plato - theaetetus, sophist

8/2/2019 Plato - Theaetetus, Sophist

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/plato-theaetetus-sophist 1/487

LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY

PLATOTHEAETETUS SOPHIST

(IEan)

Translated by

H. JV. FOWLER

I

!

Printed in Great Britain



VOLUMES PUBLISHED GREEK AUTHORS

ACHILLES TAT1USAELIAN: ON ANIMALS. 3 vols.

AENEAS TACTICUS. ASCLEPIODOTUS. ONASANDERAESCHINESAESCHYLUS. 2 vols.

ALCIPHRON. Ail IAN. PHILOSTRATUS: TIII

ANTIPHON \NDOCID1

APOLLODORUS.APOLLONIUS RHODIUSTHE APOSTOLIC FATHERS. 2 vols.

APPIAN: ROMAN HISTORY. 4

ARISTOPHANES. 3 vols.

ARISTOTLE: ART OF RHETORIC

ARISTOTLE: AI

ARISTOTLE: GENERATION OF ANIMALS

ARISTOTL: METAPHYSICS. 2

ARISTOTLE: METEOROLOGIA

ARISTOTLE: MINOR WORKSARISTOTLE: NICOMACHEAN ETHICS

ARISTOTLE: OECONOMICA, MAGNA MORALIA (with METAPHYSICS.ARISTOTLE: ON THE HEAVENS Vol. II)

ARISTOTLE: ON THE SOUL, PARVA NATURAI i \

ARISTOTLE: CATEGORIES, ON INTERPRETATION, PRIOR

ARISTOTLE: POSTERIOR ANALYTICS, TOPICS

ARISTOTLE: ON SOPHISTICAL REFUTATIONS, and othc

ARISTOTLE: PARTS, MOVEMENT, PROGRESSION I\LS

ARISTOTLE: PHYSICS. 2 vols.

ARISTOTLE: POETICS. LONGINUS: ON mi

DEMETRIUS: ON STYUARISTOTLE: POLII

ARISTOTLE: PROBLEMS. 2 *,

ARISTOTLE: RHETORICA AD ALEXANDRIA! (will 11)

ARRIAN HISlOKY (II AUXANDEK AND INDICA. 2

ATHENAEUS: THE DUPNOSOPHISIS

ST. BASIL: II ITERS. 4 vols.

CALLIMACHUS: FRAGMIMSCALLIMACHUS. HYMNS. IPIGKAMS. LYCOPHRON. ARAT!

\ILNT OH ALEXANDRIADEMOSTHENES I: OI.VVM: I-HILIPPI<

ORATIONS: I-XV1I and XXDEMOSTHENES II: DE CORONA and DE FALSA LI

DEMOSTHENES III: MEIDIAS, ANDROI ARISTOCRAI

TIMOCRATES and ARISTOGEITON, I and II

DEMOSTHENES IV-VI: PRIVATE ORATIONS and < AMDEMOSTHENES VII: EHNERAI SPFICH, EROTIC i >i \

and LETTERS

DIO CASS1US. 9 vols.

DIO CHRYSOSTOM. 5 vol

DIODORUS SICULUS. 12 vols. Vols. l-Vll. IX. X. XI

DIOGENES LAERTIUS. 2 vols.

DIONYSIUS OF HALICARNASSUS: u

EPICTETUS. 2 vols.

EURIPIDES. 4 vols.

EUSEBIUS: ECCLESI

GALEN:or .SURE FACULTIES

THE GREEK ANTHOLOGY. 5 vols.

THE GREEK BUCOLIC POETS: THEOCRITUS, BIO

MOSCHUS 25S 1

GREEK ELEGY and IAMBUS with the ANACREONTE A. 2 vols.

GREEK MATHEMATICAL WORKS. 2 -,

HERODOTUS. 4 vols.

HESIOD and the HOMERIC HYMHIPPOCRATES. 4

HOMER: HI AD. 2 vols.

HOMER: ODYSSEY. 2 %

ISAEUS ^J4

ISOCRATES.3 vols.

ST JOHN DAMASCENE: BAREAA i'H 3*

JCSEPHUS. 9 vols. Vols. 1-VHx

*



/ 181+ Plato S 5877^-8Theaetetus and Sophist

NY PUBLIC LIBRARY THE BRANCH LIBRARIES

3 3333 05986 1902 CC4

* ;



Office of Adult <5 a

THE LOEB CLA^C&W^fmgrFOUNDED BY JAMES LOEB, LL.D.

EDITED BY

tT. E. PAGE, O.H., LITT.D.

f E. CAPPS, PH.D., LL.D. f W. H. D. ROUSE, LITT.D.

L. A. POST, L.H.D. E. H. WARMINGTON, M.A., F.R.HIST.SOO.

fcfl c

PLATO

THEAETETUS

SOPHIST

BOOK POOLDISCUSSION PROGR/

OAS - CT



PLATOWITH AN ENGLISH TRANSLATION

THEAETETUS SOPHIST

I

BY

HAROLD NORTH FOWLER

OF WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY

CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS

HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESSLONDON

WILLIAM HEINEMANN LTDMCMLXI



First printed 1921

Reprinted 1928, 1942, 1952, 1961

Printed in Great Britain



CONTENTS

PAGE

PREFACE Vii

THEAETETUS 1

SOPHIST 259



PREFACE

THE Greek text in this volume is based upon the

Codex Clarkiaiius and the Codex Venetus. Devia-

tions from the readings of these manuscripts are

noted in the margin at the foot of the page. In

most instances disagreement between these two manu-

scripts,and occasionally readings found in inferioi

manuscripts or in ancient quotations, as 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. 1;twelfth

century.

W = Codex Vindobonensis 54, Suppl. graec. 7.

D = Codex Venetus 185.

G = Codex Venetus, Append, class 4, cod. 54.

b t w = later hands of B T W.

The brief introductions aim merely at supplying

such information as may aid the reader to appreciate

these particular dialogues.

HAROLD N. FOWLER

vii



THEAETETUS

A 2



INTRODUCTION TO THE THEAETETUS

IN the Theaetctus Eucleides the Megarian repeats to

his friend Terpsion a conversation between Socrates,

the mathematician Theodorus, and the youth Theae-

tetus, who was himself a mathematician of note.

The subject is the nature of knowledge, and thediscussion is interrupted and furthered by two

digressions, one concerning midwives, in which

Socrates likens his method of investigation to the

activities of the midwife, the other contrasting the

lawyer and the philosopher.

The definition of knowledge is hard to attain, and

is, in fact, not attained in this dialogue. The con-

fusion between knowledge and various kinds or

applications of knowledge is first cleared up, and

then the discussion centres upon three definitions :

(l) Knowledge is sensible perception ; (2) Knowledgeis 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 things"

;but it includes also a discussion of the

doctrine of Heracleitus, that all things are always in

S




motion. Here Plato distinguishes two kinds of

motion movement in space and change of quality

and asserts that constant motion of the first kindmust 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.

The result of this discussion is that if nothing is at

rest, every answer on whatever subject is equally

correct.

The possibility of false opinion is discussed in

connexion with the second definition. This part

of the dialogue contains many subtle distinctions

and interesting comparisons. The errors of memoryare illustrated by the wax tablets which, on account

of their imperfections, fail to receive and preserve

clear impressions from sensible objects, and the con-

fusion 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 com-

plete definition of knowledge unaccomplished,

Nevertheless the rejection of the definitions pro-

posed is a gain in itself, and the dialogue may be

said to prepare the way for the acceptance of the

theory of ideas. It serves also as an example of the

importanceof the dialectic

method,and shows

Plato's interest in combating the theories of other

philosophers.

The Theaetetus contains many interesting similes

and comparisons, and is, like the Sophist and the

4




Statesman, pervaded by a subtle and at the same time

ponderous kind of humour which is rather irritating

to some, at least, among modern readers. Thereasoning 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 is prepared for a continuation of the con-

versation, 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 . I TA TOT AIAAOrOT IIPOZQIIA

b. 142

ETKAEIAH2, TEP^mN, 2HKPATH2, EOAnPOS, 0EAITHTO2

I. ET. "Aprt, co TepîojVy 7}miAai e aypov;

TEP. 'E77iet/cai? TraAat. Kal ere ye C^TOVV /car*

ayopav Kal eOavjjLalyOv ori ofy olos r*-^ evpelv.

ST. Ou yap -^/cara

TEP. ITou

ET. Ets1

AtfieW KGLTaf3ai,va)V eatr^rto

<f>pO{JiVW K YÔpLvBoV OiTTO TOV OT/XZTOTTe'SoU 'A6rj-

TEP. Zcovrt7}

ET. Zcuvrt /cat fJidXa jLtoAts" âAeTra)? />tev yap/cat UTTO Tpatyzarcov rtya)^, [j.a.XXov fj,rjv

avrov

atpet TO yeyoro? vocn^yLtaev ra> orparevâri.

TEP. Mcuv 7} SucrevTTypta;ET. Nat.

TEP. Ofov dVSpa Aeyet? ev KivSvvto etvat.

ET. KaAoV re /cat ayaQov, at Tep^Latv, ITTZI roi

6



THEAETETUS[OR

ON KNOWLEDGE, TENTATIVE]

CHARACTERS

EUCLEIDES, TERPSION, SOCRATES, THEODORUS, THEAETETUS

EU. Just in from thecountry, Terpsion,

or did

you come some time ago ?

TERP. Quite a while ago ;and I was looking for

you in the market-place and wondering that I could

not find you.

EU. Well, you see, I was not in the city.

TERP. Where then ?

EU. As I was going down to the harbourI

metTheaetetus being carried to Athens from the campat 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. What a man he is who you say is in danger !

EU. A 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 y* droTrov, aAAa /cat TroXv dav-

fjuacrTOTepov,el

JJLTJroiovros r]v. drdp TTO)? OVK

C avrov Meyapol KareXvev;

ET. 'HTretyero otwraSe' CTTCL eycoy' eSed/x^v /cat

ovvefiov\vov, dAA' oi)/cvjOeXev. /cat S^ra rrpOTrefJi-

avrov, aTnaiv TiaXivavefJLvricrOrjv

/cat 0avfjiaora

U?, cus* jLtavrt/ccos

1

aAAa re 8^ etTre /cat Trept

TOUTOU. 8o/cet ya/5 jLtot oAtyov 77/00rou Oavdrov

vrv%lv avra)/Ltetpa/cta) ovrt, /cat ovyyevofAevos

re /cat StaAe^êt? Travu dyaaOrjvaL avrov r

(frvcriv./cat /xot

e\06vri 'A^yaê roJ? re Aoyou?

D SteAe^^ avra> Str^yTycraTO,/cat jLtaAa diovs a

etWe T6, ort TToiaa dvdyKrj ir)rovrov eAAoytjitov

yevecrât, etVep et? iÂt/ctav eXdoL.

TEP. Kat dXrjOrj ye, co? eot/cev, ciTrev. arap

TtVe? T^crai/ot Aoyot; eôt? av St^y^cracrâi;

ET. Oj) /xa TOV Ata, OVKOVV ovrai ye 0,770 oro-

143 /Ltaros" aAA* eypaâ^v TOT* evû? ot/ca8* eXOa

VTTOfjLvrj/JLara, varepov Se /caTa

cn<6fjivo$ ypa<f>ov, /cat ocra/ct? 'A^rov ajKprrj o

fj,r) efJLefJLvrjfJLrjv,/cat

eX6a)V eTTrvoOovjLrv' ware

Tt 77as" o Aoyos1

yeypartrai.

TEP. 'AXrjOfj' TJKOvcrd aov /cat Trporepov, /cat

/jievroLdel [JieXXcov

KeXevaew eTriSeiâi Siarerpi<f>a

Sevpo.

aAAa Tt /ccoAuet vw^/za?

SteAfletv; Tfdvrojs

eycoye /cat dvarravaaaOai oVo/itat, ca? e^ dypov

B ET. 'AAAa /xey 8^ /cat

8



THEAETETUS

heard some people praising him highly for his conduct

in the battle.

TERP. That is not at all strange; it would havebeen much more remarkable if he had not so con-

ducted 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

gift, especially in what he said about him. For I

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 ?

EU. No, by Zeus, at least not offhand. But I

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 AthensI used to ask Socrates about what I could not re-

member, 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

intending to ask you to show it to me. What hinders

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

9



PLATO

irr]TOi> TTpovTTejjUJja, cocrre OVK av dySajs dva-

aAA'tco/zev,

/catr)fjiiv a^ta

o 77ats" aVayvcoo'eTat.

TEP. 'Opâi? Ae'yet?.

