIAB

CAESAR: CAESAR: CAESAR:

ALEXANDRIAN, AFRICAN AND SPANISH WARS


CIVIL

WARS

CATO

AND

GALLIC WARS VARRO: DE RE RUSTICA


MEDICINA.
3 vols.

CATULLUS. TIBULLUS, PERVIGILIUM VENERIS


CELSUS: DE

CICERO: BRUTUS AND ORATOR CICERO^IN CATTLINAM, PRO MURENA, PRO SULLA, PRO FLACCO iiooks and 11) CICERO: DE QRA'TORE (Book III), DE FATO, and CICERO: DE INVENTIONE, DE OPTIMO Gf TORUM, TOi
!
>

[CICERO]: AD HERENNIUM

LONDON
WM. HEINEMANN LTD.

CAMBRIDGE. MASS.

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

PRESS

Descriptive pamphlet on application