ET. Tofjiev Srj flij3Xiov, to Tepifjicov, roi'rr

Se 8^ ovrcocrl rov Aoyov, ou/ce/>toi

tiyyov/Aevov ws St^yetro, aAAa Sta-

Aeyo/xevov

ot? e</>^

SiaX6%9rjvai.<f>7]

Se ra) re

yeai/uLerprj OeoSaSpw /cat rai eatr^ra). tVa

C eVr?y ypa(f)fj jJL,rj Trapeôiev Trpdyp.ara at

Aoycov St^y^cret? 77ept avrov re ovrore Aeyot o

:, otov, /cat eyco e<f>r)v T)/cat eyco etTrov,

7}au 77ept

rou d?70/cptvoêVou, ort oiW^ ^ ou^

co^toAoyet,TOVTCOV eVe/ca

cus

1 aurova?5rot? StaAeyo-

fjievov eypoujjci, eêXcbv ra rotaura.

TEP. Kat ovSeV ye aTro rpoTrov, cb Eu/cAetSr^.

ET. 'AAAa, Trat, Aa/3e roj3ij3Xiov

/cat Ae'ye.

D 2. 2il. Et /êv raV eVKupT]!/?] fjidXXov

o6fj,r}V,co eoScape, ra e/cet ai; ae /cat vrept

av rjpcbrcov, et rtre? OLvrodi rrepi yecofjteTpcav TI TWO.

(f)iXoao(f)Lavetat rcov ve'cov eVt/ê'Aetav Trotou-

vw Se rjTTOV ydp e'/cetVou? ^ rowcrSe<f>iXa),

/cat jJidXXov 7Ti9vfj.a)etSeVat rives i^lv rojv vea>v

e77tSoôt yevea9ai e77tet/cets" ravra S^ auro? re

cr/coTTCo /ca^' OCTOV SwayLtat, /cat rou? aAAou? epcuroj

ots" oV opcD rous" veovs e9eXovras ovyyiyveadai.

aot STI ou/c oAtytarot nvVô'taôyo't,/cat ot/cata>s"

E afto? yap ra re aAAa /cat yeajêrpias eve/ca. et

10



THEAETETUS

Erineum,1 so I also should not be sorry to take a rest

Come, let us go, and while we. are resting, the boyshall read to us.

TERP. Very well.

EU. Here is the book, Terpsion. Now this is the

way I wrote the conversation : I did not representSocrates relating it to me, as he did, but conversingwith those with whom he told me he conversed. Andhe told me they were the geometrician Theodorus

and Theaetetus. Nowin

order that the explanatorywords between the speeches might not be annoyingin the written account, such as

" and I said'"

or

"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 menthere are devoting themselves to geometry or anyother form of philosophy ;

but as it is, since I care

less for those people than for the people here, I ammore eager to know which of our own young menare likely to gain reputation. These are the thingsI myself investigate, so far as I can, and about which

I question those others with whom I see that the

young men like to associate. Now a great many of

them come to you, and rightly, for you deserve it on

account of your geometry, not to speak of other

1 Erineum was between Eleusis and Athens, near the

Cephissus. Apparently Eucleides had walked some thirty

miles.

11



PLATO

ovv rii'L evervxes dîco Aoyou, r]oea)$ av TTV-

EO. Kat IJLTJV,60 Zco/cpare?, e/xot re etVetv /cat

crot d/couaat Trdvv dîov, 0160i5/,ttv

T6ov 77oAtT6oi'(

ju,etpa/ct60 evrervx^Ka. /cat et /zev T^V /caAd?,

aV crôSpa Ae'yetv, ^tT]/cat T6o Sd|

:

6o eV

avrou eivai' vvv Se /cat /^ ^Ltot

ou/c ecrrt /caAd?, 77pocre

/

ot/ce Se crot r^v re

/cat

rd e^co T6ov o/jLj^drcov rjrrov Se -ên)

144 f'xet - dSe6o? S^ Ae

/

y6o. ei) yap ta^t drt

7TO)7TOT VTVOV-/Cat 7TO.VV

7760fjCTdo/jL-^v

ovra} Oav/jLaarws ev

TO yap evjJLaOfl ovra, a)$ a'AAco âXeTrov, npaov av

elvcLi StaêpoWcus1

,/cat eVt rourots" avS/oetov Trap*

ovrivovv, eyco fiev our' aVCOO/XT^V yeveodan ovre

opa) yiyvofJLtvov*' aAA' ot re dêt? cocrTie/o ovros

/cat ay^tvot /cat/zvT^Ltoves' co? ra TroAAa /cat Ttpo?

ra? dpyas1

6vppO7Tol etcrt, /cat arrovre? (f)poi>Ton

Bc5o-77ep

TO.av&pjJidrKJTCL TrXola, /cat [iaviK<oTpoi

7} dvSpeiorepoi (frvovrai, ot re au ef-ippiOfcrTepOL

vojOpol 776O? a77avT606Tt77/90? TO.? paOrjcreis /cat

Xr]0r]s yefjiovres. 6 oe ovra> XCLOJS re /cat aTTTaicrrcus

/cat dvvaifJLOJS epêrat e?7t rd? jJLaOijcreisre /cat

77oAA^s>

rrpqorriros, oiov eXaiov

l peovros, (Zare Bav^doai ro

Kovrov ovra ovrtos ravra Siarrpdrreo-Oai.

2n. Eu ayyeAAet?. TtVo? Se /cat ecrrt

0EO. *A/c7]/coa ;itei> rovvoua, {.ivrjuovevcD Se ow.

C aAAa yctp e'art rwvSe T6ov rrpooiovrajv 6 ev raj

1

yiyv6fj.eyov T ut videtur, Burnet ; yiyô^vovs B, Berol.

12



THEAETETUS

reasons. So if you have met with any young man who

is 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 angrywith me he is not handsome, but is like you in his

snub nose andprotruding

eyes,only

those features are

less marked in him than in you. You see I speak

fearlessly. But I assure you that among all the youngmen I have ever met and I have had to do with a

great many I never yet found one of such marvel-

lously fine qualities. He is quick to learn, beyondalmost anyone else, yet exceptionally gentle, and

moreover brave

beyond anyother

;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 ex-

citable rather than courageous ; those, on the other

hand, who are steadier are somewhatdull

whenbrought face to face with learning, and are very

forgetful. But this boy advances toward learning

and investigation smoothly and surely and success-

fully, with 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 citizensis his father ?

THEO. I have heard the name, but do not remember

it. 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'

d\i^sd;.jLevoL Sevpo teVat. dAAdel yiyvcbaKeis avrov.

6 rov

lariv, Kal rrdvv ye, attfttXe, dvftpos olov Kal av

TOVTOV Sc^yet, Kal aAAco? euSo/ct/xou, Kal uevroi

Kal ovaiav fj,dXa TroXArjv KareXnrev. TO 8' ovoaa

ovK oToa rov{JieipaKiov.

D EO. eairrjro?, aj 2c6/cpare?, TO ye

r-f]v /xeVrot ovaiav SoKovai /xot errirporroi

oi<f)9apKvaL' dAA' ofjLO>sKal rrpos Trjv

rcov

Xprj/maTcov eXevOepLorrjra OavLiaaros, <i>

5fl. TevvLKov Aeyet? rov dvopa. /cat/zot

avrov evddbe rrapaKaOiêaOai,.

EO. "Ecrrat ravra. Qeairrjre, Sevpo Trapd

cu 0eatT7]T, tva Ka.ya> euav-

TOV dvaoKei/Jco/jiai, rrolov rt e^to TOrrpocrajTrov

E(frrjalv yap QeoSajpos eêiv /xe crot o/zoiov. drapet va>^ iyovroiv CKarepov Xvpav efirj avrds r)pp,6o-9ai

O/JLOLOIS, rrorepov evOvs dv eVtcrreuo/êv T) e/ / /)> V > ^ l\ N /

j//a/xei7 av, et uovaiKos cov Aeyet;

EAI. 'E77e<TAcet/fd/xe^' dV.

Sfl. OVKOVV roiovrov ucv evpovres

dV, dfjiovaov oe, rjTnarovfJiev ;

EAI.'AAr^L?^.

2n. Nw 8e y', ot/Ltat, et rtyite'Aet

145 Trpoawrrajv ofjLOLorrjros, CFKCTTTGOV, el ypaîKos >

A/>/

eyet 17ou.



THEAETETUS

the middle one of those who are now coming toward

us. He and those friends of his were anointing them-

selves in the outer

course/

and nowthey

seem to

have finished and to be corning here. See if you

recognize him.

soc. Yes, I do. He is the son of Euphronius of

Suniuni, who is a man of just the sort you describe,

and of good repute in other respects ;moreover he

left a very large property. But the youth's name 1

donot know.

THEO. Theaetetus is his name, Socrates;but I

believe the property was squandered by trustees.

Nevertheless, Socrates, he is remarkably liberal with

his money, too.

soc. It is a noble man that you describe. Now

please tell him to come here and sit by us.

THEO. I will. Theaetetus, come here to Socrates.soc. Yes, do so, Theaetetus, that I may look at

myself and see what sort of a face I have;for Theo-

dorus says it is like yours. Now if we each had

a lyre,and he said we had tuned them to the same

key, should we take his word for it without more ado,

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 like-

ness of our faces, we must consider whether he whospeaks is a painter, or not.

1 The scene is evidently laid in a gymnasium ; the youngmen have been exercising.

15



PLATO

EAI. oKClfJLOl

ovv

EAI. Ovx> oaov ye //,e etSeVat.

2n.T

Ap' ouSe yeco/zerptKo?;

EAI. ria^rcos1

8^77ou, a> Sajsp

2n. ^H /<:at darpovofJUKOs KCLLAoytcrrt/cos' re ACCU

p.ovcrtKos KCLL oaa rraiSeias eêrat;

EAI. "E/xotye So/<ret.

EtjLtej^ apa 7^/zas

1 roOaco^taros

1

rtOfJLoiovs

v, ov TTOLVV aura>

TOV vovv

EAI. "IcTCOS" OV.

B 2fl. Tt 8', et TTorepov rrjv ifw^v eVatôt

aperr^v re wat tro^tav; dp' ou/c aîov ra>

OLKOvaavri TrpoOv/JielaOai dvaaKipao6ai TOV e

OevTCLf TO) Se TrpoOvfjiajs COLVTOV eTnSeiKvvvai ;

EAI. riavv /xev ow, c5 SaJ/cpare?.

3. 2n. "Opa roivvv, d>cf)i)( eatr^re, crot

eTTiotiKvvva.1, ejjiol8e aKOTre'icrOa.i' J)S V laQi on

OeoSajpo? TvoAAoi)? 87) 77po? /ê eVatêaa? evovs

re /cat darou? oi)SeVa TTCOerr'tjveo'ev ws oe vvv

EAI. Eu av eôt, cu Sco/cpares" aAA' opaC Tratâjv e'Aeyev.

u^ OVTO? 6 TPOTTOS OeoScopoiv dAAa

TO, cu/xoAoyi^/xeVa cr/<7]77TO/zevos>

rrai^

roV8e, tVa/XT]

KCU dvayKao-Ofj fiaprvpeiv

yap ot'Sets" 677tcr/c7]0etaura). dAAa, dappwv

rfj o/^,oAoyt'a.

EAI. 'AAAd ^p^ ravra noielv, el crot So/cet.

2n. Aeye 8?^ p,ot* âvQdv&is TTOV Trapd Seoowpov

yeco/zerpta? arra;

EAI. "Eycoye.

16



THEAETETUS

THEAET. I think we must.

soc. Well, is Theodorus a painter ?

THEAET. Notso far as I know.

soc. Nor a geometrician, either ?

THEAET. Oh yes, decidedly, Socrates.

soc. And an astronomer, and an arithmetician,

and a musician, and in general an educated man ?

THEAET. I think so.

soc. Well then, if he says, either in praise or blame,

that we have some physical resemblance, itis

notespecially

worth while to pay attention to him.

THEAET. Perhaps not.

soc. But what if he should praise the soul of one

of us for virtue and wisdom ? Is it not worth while

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

to examine them;for I assure you that Theodorus,

though he has praised many foreigners and citizens to

me, never praised anyone as he praised you just now.

THEAET. A good idea, Socrates ; but make sure

that he was not speaking in jest.

soc. That is not Theodorus's way. But do not seek

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;

I suppose you learn some

geometry from Theodorus ?

THEAET. Yes.

17



PLATO

D 2n. Kat raV Trepl dcrTpovo/JLLav re /catap/j,ovia.$

/cat Aoytcr/zou?;

EAI. T[po9vfjLOVfjLai y 877.

2fl. Kat yap eyw, to TTCLI, rrapd ye TOVTOV KCLL

Trap' aXXajv, ov? av otayzat rt TOVTWV errateiv. dAA'

Tafj.ev

d'AAa eâ) irepl avrajJLerpiajs, <j'fJiLKpov

e TLa.7ropa),

o fjiera crov re /cat

/cat /xot Aeye* dp' ou TO fJiavBdveiv early TOcro(f)a)T-

pov yiyveaOai rrepl

o

âvddveiTL?;

0EAI. rials' yap ov;

2H. 2o0ta Se y', ot//,at, <JO(f)olot

0o<f>ol.

EAI. Nat.

E 2n. Touro Se /xcov Staêpet rt eVtar^/x^s';

0EAI. To Trolov;

2n. *H ao<^ta. ^ ou^ dVep e7rtcrr^ /ctoves', raura

/cat ao(f)Oi;

EAI. Tt/XT^V;

2H. Taurova'/oa eTrtar^/x^ /cat ao^ta;

EAI. Nat.

2n. Tovr' auro TOIVVV earlv ooLTropco /cat ou

Swa/xat Xafielv u<ava>s Trap* IfjiavTO), emaT7]ft77 o rt

1467TOT6

Tuy^dVet6V.

ap' ow 817 e'ô/zez' XeyeivavTo; TL <f>aTe; rt? dV

rj/jLaji> rrpajTO? etVot; o

Se afJLapraiVy /cat 09 dV det d/xaprdv^, /caêSet-

rat, cuarrep (fraolv ot TratSe? ot crâi/HôvTes', 6Vos"

os"

'

dvTT-e/nyeV^rat dya/xdyOT^ro?,

/cat eVtrdfet o rt dv fiovXrjTaL d

TL CTtare; ou rt

Aoytas* dypot/ctô/xat, TrpoOvfjiovjjievos rjfjLa.^1

StaAeyeaât /cat^>t'Aou? re /cat Trpoorrjyopovs

Aot? yiyvea9ai;1

^/ia?] ywaj T.

18



THEAETETUS

soc. And astronomy and harmony and arithmetic ?

THEAET. I try hard to do so.

soc. And so do I, my boy, from him and from anyothers who 1 think know anything about these things.

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

help and that of these others. Tell me, is not

learning growing wiser about that which one

learns ?

THEAET. Of course.

soc. And the wise, I suppose, are wise by wisdom.

THEAET. Yes.

soc. And does this differ at all from knowledge ?

THEAET. Does what differ ?

soc. Wisdom. Or are not people wise in that

of which they have knowledge ?

THEAET. Of course.

soc. 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 know-

ledge really is. Can we tell that ? What do you say ?

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 discus-

sion and my eagerness to make us converse and

show ourselves friends and ready to talk to one

another.

19



PLATO

B EO. "H/ctcrra/xet>,

a) Zcu/cpaTe?, TO TOLOVTOV

aveirj aypoLKOv, dAAa TOJV jiieipa/aau> TL /ce'Aeue' crot

a.7TOKpiveoBai' eyco fjiev yap dijdrjs rfjs

8taAe'/CTOU, /cat ouS' av cruveOiêaOai Ât/ctW e

TOtaSe Se TrpeVot re oV rovro /cat TroAu TT\OV

TO) yap 6Wt17 vorr)s et? Trav

aAA', cocnrep vjpôj, /mrj a^teao ro?5 N \ > /

aAA epcora.

2fl. 'A/couet? S^, c5 eatr^re, a Aeyet.-j'p* /3i f ' ^ * ' ^

w a7Tiueiv,L

cos eyto ot/xat, oure cru

ovreOe/Jiis Trepl ra Toiavra dvSpl ao(j>a) eTrtrarrovrt

V0)Tpov aVei$eti>. dAA' eu /cat yevvatojs

Tt CTOt 8o/cet etvat

0EAI. 'AAAa

Trdvrajs

yap,

av rt /cat

a/mprco,irav-

4. 2n. IldVu//.et' ow, aV 77ep ye ofot T

6EAI. Ao/cet roivvv{JLOL

/cat a Trapa 0eoScupou

rts" fJiddoL emarrj/JLaL elvai, yeto/xcrpta re /cat

a? vi>Si)

CTU SirjXOes, /cat aucr/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? Tt TOVTO Ae'yet?, cu

2n. "lacos1

)U,evouSeV' o /xeWot ot/xat,

6Vav Xeyr/s aKvriKrjV, fjirfn aAAo

aTJ\\Jjr\v VTToSrj/jidTCov epyacrtas

1

;

EAI. OuSeV.

Erp / ^> f/ / / w\ \

2H. It o, oTav Te/CTOVt/ajv; jitiyTt aAAo

eTnoTTJiJLrjv rrjsra>v ^vXivcuv ai<eva)v epyaaias;

1direideiv W ; dTnarea' BT

;d.Tre\deii> al.

20



THEAETETUS

THEO. That sort of thing would not be at all

rude, Socrates;

but tell one of the youths to

answer your questions ; for I am unused to suchconversation and, moreover, I am not of an age to

accustom myself to it. But that would be fittingfor these young men, and they would improve muchmore than I

;for the fact is, youth admits of im-

provement in every way. Come, question Theaetetusas you began to do, and do not let him off.

soc. Well, Theaetetus, you hear what Theodorussays, 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

knowledge is ?

THEAET. Well, Socrates, I must, since you bid me.

For if I make a mistake, you are sure to set me right.soc.

Certainly, if we can.

THEAET. Well then, I think the things one mightlearn from Theodorus are knowledge geometry andall the things you spoke of just now and also

cobblery and the other craftsmen's arts;

each andall 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. OuSe TOVTO.

2fl. QVKOVV eV dju<ôo>, ov e/care'pa

TOVTO optetsv0EAI. Nat.

2fl. To Se y' epajTTêV,1

c5 eatT^re, ou TOVTO

r/v,TLVWV

Tj eTnoTTît^, ovoe oTvocrat rives' ov

yap dpLOfjirjaaL aura? fiovAo/mevoL rjpofAeOa, dAAa,

7TicrTr)fxr)vCLVTO o TL TTOT* ecrrtV.

?)

0EAI.

147 2fl. S/ce0at 817/cat roSe. et rt?

J /\ \ / >/ ? X -V ^

<pavAo)v TL /cat Tfpoyêipcov epoiTO, oiovTcepi TTYJAOV,

6 TL TfOT* eartV, et aTTOKpivaijAzOcL avTO) vnÂo? o

vTpecuv /cat TTTÂo? o rcov iTrvoTrAaOojv /cat

o TCUJ^ Tr\iv6ovpya)vy OVK av yeAotot elfji^v;

0EAI. "laws'.

2il. ITpaJTOV jiteV ye 77ou oto/xevot avvievai e/c

rjfJLTpa$ a7TOKpLO~6(Jj$ TOV epCOTCOVTOL, OTOV

O TOJl' KOpOTT\OiOO)V TfpOodeVTZS

B etre aAAco^ (JJVTIVOIVOVV Srjfuovpycov. rf, otet, rts

Ttorvvirjcriv TLVOS oVojLta, o /x^ otSev rt ecrrti/;

0EAI. O

6emaTrjiJLrjV p,rj

EAI. Ou yap.

2fl. 2/curt/c^v apa ov avvirjcriv os av

dyvofj, ovoe TLVCL aXXrjv

0EAI. "E(JTtV

2fl. FeAota apa 77 aTro/cptcrt?ra> epcor^êVrt eVt-

TL ecrrty, orav drro/cptV^rat re'^VT]?

1ro 5<? 7' ^pwr^v Burnet ; r6 5^ 7e puTi)Qh W, Berol.;

5' tTrewTT)8tj> BT.

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 reallyis. 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. By no means.soc. Then he does not understand knowledge of

shoes if he does not know knowledge.THEAET. No.

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. TWO? yap eTnarri^v dVo/cptVeTat ov TOUT

EAI. "Eot/cev.

2fl. "ETretTa ye Troy côv <f>avXa)s /cat

drroKpivaaOai TreptepêTat airepavTOV oSoV. otov\> \~5 / I ~\ ' *

KOLl 6VTT)

TOV TT7]AOV pO)Tr]O~i (f>CLVAOV7TOU KO.L

L7TLV on y^ vypa) (frvpaOtlcra TrrjXosaV

TO 8' orou e'dV âtpetv.

5- 0EAI. 'PaStoi/, cS So;spares', ^w ye ourcu

atVeraf arap KrtvSuveyets1

epcurav otov /cat

ayrot? 7^/xtv eVayô? elarjXOe StaAeyoûeVots1

, e/>tot

D re /cat TOJ aai O/XCDVU/AOJ rovra) Sco/cparet.

2fi. To TTOIOV817,

c3 OeatV^re;

0EAI. Flept 8um/xec6v rt ^/ztv OeoScopo? 6'Se

T rptVoSos1

Trept /cat

Statart fitKei ov cru/x/xerpot T?yTro

/cat OVTO) Karafjiiav e/cacrr^v 7Tpoa.ipov/jLvo$

rfjs eTrra/catSe/caTToSo?'

ev Se ravrrj TTWS eve

ovv elafjXOe TL TOIOVTOV, eTretS^ aVetpot TO

s at ovvdfJtLs e(f>aivovTOt TreLpadrjvai o~uXX

E etV eV, OTO) 77acras>

TauTaj TrpoaayopevaofJiev

1

airo(t>a.ivwi> om. T;Burnet brackets.

1 A simple form of the first statement would be : The

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

some 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

everyday, simple thing would be to say"clay is

earth mixed with moisture"without regard to whose

clay it is.

THEAET. It seems easy just now, Socrates, as you

put it;but you are probably asking the kind of

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

that he stopped. Now it occurred to us, since the

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

of irrational numbers or fractions. He is not giving an

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 some-

what 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 rjvpere ri roiovrov;

0EAI. "Eîtotye SoACou/xev o~K07Ti 8? /cat crv.

2X1. Ae'ye.

0EAI. ToV dpiOjJiov rrdvra Stâ SteAa/So/ze

ev ovvd/Jievov LCTOV to'a/ct? y'iyvzaOai ra>

TO OfjLCL a7TLKOL(jaVTS TerdaJVOV T Kal 1<JO-

TrXevpov

2fl. Kat ei; ye.

0EAI. Tov Toivvv p,Tai> TOVTOV, &v Kal ra

148 rpla /cat ra TreVre /cat 77a? o? dSwaro? tcros

tcra/ct? yevecrât, aAA'7}

7T\eia)V eAarrovaActs1

^

l\drra>v TiAeot'cx/ct? ytyyerat, /xet^co^ 8e /cat eXdrraiv

del TrXevpd CLVTOV TrepiXa^dvei, ra77/3O/X7]/cet

au

cr^ârtaTret/cacrayres' TrpofJuJKr) dpiOôv eVaAe-

aa/xev.

2n. KaAAtara. aAAa, rt TO jLtera rovro;

EAI. "Oaat/>tev ypa//-/xat

TOI^ loorrXevpov /cat

7Ti7T(!>ov dpiOjJiov TeTpayojVLôvcn, fjifJKOs djpLcrd-

,oaat Se ToV erepo/JiiJKr], SwvajLtet?, cos- [JLTJKI

01)

vfjL{jiTpovs e/cetVat?,Tot? S' e77t77eSot? a

t. /catTrept TO, crrepea a'AAo TOLOVTOV.

2H. "Apicrrd y' dv9pa)7ra)v,a) TratSes" a>crr

So/cet o eoScopo? oy/c eVoô? Tot?

0EAI. Kat/X7]v,

co StoAcpaTe?, o yc e/ocoTa?

7TLcrTTJ[jir]$ } ovK dv Sviâi/Jirjv aTTOKpivaadai,

7Tpl rov/JLIJKOVS

Kol rfjs Swa/xeco?. /catVot CTU

ye jitot80^6 1? roiovrov ri t^relv cocrTe TrdXw av

o

26



THEAETETUS

soc. And did you find such a name ?

THEAET. I think we did. But see if you agree.

soc. Speak on.THEAET. We divided all number into two classes.

The one, the numbers which can be formed by

multiplying equal factors, we represented by the

shape of the square and called square or equilateral

numbers.

soc. Well done !

THEAET. The numbers between these, such asthree and 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.

soc. Very good ; and what next ?

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

soc. Most excellent, my boys ! I think Theo-

dorus will not be found liable to an action for false

witness.

THEAET. But really, Socrates, I cannot answer

that question of yours about knowledge, as we

answered the question about length and square

roots. And yet you seem to me to want some-

thing of that kind. So Theodorus appears to be a

false witness after all.

1 That is, cubes and cube roots.

27



PLATO

C 2fl- Tt 8e'; et ae

OVTO) SpOfJLlKO) <E(/>7]TOJV VO}V VTTV)(r)KVai,

SiaOeajv rov d/c/zdôvTos1

/cat ra^Larov ijTTrjOr]?,? / H * \ o ** /o>' /

I^TTOVTI av OiL aAr]ur) TOVO eTTCLiveaai ;

0EAI. OVK eyajye.

2n. 'AAAa rrjv eTnaTrjfJirjv, axiTrep vvv817 eycb

(TfJLiKpovn oiei eivai ^vpiv /cat ou

0EAI. NT) TOV At" e'yarye /cat p,d\a ye rcut' a.Kpo-TOLTOJV.

. Qdppei roivvv Trepl oavTO) /cat rt otou

D 0eoScopoy Aeyetv, TrpoOv/uLTJOr^TLSe rravrl rpoTrco

TCOV re dAAajv Trept /cat eVtar?^^? Xafielv Aoyot', Tt

Trore Tvy\dvi 6V.

EAI. YlpoOv/jLia? fjiev eVe/ca, ai Sco/cpaTe?, <â-

I'etrat.

6. 2n. "I^t817 /caAco? yap aprt vfirjyrjcra)

Treipto îiiovêvos rr^v Trcptrav Svvdfjieajv drro-

axjTrep ravra? TroAAa? ovaas eVt et'Set

,OVTOJ /cat ra? TroAAa? eVtcrrâs

1

evt

Aoya> TrpoaeiTrelv.

E EAI. 'AAA' eu ta^t, to SoS/cpare.?, TioAAa/ct? 817

auro eTreêtp^CTa GKeibaaOai, UKOVODV ra? Trapa

aov a,77oêpOyU,eVa? epwTrjaeis' dAAa yap oi>

awro? Swa^tat 77etcrat e^taurov co? t/cavcD? Tt Aeya>,

OUT' aAAou aKOvaai Xeyovro? ovrcos co? en) Sta/ce-

ou /lev 817au 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?" 6 ^teWot TreVovâ

Ae'yco.1

jitAet^ B, Berol. et 7/>. W(and Burnet); /j.\\eii> T; eu/jetj/ W.

28



THEAETETUS

soc. Nonsense ! If he were praising your runningand said he had never met any young man who was

so good a runner, and then you were beaten in arace by a full grown man who held the record, do

you think his praise would be any less truthful ?

THEAET. Why, no.

soc. And do you 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 ?

THEAET. By Zeus, I think it is a task for the veryablest.

soc. Then you must have confidence in yourself,and believe that Theodorus is right, and try earnestlyin 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 one class, though they were many, try to designatethe many forms 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

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 youinsist 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, cos

eyoij etftt vos paias p,dXa yevvaias re /cat fiXoavpas,

0EAI. "HS77 TOUTO ye TJ

/cat, ort ImTrfievoj Tr\v avrrjv

a/crj/coas";

EAI.

. 'AAA' eu tcr^' 6Vffjirj /xeWot /xou

77/00? TOJ)? aAAows*. XeXrjBa yap, c5 eralpe, ravrrjv

e^cov TT)^ T^V7]V ol 8e, are OVK et'Sores*, rovro

fiev ov Aeyowcrt 776/at efjLOv,6Vt e OLTOTrcoraros et^tt

/cat TrotaJ rous* avOptorrovs an-opelv. r)/cat rovro

B 0EAI. "Eycoye.

2n. E'tVco ow crot TO amov;0EAI. navu /xev ouv.

2H. 'Eyô7]crov 817TO

rrepi ras /xatas1

eêt, /cat paoy /xaâet o /3oJAo/aat. olaOoL yapTTOV cos* ovSefJiia avrojv eVt awT-^ /ci/tovco/xeV^

/cat Tt/CTOUcra aAAa? /âteyeTat, aAA* at ?]S^ dSu

0EAI. Ilavu

. Alriav 8e ye rovrov(fracrlv

efvat TT^V "Ap-

,6Vt aAoôs

1 owaaTT^V Aoêtav et'Aê. crrepi-

^>at? ju-evow apa ou/c eoojKe fiaievea-Oai, on

rj

anrivri (frvais aaOeveo-repa ij Xafielv re^v^v

aV 71 arreipos' Tat? Sc St* Ât/aay aTO/cot?

Tt^tajaa Tr^v avrrjs ofjLOLOTrjra.0EAI. EtVo?.

. Ov/cow /cat To8e et/cos1 re /cat dVay/catov,



THEAETETUS

soc. Have you then not heard, you absurd boy,that I am the son of a noble and burly midwife,Phaenarete ?

THEAET. Yes, I have heard that.

soc. And have you also heard that I practise the

same art ?

THEAET. No, never.

soc. But I assure you it is true; only do not tell

on me to the others;

for it is not known that I

possess this art. But other people, since they donot know it, do not say this of me, but say that I

am a most eccentric person and drive men to dis-

traction. Have you heard that also ?

THEAET. Yes, I have.

soc. Shall I tell you the reason then ?

THEAET. Oh yes, do.

soc. Just take into consideration the wholebusiness of the midwives, and you will understand

more easily what I mean. For you know, I suppose,that no one of them attends other women while she

is still capable of conceiving and bearing, but onlythose 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 /catfjirj ytyvc6ovcecr#at fJidXXov VTTO TOJV

fjiaiaJv T)T)V aXXajv;

0EAI. Udvv ye.

5n. Katfirjv

/cat StSoucrat ye at LLCLLCLL</>ap/,td/cta

D /<:at eVaSoucrat Suvavrat eyetpetv re ret? ajStiâ? /<:at

/LtaAâ/ccure'pa?, aV fiovXuivTOii, iroi^lv, KCLL TLKTZLV

re817 ras" SuaroAcouaa?, /cat e'av ve'DV 6V x

@EAI. "Eart raura.T A * >' * '5 >^'/) "2n. Ap ofv ert /cat rooe avrtov

fiourjcraL,ort

/cat Trpo/xv^crrptat eiVt Setiôrarat, to? 7rd(jao(f)OL

OVOCLL ?rept rou yvcDvat Trotav ^p^ TTOIOJ

CTUVofJo-av cu? apicrrovs TratSa? rt/cretv;

0EAI. Ou Trai^y TOVTO otSa.A -V N >//)> > \ / />> I

2n. AAA icrc7 ort e77t rovrco fJLiL,ov (p

E ^ eVtTT^ ofjLâXrjTOfjLia. IVVOEL yap- rrjs avrrjs

otet revs zlvcLL êaTretW re /cat

ra>v e/c y^? KapTrcov /cat at' TO ytyvcocr/cetv et?

noiav yrjv Trolov <f)vr6v re /cat oWp/za /caraÂ^re'ov;

0EAI. 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 sn. Ou yap. dAAa Sta TT)Vd'St/cov re /cat

are^vov crvvayajyrjv dv$po$ /cat yuvat/co?, $ 817

Trpoaycoyia 6Vo/xa, (f)vyovcrt /cat

are O6(JLvai ovaai at /xatat, (fjofiovfievai fjirjels

StaKLvr)v rrjv

CLLTLOLV ta

Tavrrjv ejJLTTeaaxnv'

e?ret

8^ of the MSS. is impossible ; Schanz suggests

v6fju/u.ov"lawful," Adam ^775^

" the womb." Possibly Plato

wrote avertov "permissible."

32



THEAETETUS

ing. And yet the true midwife is the only propermatch-maker.

THEAET. It seems so.

soc. So great, then, is the importance of mid-

wives;

but their function is less important than

mine. For women do not, like my patients, bringforth 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 midwives would be indistinguish-

ing between the real and the false. Do you not

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

their souls in labour, not their bodies. But thegreatest 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 I have this in

common with the midwives : I am sterile in point of

wisdom, and the reproach which has often been

brought against me, that I question others but makeno 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,

but has never allowed me to bring forth. I am,

then, not at all a wise person myself, nor have I anywise 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

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 06OS\ > \ H ? \ s~~\ "v ~\

^

re /cat yaj atrto?. code oe OTjAov TTOAAOL

TOVTO dyvoTâavre? /cat eaurou? atrtaaa/zeôt,

8e KaTa(f)povTJaai>T$ , r)awrot ^ VTT' aAAcov

re? aTrrjXBov 7rpa)aLTpov TOV S

Se ra re Aot-rr-a e^r^jiBXaxjav Sta Trovripav/cat ra WTT' e/xou /zateuêVra /ca/ca)? Tp<f>ovT$

a,77coAe(Tav, ifjevSrj/cat ei'SeuAa ?7ept TrAetovos" Trot^cra-

fjLevoirov dXr)9ov$, TeXevTOJVTes 8* aurot? re /cat

rot? aAAot? e'Soâv a/xaêts1

etât. c5v et? yeyovev

151 'AptaretS^? o Aucrtû,aôu /cat a'AAot Trdvu TioAAor

ot?, ora^ TrdXiv eXOaxji Seo^tevot r^? e'/x^?ow-

oucrta? /cat âu/xacrra Spajvre?, evtot? fte^ TO yt-

yvo^Ltewv /Ltot Sai/Jioviov oiTTOKcoXveL ovvelvai, eviois

Se ea, /cat TrdXiv OVTOI 2eTrtotSoacrt. Tiacrôucrt Se

ST)ot'

e^Ltot o-uyytyvo^tevot /cat TOVTO TCLVTOV rat?

rt/croucrats" a>8tVoucrt yap /cat aVopt'a? ejLtTTt/i-

TrAa^rat vu/cra? re /cat T^tepa? rroAz) ftaAAov 77

e/cetvat3 '

TavTTjV Se ri^v coStiâ eyetpety re /cat

a77077aJetv7^ e'/xr) Tiyyr] SiWrat. /cat OVTOI

B5 \ </ / 4''>'r^ / >/

OT) OUT60?. e^tot? oe, co Weatr^rc, ot ai> /xot

Soâ>at 7760? ey/cu/zove? etât, yvovs ort o

eîtou Seovrat, Wyu eu/xei/cD? Trpo/xyaifiat /cat,

1ral TfKovres W, Berol. ; /careôyres BT.

2

of'Tot T; auroi B.

3fKelvai B

;/cetVcu T.

4 ^/o Berol., Burriet; More BT; friot W.



THEAETETUS

in their own opinion, but in that of others as well.

And it is clear that they do this, not because they

have ever learned anything from me, but becausethey have found in themselves many fair thingsand 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 theirown accord or because others persuaded them to do

so. Then, after they have gone away, they have

miscarried thenceforth on account of evil companion-

ship, and the offspring which they had brought forth

through my assistance they have reared so badlythat they have lost it

; they have considered im-

postures 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 eager-ness to let them join me again, the spiritual monitor

that comes to me forbids me to associate with someof them, but allows me to converse with others,

and these again make progress. Now those whoassociate with me are in this matter also like womenin 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.

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 of? oV

ovaivro' cbv rroXXovs/.tei> Brj c'ê'

iAco), TToXXovs Se d'AAotS" (robots' re /cat Oecr-

aVSacrt.

Tavra817 crot, c5 dpcare, eW/ca rowSe l^

VTTO7TT VO)V G, COCT776/5ACat (LVTOS OlL, ctetV Tt

Kvovvra eVSoy. 7rpocr(f)pov ovv irpos JJL a)$

C //.atas1 uov /cat awrov jLtateurt/cov, /cat a av e

TTpoOvfjiOV O7TCOS OtO? T t OVTO>S d7TOKpiVCLO0CLi'

/cat eav apa cr/co77ou^tevos>

rt c5v aV Aey^? ^y)]cra>-

)itatetSajAoi' /cat

/r>) aXrjOes, etra ^Treâtpai/xat /cat

CLTTofidXAa),2

/Jirj ayptatve cocnrep at Trpcororo/cot

?reptra 77at8ta. TroAAot yap T^S^,

co

Trpo? ftovrco Stereô-av, tocrre are^vco?

erotjLtotelvat, eTretSay rtva

Xrjpov

avrajvd<f>-

atpai/zat, /cat ov/c oiovralfjie

evvota rovro -rroizZv,

D Troppoj OVTS rov et8eVat ort ouSet? êo? Suovou?

dvOpcuTTOLS, ouS'e'yco

Svcrvola roiovrov ovSev 8pto,

dXXdIJLOL J/reuSo? re orvyxa}P^joai Ka ^ dXr)9es

d(f)aviaai ouSa/xcus" ê/zts1

. 77-aAtv817

ow ef dp^?,a> eatr^re, o rt TTOT* ecrrt^ eVtcrr^/x^, Tretpa)A/ * O> ?/

ST<>/ >

Aeyety tu? o ou^; oio? r et, fjirjoeTror>\ \ /^^ '/3/\ ^'^'X T/ '"eav yap c/eos" eueArj

/cat avopLLr), oto? T ecret.

8. 0EAI. 'AAAa fjievroL, w Haj/cpare?, crou yeOVTOJ 7TO.paK6\VO}JLVOV OLiCf^pOV fJirj

OV TTCLVri

E rpoTTO) 7rpo6v/jLLa6aL o rt rt? ^;et Aeyetv. So/cet

ow/>tot

o eVto-raftevos' Tt alaQdveaOai rovro o

emoTarat,/cat

cos* ye vuvt âtVerat,ou/c

aAAo riecrrtv

1 VTroirTfvuv B;

iiTTOTrreuw al.

8d7ro/3clX\w T ; UTro/SdXoj B ; dtTro^ciXw W.

38



THEAETETUS

as match-maker and, under God, I guess very success-

fully with whom they can associateprofitably, and I

have handed over

manyof them to

Prodicus, andmany to other wise and inspired men.

Now I have said all this to you at such length, mydear boy, because I suspect that you, as you your-self believe, are in pain because you are pregnantwith 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 toanswer 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 firstoffspring. For many,

my dear friend, before this have got into such a stateof 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 orto destroy the true. And so, Theaetetus, begin

again and try to tell us what knowledge is. Andnever 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 perceivesthat which he knows, and, as it appears at present,

knowledge is nothing else than perception.

39



PLATO

2ft. y /cat yvvaia>s, to Tral' xprj yap

OVTO)$ a.Tro^>ciLi'6(JLvov Ae'yetv. dAAa(f>epe Sr) avro

KOivfl aKe^tJOfieOa, yovi\iov r\ dve^jnalov rvy^dvet

ov. aicr9r](jLs} (fays, iTTLcrTrjfJLrj;

EAI. Nat.

SQ. KtvSweuei? /xevrot Aoyov ov (f>avAov elp-q-

152 Kevai TrepleV

ccrrry^T]?,aAA' 6V eAeye /cat n/acor-

ayopa?.rponov 8e rtva a'AAov

etp7]/ce TO, aura

TCLVTOL.(f>7](JL ya/5 7TOV TTOLVTCW ^p^ftaTCOV fJLTpOV

avOpanrov elvai, TOJV /xev oVrcov, cu? eart, TOJV Se

/ii) OVTCOV, cos1

ov/c eanv. aveyvco/ca? yap TTOU;

EAI. 'Aveyvco/ca /cat TroAAa/a? .

2fl. Ou/com' ouro) 770)? Aeyet, a>? ota yuev e/ca-

araejLtot âtVerat,

rotaura/zev

eortve/ôt,

ofa Se

(rot, rotaura Se au <ror dvOptoTros Se CTU re /cayto;

EAI. Aeyet yap ouv OVTOJ.

B 2H. Et/co? /xeWot CTO^V aVSpa /xi] Xrjpeiv err-

ouv aura>. dp ou/c eviore irviov-

TOS avefjiov rov avrov 6JJLCV rjâjv ptyot, o S' ou;

\ \ >/ *^^ j'^

/cat o ftev 7)pe/xa, o oe acpoopa;EAI. Kat

2fl. oTeov ouv rdre auroe<^'

eavrov 1 TO

r)01) ipvxpov (ftrjcrofjiev ; 7) 7Tio6}JL9a

rat Dpcuraydpa art TCO/-tet' piyovvri i/jv^pov, ra>

8\\ "

e/XT) ou;

EAI. "Eot/cev.

2fl. Ou/couz/ /cat âtVerat OUTCD e/carepa>;

EAI. Nat.1 eauroO W, Berol. ; eavr6 BT.

40



THEAETETUS

soc. Good ! Excellent, my boy ! That is the

way one ought to speak out. But come now, let us

examine your utterance together, and see whetherit is a real offspring or a mere wind-egg. Perception,

you say, is knowledge ?

THEAET. Yes.

soc. And, indeed, if I may venture to say so, it

is 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 wayFor 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

me, and for you in turn such as they appear to you

you and I being" man

"?

THEAET. Yes, that is what he says.

soc. It is likely that a wise man is not talkingnonsense ;

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 Prota-

goras's saying that it is cold for him who feels cold

and not for him who does not ?

THEAET. Apparently we shall accept that.

soc. Then it also seems cold, or not, to each of

the two ?

. THEAET. Yes.

41



THEAETETUS

soc. Let us stick close to the statement we madea moment ago, and assume that nothing exists byitself as

invariablyone : then it will

be apparentthat black or white or any other colour whatsoever

is the result of the impact of the eye upon the

appropriate motion, and therefore that which wecall colour will be in each instance neither that

which impinges nor that which is impinged upon,but something between, which has occurred, peculiar

to eachindividual.

Or would you maintain thateach 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

of this ? Or are you not much more convinced that

nothing appears the same even to you, because youyourself are never exactly the same ?

THEAET. Yes, I am much more convinced of the

last.

soc. Then, if that with which I compare myselfin size, or which I touch, were really large or white

or hot, it would never have become different by

coming in contact with something different, withoutitself changing ;

andif, on the other hand, that which

did the comparing or the touching werereally 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

in some way itself. For nowadays, my friend, we

find ourselves rather easily forced to make extra-

ordinary and absurd statements, as Protagoras and

everyone who undertakes to agree with him would

say.

49



THEAETETUS

THEAET. What do you mean ? What statements ?

soc. Take a little example and you will know all

I have in mind. Given six dice, for instance, if

youcompare four with them, we say that they are more

than the four, half as many again, but if you comparetwelve with them, we say they are less, half as

many ;and any other statement would be inadmiss-

ible;or would you admit any other ?

THEAET. Not I.

soc. Wellthen,

if

Protagoras,or

anyone else,ask

you,"Theaetetus, can anything become greater or

more in any other way than by being increased ?'

what reply will you make ?

THEAET. If I am to say what I think, Socrates,

with reference to the present question, I should

say "no," but if I consider the earlier question, I

should say

"yes," for fear of contradicting myself

soc. Good, by Hera ! Excellent, my friend !

But apparently, if you answer "yes" it will be in

the Euripidean spirit;for our tongue will be un-

convinced, but not our mind. 1

THEAET. True.

soc. Well, if you and I were clever and wise and

had found out everything about the mind, we shouldhenceforth spend the rest of our time testing each

other out of the fulness of our wisdom, rushing

together like sophists in a sophistical combat, batter-

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 withone another or not at all.

1

Eurip. Hi/ppol. 612, 77 7X0)0-0-' 6fj.u/ji.ox t T/5

<f>pr)i>

my tongue has sworn, but my mind is unsworn."

51



PLATO

0EAI. Hdvv p,ev ovv eycoye TOUT' av

II. 2n. Katfjirjv eya>. ore 8' OVTOJS

aAAo TL r/ r]pfj,a, cus* TTOLVV TfoXXrji' aôXrjv ayovres,

155 TrdXiv eTravaoKet/JoiJieOa, ov ovaKoXaivovres, dAAa

ra> OVTL rjid? avrovs eêraô^res', arra TTOT' ecrrt

raura ra âcr/xara ei^ TIÎV; &v rrpcorov eVtcr/co-

co? eyco ofyxat,

fjielôv /X7)SeeXarrov yeveaOai /x^Te oy/cco

ecDS" laove'lrj

avro eavrco.ov% ovra

0EAI. Nat.

2n. AeuTepov Se' ye, aj pr/re rrpoariOolro

d(j)aipolrOy rovrop,rjr av^dve&dai, rrore

(frOiveiv,del Se laov tlvai.

0EAI. Ko/XtSiy JJLCVOVV.

2fi.T

Ap' ow ou /cat rpirov, ofjir) rrporepov rjv,

varepov aAAa 1 rovro eivai dvev rov yevecrdat, /cat

yiyvtaBai dovvarov;

EAI. Ao/cet ye 817.

2n. Taimz817, of/xat, o/xoAoyâTa T/ata /xaêTai

auTa auTOt? eVTry rjuerepa i/Jvxf],

orav rd rrepl rajv

dcrrpaydXcov Aeyaj/xev, T)OTav âj/xev e/xe T?]At/covSe

6vra } /j.-rjr avÔevra /x-^Te rovvavriov rraOovra, eVeviavra) o~ov rov veov vvv

fjiev fiei^co elvai, varepovSe eXdrrco, fjirjoev

rov e/xou oy/cou a

C5\\V> / /) / 5\ \ 0\W

aAAa crou avgrjuevros. eifJLL yap OT) vcrrepov o

rrporepov OVKr),

ov yevo/xevo?' aVew yap TOU yt-

yveoOai yeveaOai aovvarov, [JirjoevSe aVoAAus' rou

oyKov OVK dv Trore^yiyvo\Juf]v IXdrrajv. /cat aAAa

fjivpia67TL

fjivpiois ovrcos e'êt, elrrep /cat ravra

d\\a BT (schol. 6 IT/so/cXoj TO dXXa

i.e. dXXa is transposed to the second place); dXXd varepov

Stephanus et al.

52



THEAETETUS

me, I take it, Theaetetus, for I think you are not

new at such things.

THEAET.By

thegods, Socrates,

I am lost in wonder

when I think of all these things, and sometimes

when I regard them it really makes my head swim.

soc. Theodorus seems to be a pretty good guesser

about your nature. For this feeling of wonder

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

madeagood

genealogy. But do you begin to understand whythese things are so, according to the doctrine we

attribute to Protagoras, or do you not as yet ?

THEAET. Not yet, I think.

soc. And will you be grateful to me if I help you

to search out the hidden truth of the thought of a

famous man or, I should say, of famous men ?

THEAET. Of course I shall be grateful, very

grateful.

soc. Look round and see that none of the un-

initiated is listening. The uninitiated are those

who think nothing is except what they can grasp

firmly with their hands, and who deny the existence

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 clever, whose secret doctrines I

am going to disclose to you. For them the beginning,

upon which all the things we were just now speak-

ing of depend, is the assumption that everything

is really motion and that there is nothing besides this,

1 Hes. Theog. 780. Iris is the messenger of heaven, and

Plato interprets the name of her father as "Wonder" (0aO/*a),

55



PLATO

E I^LOJV, rrjs oe XevKOTrjTos 77/50?TOV ovvaTTOTiKTOVTOS

TO ^pa)fjLa y 6fuiev 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

7Tpi7rXijcrOr] /cat eyeVero 01) XCVKOTTJ? av

Ol

2

xp<jDO-9f]vai TO) rotoura) ^pco

aXXoi XevKoVy etre ûAov etre XiOos eire OTOVOVV

/cat rdAAaSi] OVTOJ, aKXrjpov /cat Oep/Jiov /cat

TOV ai)TOVTpOTTOV V7ToXr)7TTOV ,

CLVTOfJLV

KdQ* CLVTO

157 fjirjoev zivai, oor)

/cat rare eXeyofjiev, ev Se rô? a'AAÂa o/xtAta TrdVra yiyveaOai /cat Travrota

eVet /cat TO TTOIOVV etvat Tt /cat

TO Tfdaxov (LVTWV eVt eVo? vorjcrai, c5? <âcrtv,oi)/c

etp-at 77aytco?. ouYe ya/o TTOIOVV eo*Tt Tt, Trptvai/

TO) Trao"XpVTi avveXOrj, ouVe Trdaôv, Trpiv av TCO

TTOtOWTf TO T TlVt CTUVeAÔ^ /Cat 7TOLOVV

av TrpooTTeo'ov Trdaôv dvefidvrj. a)o~T e

TOVTOJV, oTrep c dp^? eXeyofiev, ovoev etvat

/ca^' avTO, dAAa Ttvt de! ytyp'eaât, TO 8' etvai

B TravTaôOev eâipeTeov, ovx oVtrjfJiLS

TroAAd /cat

a/art TjvayKao'fJLeOa VTTO crvvrjOeia? /cataveTTicrTrjfjio-

Gvvrjs xPâ@aL a^<^- TO 8' or) Set, to? 6 TOJV

cro<f)ajv Aoyo?, ouVe Tt avyâjpelv OVTC TOV OVT*> / / Q. _v 5 1 - J/ >/ \ \ O> \ W

e/Ltou QUTe Tooe OUT e/cetvo OUT6 aAAo ouoei^ oi'Ofj,a

o Tt oVtcrT^,

dAAa /caTa $vaiv (/>$eyyecr#at ytyvojitet'a

/cat 7TOiov/jLva /cat dVoAAJ/zeva /cat dAAotou/xeva'

a>? eav Tt Tt? OTrjarjTO> Aoya>, eue'Aey/CTO? o TOVTO

Schanz ; 6'rou oftv BT; brqovv Campbell; ortcOr

vulg., Burnet.2

Xpu>Aia BT ; xpy/J-a Heindorf, Burnet ; <rxâ Schanz.

58



PLATO

Set Se /cat KarajJiepos

ovrco \4yeiv KO\

rrepi TToXXcov ddpoio-Oevrajv, coor) aQpoiafJiari

C dvdpajTTov re riOevraL Kal \idov Kal eKacrrov o>dV

re Kal eioos. ravraorj,

cb Qeairrjre, dp' rjoea

So/cet ooi elvai, Kal yevoio av avrajv co? apecr-

KOVTIDV;

EAI. OVK oiSa eyujye, d> Scoarpares" Kal yapouSe Trepl aov SiW/>tai KaravorjaaL, irorepa SOKOVVTOL

aoi Xeyecs avra T) IJJLOV axroTretpa.c\ > t -? i /\

lf/ 5 \ \ >/ >

2H. Uf /xv^/zoveyet?, co ^tAe, ore eya> /xev our

oiSa ovre TTOiovjuiai TCOV roiovrojv ovSevefjiov, aAA*

et/xt aurajp' ayovo?, ere Se ^tateuoât /cat rovrov

eVaSco re /cat7rapari9rj/jLL

eKaarcov TCJJVcro^>aJv

a

D yevaaaOai, ea)? av et? ^cD? TO aov Soy/xa> / */ Q f ^ * ' > "^ ' /

eg-ayayw ega^fevTO?oe TOT

070-^ cr/cei//o/>tat

ave/xtatov etVe yovijjiov avaâv-qaerai. aAAa

Oappcov Kal Kaprepa)v ev Kal avSpziajs drroKpivov

a av(f>aiV7]Ta.i

croc Trepl d>v av epcora).

0EAI. 'EpajTa 8r^.

13- 2il. Aeye TOLVVV TrdAiv, et crot apecr/cet

TO/z.r^

Tt eivai aAAa yiyveaOai del dyaOov Kal

KaXcv l Kal irdvra a apTt 8t7^/>tey.

EAI. 'AAA'efjLOLye, eVetS^ crou aKOva) OVTOJ

Ste^toVros", Oavimaaia)? (âiverai a)s eêiv XoyovKal VTToXrjTTreov fj77p SieXr/XvOas.

E 2H. MT) TOLVVV a7ToXi7Ta}/JiV oaov e

avrov. AetVeTat Se evvrrviajv re Trept /cat

TeaAAcov

/catfjiavias, oaa re rrapaKoveiv

Trapopav r]ri dXXo TrapaiaOdveoQai Xeyerai.

1

ayadbv Kal KaXbv AISS.; seel. Ast.

60



PLATO

olaOa yap TTOV on eV Trdon rovrois d/ioAoyoiyzeVtos1

eAeyêcrât So/cet 6V apri Sifjfjiev Aoyov, a>9 TTOVTOS

158 fJidXXov rûlv j/reuSets" at'a^cret? eV aurot? ytyvo/zeVa?,

/cat TroAAou Set 1 ra (âivoêva e/cacrroj ravra /cat

* >\\\^ / >< \ ? / / T

etvat, aAAa TTCLV rovvavnov ovoev cmv (patverat etvat .

0EAI. 'AA^êo-rara Aeyet?, c5 Sco/cparc?.rp/OVTT /s\/ \/ ~\ItS" OT) OfVj CO TTCLL, AL7TTaL AoyO? T6J

TJ]V

eiTL(JT7J/jir]i> riOejJieva) /cat ra

e/cacrra) raura /cat etvat rovra) oj </>atVerat;t i r '

@EAI. 'Eca ieV c3 Saj/cares' o/câi tVeti> ort

ou/cTâ>

rt Aeyco, Stort /xot vw 8^ 77eVAr^â? ZITTO

B auro. eVet c5? aA^âi? ye oi)/c aV 8uât/u,^v a^t^>tcr-

CUS" OtfJLGLLVOfJLeVOl, TTJ

Ol OViptOTTOVTS OV

Sod,ov<JLv, OTCLV ot/êt>

êot aurcD^ otcoyrai

etvat, ot SeTrrrjvoi,

re /cat to? Trero/xeôt ei^ TO) VTTVCO

2ri.T

Ap* ow ouSe TO rotdvSe a/x^tCT^T^jLta ev-

voet? Trept avraJi/, yLtaAtcrra Se ?rept rou 6Vap r /cat

0EAI. To

2n. *0 TToAAa/ct? o*e ot/xat d/C7^/coeVat epcorcovrcov ,

Tt dV rt? eôt reKfjiripiov aTroSetât, et rt? epoiro

VVV OVTCOS V TO) TTCtpOVTl, 7TOTpOl> Ka0v8ofjiV KOi

TTO.VTCL a Staôou/xeâ oveipcorro^Lev , r) e'yp^yopa/êV

C re /catU77a/3 dAArÂots" StaAeyo/êâ.

0EAI. Kat ^v, a) Sco/Cjoares1

, aTTOpov ye orco

2VtSetât reAr/x^pta) Trd^ra yap

avricrrpo(f)ara avra

rrapaKoXovQel.a re

yap,ouSev /ca>Auet /cat eV ra VTTVU) So/ceti'

1Set MSS. ; Seti/ Heindorf, followed by Schanz and

Wohlrab.2xM TW ; XP^V XPil B ; x/ie'*"

/ Hultsch.

62



THEAETETUS

you know that in all these the doctrine we were

just 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. What you say is very true, Socrates.

soc. What argument is left, then, my boy, for the

man who says that perception is knowledge and that

in each case the things which appear are to the oneto 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. Butreally 1 cannot dis-

pute 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

wings and are flying.

soc. Don't you remember, either, the similar dis-

pute about these errors, especially about sleeping and

waking ?

THEAET. What dispute ?

soc. One which I fancy you have often heard.

The question is 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 proofcan be given ;

for there is an exact correspondencein all particulars, as between the strophe and anti-

strophe of a choral song. Take, for instance, the

conversation we have just had : there is nothing to

prevent us from imagining in our sleep also that we

63



PLATO

8taAe'ye(7$ar KOI oravSrj ovap oveipa.ro.

Sti^yetcrât, OLTOTTOS rj O^JLOLOTTJ?TOVTCDV

2n. 'Opas ovv on TO ye a/zîcr/^T^crat ov

ore /cat norepov IOTIV VTrap r) 6Vap

D retrat, ACCU817

taou 6Vro? row ^povov ov K

a) eypriyopafJiZVy ev eKarepa) Sta/xaêrat rjf

i/JV%rjTCL del

Trapovra Soy/xaraTTCLVTOS fjidXXov elvoa

dXrjOrj,cocrre t'o-ov /xev ôôy raSe

(fia/jievovra

laov Se eKiva, KOLIo/.tota>S'

0EAI. IlavTaTraort /zev ow.

OVKOVV /cat7ie/3t

vocrajp' re KOIfjiaviwi' 6

CLVTOS Aoyo?, TrXrjvrov

^povovori

ov)(l Laos;0EAI. 'Op9a)S.

Tt ow ; TrXtjOeL ^povov KOI dAtyor^rt TO

E 0EAI. PeAotoi^ jueVr' aêti)

Tr

2n. 'AAAa rt aAAoe'êt? craê? e

OTrota TOVTCOV TOJV 8oâap.aTa>v dXrjOrj;

EAI. OujLtOt

So/Co).

TOIVVV CLKOV Ottt

av Aeyotev ot TO, aet &OKOVVTOL opLôêvot ra> OOKOVVTL

zlvai dXrjOrj. Aeyouat Se, ct>? ey6^ ot/mt, OVTOJS

pO)TO)VTS''

CO 0atT7]T, O CtV TpOV T)

Tracriv, \JJT] 7717 Ttva SiW/zty T^V avrrjv eêt TO)

ereptu; /cat ^17 V7roXd^cof.iV rfj fiV ravrov eivai

o epajTa>/zej^, TT^Se erepov, aAA' oAcu? erepov."

EAI. 'ASwafOK roivvv ravrov Tt e'êtv 07cV

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 theother is remarkable.

soc. 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 cer-

tainly true, so that for half the time we say that this

is true, and for half the time the other, and wemaintain each with equal confidence.

THEAET. Certainly.

soc. And may not, then, the same be said about

insanity and the other diseases, except that the time

is 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 waywhich 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

appears. They begin, I imagine, by asking this

question :

"Theaetetus, can that which is wholly

other have in any way the same quality as its alter-

native ? 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

c2 65



THEAETETUS

anything, either in quality or in any other respect

whatsoever, when it is wholly other.

soc. Must wenot, 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. We must.

soc. Well, we said before, did we not, that the

active elements were many infinite in fact and

likewise the passive elements ?

THEAET. Yes.

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.

soc. Well, then, let us take me, or you, or any-

thing else at hand, and apply the same principle

say Socrates in health and Socrates in illness. Shall

we say the one is like the other, or unlike ?

THEAET. When you say " Socrates in illness

"

doyou mean to compare that Socrates as a whole with

Socrates in health as a whole ?

soc. You understand perfectly ;that is just what

I mean.

THEAET. Unlike, I imagine.soc. And 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



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. Of course.

soc. So, then, when I 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 per-

ceptive, 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



THEAETETUS

ness, and in the wine a bitterness which is engen-dered there and passes over into the other

; the wine

is made, not bitterness, but bitter, andI

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

is another perception, and makes the percipient

different and other : nor can that which acts on me

ever by union with another produce the same resultor become the same in kind

;for by producing

another result from another passive element it will

become different in kind.


soc. And neither shall I, furthermore, ever againbecome the same as I am, nor will that ever become

the same as it is.

THEAET. No.

soc. And yet, when I become percipient, I must

necessarily 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,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

bound 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



THEAETETUS

and similarly if he says it" becomes

";but he must

not say it is or becomes absolutely, nor can he accept

such a statement from anyone else. Thatis

themeaning of the doctrine we have been describing.

THEAET. Yes, quite so, Socrates.

soc. Then, since that which acts on me is to meand to me only, it is also the case that I perceive it,

and I only ?

THEAET. Of course.

soc. Then to me my perception is true ; for in

each case it is 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.


soc. How, then, if I am an infallible judge and

my mind never stumbles in regard to the things thatare or that become, can I fail to know that which I

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

that all things are in motion, like streams the

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,

perception is knowledge. Eh, Theaetetus ? Shall

we say that this is, so to speak, your new-born child

and the result of my midwifery ? Or what shall we

say ?

THEAET. We must say that, Socrates.

soc. Well, we have at last managed to bring this

73



THEAETETUS

forth, whatever it turns out to be;and now that it

is born, we must in very truth perform the rite of

runninground with it in a circle

] the circle of our

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

yourfirst-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. I myself know nothing,

except just a little, enough to extract an argumentfrom another man who is wise and to receive it

fairly.And now I will try to extract this thought

from Theaetetus, but not to say anything myself.THEO. That is the better way, Socrates

;do as

you say.

soc. Do you know, then, Theodorus, what amazes

me in your friend Protagoras ?

THEO. What is it ?

infant rapidly about the family hearth, thereby introducing

him, as it were, to the family and the family deities. Atthis 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

TOV X6yOV TeOaV/JLCLKOL, GTL OVK LTT.V dp^6(JiVO?

rrjs dX^deia? on TTO.VTCOV xprj^drajv fxerpov lo~rlv

v$TI KvvoK6(j)aXos r\

rt aAAo droTranepov TOJV

wa, jLeaoTreTraJS /cat

Xeyeiv, e

OTI rJiels [J,v CLVTOV axjTrep 6eov eOavfJidôfjiev liri

ao(f)ia }

6 3'

dpaTv

DfieXriajv ârpdôv yvpivov, /ZT)

ort a'AAou TOV

dv6pd)TT(jJV. T]77tD? Aeyto/zev,

1a> 0eoSajpe; et yap

<j.\c/ '^l^ " t\o> >/3' <Z / ' Y

O-TIe/cacrra) aA^c/es' ecrrat o ay ot

atcrc/^crea)? ooâ^T],

/cat/Z7]T

ro aAAou TTa.Oo'S aAAo? fieXriov Sta/cptvet,2

jLtT^re TT)V Soâv Kvpicorepos earat TrLO~Kipao~6aift \ f/ '/3^/ <J/ s \ \ e\ A\/Tpos Ti]V erpov t opur] rj yjevorjs,

aAA o Tro/AAa/cts1

, CLVTOS rd avrov e/caaros1

fJiovo? Soâcrei,

oe Trdvra opOd /catdXrjOfj, rt

897 Trore, c5

eratpe, npajTayopas" ftev o~O(f)6s }ajcrre /cat

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

, ^/xet? Se dâQearepoi re /cat

Trap* eKelvov, /xerpoj 6Vrt avraJ e/cacrra)

avrov oo(f)ias; ravra TTOJS ^rf (f)d)/jiV

Aeyetv rov n/Dcorayopav; TO 8e817 e/zoV re /cat

T^? eftTy? re^T^? r^? ftateurt/c^? crtya), oaov

yeAcora dÂtcr/cayo/xev ot^LtatSe /cat ^vp,Tracra r)

TOV OLaXeyeodai vrpay/zareta. TO yap e

/cat eVtêtpetv3

eAeyêtv TO,? aAAÂcovre /cat Solas', op6ds eKaarov ovaas, ov

fj.ct.Kpd

BT; \yo/j.ei> vulg.

2SiaKpivei most editors ; diaKpivy B (emendation) T.

3^Trtxetpety TW ; om. B.

76



PLATO

162 (JievKOI StcoAuyto? <f>Xvapia, et dA^^s" 17

YlpajTayopov, dAAdfjir) Traiôvcra e/c TOV dovTOu

TTJS ptfiXov l(f)9ey^cLTo;

EO. ^1 %o)KpaTS, <J>L\OS dvrjp, (jjcnrepov vvv

& \ ? > i\ ?<$/? ^>>^<\or) L7T$. OVK o.v ovv

oegaLfJirjvOL

eyitou ofJLoAo-

yovvros eAeyêaât TlpajTayopav, ouS' av aol Trapa

86av dvTiTLViv. TOV ovv QeairrjTov TTaXiv Aa/8e*

TTOLVTOJS KOI vvvBrj /xctA* eyLt/êAa)? CTOI e</>atVero

VTTCLKOVeiV.

Âpa KOLV els AaKcoaifjiova eXOcjv, cS 0eo-

B 8a)/3e, Trpo? TCI? TTaXcLLcrTpas d^tot? av aAAou?

6cbfjivos yviJivovs, eviovs <âv\ovs, avrosfjirj

avr-

7TL$lKVVVai TO ClSoS TTapCLTTOOVOfJieVOS /

EO. 'AAAa rtfjirjv ooKels, etVep /LteAAoteV ftot

eTTtrpei/feiv /cat TftiaeaOau; warrep vvv olîai vjj,d?

TTciaeiv e/xe /zev e'dV Oedodai KO!fjirj e\Kiv Trpos TO

yvfjivdatov o*KXr)pov ySr) OVTCL, TO) 8e8rj va>Tpco

re /cat vypOTepaj OVTL TrpoaTraXaUiv.

17. 2n. 'AAA' et OVTOJS, a) 0eo8cope, aoi

C (f>iXov, ovS' e/xot )(0p6v, (f>aalv OL 7rapot/ztao/zei'Ot.

TrdAtv 8^ oui^ eVt TOV aofiov QeaiTTjTov treov. Aeye

or), a) 0eatr^re, TrpajTov p,ev a vw 817 StT]Aôîev,

dpa ov avv9avp,d,is1et

eai(f)vr)s OVTCJS dva<f>a,vr}o~i

fjirjoev XLpa>v 6t$" o~O(f>iav OTOVOVV dvdpcjTrcov r)/cat

6eojv; rj f\TTov rt otet TO UpajTayopeLov fjueTpov

els OeovsT)

et? dvdpajTrovs AeyeaOai;AT \ A /> > >' \ / >

0EAI. Ma At ou/c eycoye' /cat oxrep ye epa>Tas,

ndvv Oavfjidâ). TIVLKCL yap Oifj/Jievov TpoTrov

D Ae'yotei'TO OOKOVV e/cdcrTO) TOVTO /cat etvat TO>

So/couvTt, TrdvuyLtot

ev <f>aivTO XeyeoOdi' vvv Se

TOVVaVTLOV1

ffvv0avfj.dfis BT ; <ri> Oavjj.dfas W.

78



PLATO

d/couetv re /cat 7Ti<JTCLa6ai a Acyoucri; /cat av

ypd/z/xaTa/XT) eVicrra/xevot, fiXeirovres eiV aura

TTorepov oi>x opaV 77emaTacr$at eirrep opco/xei' 81-

toûptou/xeâ;

EAI. Ai)ro ye, ai Soj/cpares", TOVTO CLVTOJV,

OTrep 6paj[jLv re /cat aKOvofjiev, eVtaracrât<f>TJaofjLv

TOJVfJLi> yap TO

oxfjfjiaKO.I TO ^yocD/m opav re /cat

C em'(7Tacr$at,TCOV 8e

r^v o^vrrjra/cat

aKoveiv r a/xa /cat ei'SeVar a Se ot re

arat TreptaurcDt' /cat ot

ep/jLrjvels StSaa/coucrtv, owre

aladdi>(j9ai ra> opdv r)d/couetv oure eVto-racrât .

l8. 2n. "Apiard y', a> Qeairrjre, /cat oi)/c

aîov CTOL Trpos ravra d/z^tcr^T^crat, tva /cat

dAA' opa 817 /cat roSe a'AAo TrpoaLov, /cat cr/co77et

auro

EAI. To TToloV

rp> / S " ' f<T^ /

2H. lo rotovoe* et rt? epotro, apa OVVCLTOV,

orov rt? eVto-r^yLtcov yeVotro 77ore, eVt eôvra

D [JLvrjfJLrjVavrov rovrov /cat cra>ôp.evov, TOT ore

/ze'/zv^rat ^,17 eVt'crrao-ât auro TOVTO o ^te/xv^rat ;

'

jLta/cpoAoyai 8e, cu? eot/ce, ôuAo/xevo? epeadai, el

fjiaOcbv TIS rt /xeyLtv^/zeVos1

/XT)otSe.

QEAI. Kat 77CO?, c5 Scu/cpares1

; Tepas yap aV117

o Aeyet?.

2H. Mi) ow cya> A?7pcu; cr/co7ret Se. dpa TO

opav ou/c aladdveoBai Aeyet? /cat TI)V oi/ftj^ ai'aâtv;

0EAI. "Eycuye.

2n. Ov/couv o tScot' TteiTLo-TTJfjiajv

K6ii>ov yeyovev

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



THEAETETUS

or that we both hear and know what they say?And again, if we do not know the letters, shall we

maintain that we do not see them when we lookat them or that if we really see them we know them ?

THEAET. We 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

and 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

dispute that, for I want you to grow. But look out

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

possible, if a man has ever known a thing and still

has and preserves a memory of that thing, that he

does not, at the time when he remembers, know that

very thing which he remembers ?"

I seem to be

pretty long winded;but I merely want to ask if a

man who has learned a thing does not know it

when he remembers it.

THEAET. Of course he does, Socrates;

for what

you suggest would be monstrous.

soc. Am Icrazy, then ? Look here. Do you not

say that seeing is perceiving and that sight is per-

ception ?

THEAET. I do.

soc. Then, according to what we have just said,

the man who has seen a thing has acquired know-

ledge of that which he has seen ?

83



THEAETETUS

it, he does not know it, since he does not see it ;but

we said that would be a monstrous conclusion.

THEAET. Very true.soc. So, evidently, we reach an impossible result

ifwe say that knowledge and perception are the same.


soc. Then we must say they are different.

THEAET. I suppose SO.

soc. Then what can knowledge be ? We must,

apparently, begin our discussion all over again. Andyet, 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 con-

testants for a prize, but lovers of wisdom, are doing

just what those ingenious persons do.

THEAET. 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

at the same time he remembers ; but this, we said,

was impossible. And so the Protagorean tale was

brought to naught, and yours also about the identity

of knowledge and perception.

87



PLATO

yap yjpr\Gi d<f>VKTO) epajTij/jLari,TO XeyofJievov cv

cf)peaTL oweôftevo?,1 orav e'pwra ave

dv/ip, KaToXafiuov rfj xetpt a v TOV eVepov

C et opa? TOifJiOLTiov

TO> /caretA^/z/xeVaj;

0EAI. Ov(f>ljo~0), OlfJLCLL,

TOVTO) y, TO) (JieVTOl

. QVKOVV opas T Kal ovx opa? a/xa TCLVTOV;

0EAI. OVTOJye

TTCD?.

\9^\ 9 / I / ~ >t / >/

foev eya>, <p'/)cret,TOVTO OVT rarrco our

TO oTTws, dAA' et o eTTtoracrat, TOVTO Kal

OVK eTrtcrTacrat. yw 8' o ou^ opa? 6pa)v (f>aivL.

ajfjLoXoyrjKOJSoe Tvy^dvei? TO opav rricrTao~9a.L Kal

TO{J.TI opciv fjir]

eiriaTaaOai. e^ ouv TOVTOJV Xoyi&v,

Ti aOL OV}JifiaiVL.

EAI. 'AAAaXoyifgOfJiat

ort rdVaima ot? U

Sey',

a> âu/xacrte, TrAei'co ai/ rocaur'

et rt? ere Trpocn^pcura, 6 errLOT0.08ai ecrrt

t' oû, eart Se dfJi^Xv, Kal eyyvOev /zev eTrtcrrao-ât,

TToppaiOev 8e /u,^, /cat afioSpa Kal rjpefjia TO avTo,

Kal dXXap,vpt.a,

a eAAoâlj/2aV TreAracrTtKos' av^p

v Xoyots epofJLevos, j]vli< eVtcrTTy/z^v /<:at

TavTov e9ov, e/JifiaXcbvav et? TO a/couetv

/cat oa(f)paLVa9aL Kal TCLS rotaura?

rfAeyêv av eTreâjv Kal OVK avtet? 77/>tv

TTjV TToXvdpaTOV oo(j>iav ovv7TO$ia6r)s

ovSTJ

ae êtyococra^tevos1 T /cat

crwS^cras'

90

B; (TVffX&fJi-evos B

2T.

wj' bt; tv\oxw BT.



PLATO

Tore cXvrpov xprmdrcuv oo~a>v crot' ye /ca/cetVoj

eSo/cet. rtV ovv897

o

I7pa>rayopa?,(f>acr]s

av tcrco?,

AoyOJ> 7TLKOVpOV TOL? CIVTOVe'/jet;

ttAAo Tt 77ei-

pdjfjieQa Aeyetv;

EAI. Ilavu ^tev ovv.

2O. 2H. Tawra reSrj

navra ocra^/.tet?

eVa-

166 [Jivvovres aura) Ae'yo/xet',/cat o/xocre, oipat, xcopij-

aerai Kara^povcov rjiiwv /cat Ae'ycov

'

ovro? 817

o mwKpOLTrjs 6 xprjcrros, eVetS?) aura) TratStov rt

e'Setcrev et otoy re roi^ aurov ro auro

ajua /cat /^ et'SeVat, /cat Setcrav aTrefirjcrev

Sta royLt^

Svvaa9ai Trpoopdv, ye'Aajra 817rov

e'/xe

eV rot9 Aoyot? o.rreêiêv . ro Se, d> paOv/jLorare

T7y8' eêt- orap' rt ra)v e/xa)v 8t*epajTij-

o~KO7rfjs,lav

fjiev6 cpajrrjOeis oidrrep av

e'ya>

iriv aTTOKpivafjievos o^dXX^rai, eyw eAe'y-

B %OjLtat, et Se aAAota, auro? o epojrrjOeis. aurt/ca

ya/3 So/cet? rtva crot ovyôjpriaeadaL fjivtjfjirjv

rrapelvalrco d>v

eTraOe,TOLOVTOV rt ovaav

7rci6os

olov ore eVacrê, /Lt^/ceVt 77acrôvrt; TroAAou ye

8et.r)

au a7TOKVTJo*iv o/xoAoyetv otov r' etvat

CioevaL /cat/X77

et'SeVat rov auroi^ ro avro; TJ

rovroSet'cn],

SaScret^ Trore rov auroi^ 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,

C et817 ovofjidrcuv ye Se^cret Brjpevaeis

92



PLATO

\\ /\ >\\ * / i / (t i

aAArjAtov; aAA,

tojita/capte, (prjcrei, yewatOTe-

pa)S eV auro e\9(ji>v o Xeya), et Swaaat, eêXeyôv

d)$ ov^l t'Stat alaOrjaeis e/cdcm/jrjfJLtov ytyrovrat,

^ a>? tStajv yiyvoêvajv ov8ev TL av ^LtaAAov TO

<f)a.Lv6[Jievov fj,6va)Kivct) ylyvoiTOy r\

el elvai Set

ovofjidêw, eir) corrzp <f>aivTOLL' v$ Se817

/cat KVVO-

K6(f>d\ovs Aeycov ou [LOVOV avros vyveis, aAAa /cat

TO?)? a/couovras" TOVTO Spav els ra cruyy/octft/zara

D />tou dvaireiOeis, ov /caAa)? TTOICOV. eyca yap (frrj/jLi

evrrjv dXrjOeiav e\iv cos yeypaâ' /zerpov yap

KOL(JTOVrjfjLOJV

ivCLi TWV T OVTCOV KO.LfJLTj' fJLVpLOV

l^tvTOi Staêpeti' erepov erepov avra* rovra), on

ret) fjiev aAAa eart Te feat </atVerat, TO> Se aAAa.

/cat ao(f)iav /cat crofiov dVSpa TroAAou Sea) TO^,7)

<f)dva,L etvat, dAA' aurov rovrov /cat Ae'ya)

o? dV Ttvtrjfjicov,

d) (fraiverai /cat eaTt /ca/cd,

fidXXcov TOirjcrr) dyadd (fxzivecrOai re /cat elvai.

E Toy Se Adyov aujit

1

))TO>

pr^Jiari (JLOV Stto/ce, dAA'

a>Se eVt oafiearepov fidOe rt Ae'yco. otov yap eV

Tot? TrpoaOev eXeyero dva/xv^cr^T]Tt, 6Vt TO; /xev

daOevovvri rriKpd (fraLverai a ea9iei /cat ecrTt, TOJ

Se vyiaivovTi rdvcLvria eari /cat(fxiiverai . oxxârre-

pov jLteyouv TOUTOJV ouSeVepov Set

Trot^crat ouSe

167 yap SwaTov ouSe KaT7]yopr]Teov (Ls 6 fiev Ka

dfJiaBrjsori rocavra So^dêt, d Se vyiaivaiv

6Vt dAAota* neraf3Xr)roi> S' e?rt ddrepa' dêi

94



THEAETETUS

different continues ? But, my dear fellow," he will

say," attack my real doctrines in a more generous

manner, and prove, if you can, that perceptions,when they come, or become, to each of us, are

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 yourhearers to act so toward my writings, and that

is not right. For I maintain that the truth is

as I have written;each one of us is the measure

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

things. And I do not by any means say that

wisdom and the wise man do not exist;

on the

contrary, I say that if bad things appear and are to

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 from what I am going

tosay. Recall to your mind what was said before,

that his food appears and is bitter to the sick

man, but appears and is 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

healthy man wise because his are different ;but a

change must be made from the one condition to

95



PLATO

\ e / > w o > \ y /% <> / t

yap i) erepa et?. OVTCO be Kai evrrj

Tratoeta avro

crepas eeais em r^v djuetvco fJiera^Xr/reov dAA*

o /zev larpos </>apîtd/cots* yitera/SdAAet, o Se Gro^tor?}?

Adyots1

. eVet ou rt ye ifjevSrj Soâowa rt? rtra

varepov dXrjOfj eVoiâe Soâêt^. cure yap ra\ V O. \ (> > / V J/\ \ > t\ M

fir]ovra ovvarov oogaaai, ovre aAAa Trap a av

Ta Se detdXr}9fj.

dAA' ot/xat, 7rovr]pal

So^dôrra2

avyyevrj eavrrjs3

xprjarrj

So^daat erepa rotawra,a

Si]rtve? TO,

(fjavrdafiara VTTO arreipia.? dXr]9rj KaXovau 1

, eyd)

Se ^SeArtCD //-ei^ret erepa raiv erepcoy, dXrÔearepa

<$ \ '^' * x ; / / >

J / ^ V'oe ovotv. KO.L TOU? aocpovs, cu 0tAe 2-ojAcpare?,

TroAAou 8eco fiarpdxovs Ae'yetv, dAAd /card

tarpou? Aeya>, /card Se (f)VTa

l yap Acac TOVTOVS rot? (f>vrols dvrl

orav ri avr&v dcrOevfj, ^prjards /cat

C wytetva? atcr^crets'T /cat dXrjOels

4IfJiTroielv , TOVS

$ ye vofiovs re /cat dyaôu? prjropa? rat? TroAecri

rd xprjOTd dvrl TOJV Trovrjptov 8t/cata So/cetv etiât

TTOielv. eVet otd y* dve/cdcrri]

vrdAet St/cata /cat\\o^. ^. *? w ^\ >\

/caAa OOKYJ, ravra /cat etvat aurry, eco? ai^ aura

vofjiiî)' dAA' o aofios dvrl TTOvrjpojv ovraiv aurot?e/cdarcov xprjard eTroiTfCrev

etvat /cat So/cct^. /card

8e rdi^ aurdv Aoyov /cat ocro^no-r^s' rou? TiatSeuojLte-

vows1 OVTCD Suvd/zevos' TratSayajyetv aofios re /cat

D altos' TroAAcDv ^p^drcov rots1 Trai&evOelaiv' /cat

OUTCD oro^corepot re' etcrtv erepot erepajv /cat ouSets

1

irov-rjpq.Aldina

; Trovrjpas BT.2

Sofafoi/ra Tb ; So^dfoiras B.8

eauTTjs BT ; ai)r??j some JMSS. and editors.4

d\-i]()eis BT ; aXyddas Schleiermacher.



THEAETETUS

the other, for the other is better. So, too, in educa-

tion 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 bymeans 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, I call them physicians, and when

they have to do with plants, husbandmen;

for I

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

isreally 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

instance, to be and seem right and honourable. Andon 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 high pay from them whentheir education is finished. And in this sense it is

true that some men are wiser than others, and that

D 2 97



PLATO

ô>/} * i t f n /\ * / /

Y) ooi;aL,ei, /cat VOL, eav re povArj eav rein],

aveKreov ovri //,eVpar crcoêrat

yapev rovrois o

Xoyos ovros. d) en) et/zez> e%eis e dp^rjs dyu,<^tcr-

firjreiv, du<f>io-f$r}rei Aoyco dvrioieêXOcov el oe

8t' epa>rr)aeojv (3ovXei, 8t' epcorrjaeaiv ovSe yap

rovro (frevKreov, dAAd rravraiv ^LtdAtcrra oiaiKreov

TO) vovv eovri. TTOiei jievTOi OVTCOCTL-

Eev ra>

epcordv/cat

yap rroXXrj dXoyia dperrjs

cf)do~KOvra emueXeloOaijjirjSev

dAA'r)

dSt/cowra

ev XoyoLS StareAetv. d8t/cetv 8' earlv ev ra> roiovra),

orav ns ^ ^copt? fJ,ev to? dyaiviôfjtevos rds

Siarpifids TTOirjrai, ^copt? Se StaAeyoêvo?, /cat ev

fjievra>

rraitrj re /catcrfidXXrj

/ca^' ocrov aV 8uv7^rat,

eV Se TO) StaAe'yeaât crTrouSd^ re /cat erravopOoirov TrpocrStaAeyo^Ltevov, e/cetva fjiova avra> ev8et/cvu-

jjievos rd o^dX/mara, a auros" y</>'eavrov /cat

168 T^^ TTporepajv O-VVOVOLOJV rrapeKeKpovaro' avfj,ev

yap ovra)rroifjs, eavrovs atrtderovrat ot TvpocrSta-

rpifiovres crot TT^?avrwv rapa^s /cat drropias,

ctAA* ou ere, /cat ere ^tev Stcoôvrat /cat (^LXrjaovcriv,

avrovs oe u,Lar>o-ovai /cat (bevfovrai d<^' eavrajv elsII f * /

(îXoaoîav , lv* d'AAot yevouevoi aTraAAaycocrt TOJV

ot rrporepov rjoav edv Se rdvavria rovrajv Spas

ot TroAAot, rdvavria ^viiBriaerai crot /cat

TOJ)? cruvoVras1 dvrt

(f>iXoo~6(f)CL)v fJLLaovvras rovro

rd rrpdyaa drroâvels , errecSdv Trpeafivrepoi yevcuv-

rai. edv ovv euolrreiOrj,

o /cat rrporepov eppijOrj,

ov Sva/Jievajs ovoeyLta^rt/ccus",

dAA' tAeojT7y

Stavota

crvyKaOeis coy dXrjOws cr/ce'0et rt Trore Xeyofjiev,

98



THEAETETUS

the man asks, you and I must question eacli other

and make reply in order to show our serious attitude

towardshis doctrine

;

then hecannot,

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 yourdeceased friend by any and every means, while youdo 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 youwould 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 meto play rather the role of Antaeus

;for you do not let

anyone go who approaches you until you have forced

him to stripand wrestle with you in argument.

soc. Your comparison with Sciron and Antaeus

pictures my complaint admirably ; only I am a more

1 Sciron was a mighty man who attacked all who camenear him and threw them from a cliff. He was overcome

by Theseus. Antaeus, a terrible giant, forced all passers-

by to wrestle with him. He was invincible until Heracles

crushed him in his arms.

103



PLATO

yap 17817 /xot 'Hpa/cAeV? re /cat Qrjcrees evrvôvrcs*

Kaprepol2

rrpos TO Ae'yety /xdA' eu vyKKO(j)acrLV,

dAA' eya) ouSeV rt /xaAAov d^tora/âf ovrco rt?

C eptus1

Setvo? eVSe'Su/ce T^? vrept ravra

/XT)ouv /xi]Se

cru(f)9ovr)ar)s

aaurov re a/xa /cat eê ovrjaaL.

@EO. OuSev ert avrtAeyco, aAA' aye 6Vi] ê'

TT]v Trepl ravra etftap/xeV^v T^VaV 3

cri)

Set

aVarATpai eAeyô/xep'ov.

oi5

/xeVrotTrepairepa) ye a>v rrporiOeaai oios T* ecro/xat napa-

aoi.

. 'AAA' dp/cet /cat/xe'^pt TOUTOW. /cat

/zot

TippetTO TOto^Se, /XT^

TTOU 77-atSt/cov Tt

D ei5o? ralp' Aoya)!' Trotou/Ltevot, /cat Tt? TrdAtv T

EO. 'AAAct 817 7TLpdao/jLai y /ca^' OCTOV aV Su-

vco/xat .

22. 2fl. TouSe roivvv Trpajrov TraAtv dWtAa-

â)fjie8a ov7Tp TO Trporepov, /catt'Sco/xev op6a>$ 77

ov/c opdaJs e'SucrêpatVo/xev eVtTt/xajvTe? TO Aoya>

OTt avrdpKrj eKaarov et? (frpovrjcnv eVot'er /cat

âjp^crevo

ITpajTayopa? 77eptTe TOU

/cat êtporo? Staê'petv rivds, ovs 877/cat

tva' cro(f)ov$. ou^t;

EO. Nat.

5fl. Et/xet'

roivvv auro? Trapcbv coyLtoAoyet, dAAd

E/XT) i7/xet? fiori9ovvres VTrep avrov

owSep' av TrctAtv e'Set eVavaAa

vvv 8e TO*;^' ^ Tt? ^ctS" d/cupou? riOeir} rrjs vrrep

e/cetVou o/xoAoytas1

. 8to /caAAtovtos" e'xet cr

1

^7-i^6i'Te9 T ; &Tvyx&vovTes B.2

Kaprepol B ; Kparepol T. 3T)*'

at- W ; ?)> BT.

104



PLATO

crrepov irepl rovrov CLVTOV Sto/zoAoy^trao-âr ov

ydp Tl(JfJLlKpOV 7TO.paXXdrTL OVTCO$ ^XOV *l

dXXo>S'

0EO. Ae'yet? dXrjOfj.

2H. Mr/ Toivvv St* aXXcov aAA* e/c rov Kivov

170 Xoyov o)$ Sta /Spa^vrdrajv Xdj3a>/jLv rrjv o/xoAoytW.

EO. 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 Soâ? Xe

/catcf>aiJLei>

ouSeVa OVTIVCL ov rd /zev auray 7/yetcrât

raiv d'AAcov oocfxjjTcpov, ra Se aAAous" eavrov, /cat

eV ye rots' /zeytcrrots- /ct^Swots1

, orav ev orpareLOLLS

Tjvooois

r)eV daXdrrrj êt/xaâyrat, wanep rrpos

0ov$ ^X lv TOVS iv eAcaoTOts" dpôvras,

Bo(f>ajv TTpoaooKatVTas, OVK dXXco TO)

77ra) etSeVat* /cat Trdvra TTOV fjiEard rdv6po)7nva.

t,rjrovvro}V StSacr/caAou? re /cat dpxovras eavrujv

re /cat rcDy aAAcov âa>v rair re epyaaicov, oto/zeVcov

re au iKavaivjjiev StSaa/cetv, IKCLV&V 8e apêtv etvat.

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

avrovs

TOVS dv9pu)7TOVs rjyeiaOai ooîav /cat dâOuap

etvat Trapd 0<j)iaiv;

0EO. OySev aAAo.

2n. Ou/cowr^y jitev ao(f)iav dXr]9f}

Sidvoiav

riyovvrai, rrjv oe d/JLaOiav ifjevofj Soâv;

C 0EO. Tt ft^v;

211. Tt ow, co n/>a>rayopa, xprjaofieOa rat Aoya>;

106



THEAETETUS

agreement still clearer on this particular point ;for

it makes a good deal of difference whether it 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

which appears to each person really is to him towhom it appears."

THEO. Yes, that is what he says.

soc. Well then, Protagoras, we also utter the

opinions of a man, or rather, of all men, and we saythat 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 timesof 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 menthemselves 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



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 whichthe doctrine that man is the measure of all things

inevitably leads.

THEO. How so ?

soc. When you have come to a decision in yourown mind about something, and declare your opinionto me, this opinion is, according to his doctrine, true

to you ; let us grant that ; but may not the rest ofus sit in judgement on your decision, or do we always

j udge that your opinion is true ? Do not myriads of

men on each occasion oppose their opinions to yours,

believing that your judgement and belief are false ?

THEO. Yes, by Zeus, Socrates, countless myriadsin 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" whichhe wrote is true to no one ? But if he himself thought

1Homer, Odyssey, xvi. 121, xvii. 432, xix. 78.

109



PLATO

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

ota^' oTt 7rpa)Tov fêv oaco TrXeiovs of? /XT)OOKCL

77

Ot? OOKL, TOCTOVTO) /JLOiXXoV OVK <JTLV TT) <JTIV .

0EO. 'Avay/CT], etVep ye KOL&e/cacrTT^v

ooav

eorai KCU OVK ecrrat.

2H. "ETretra ye TOUT* eêt /co/xôrarov Kivos

Trepl rfjsavrov

ot^creajs" TT)Vrcov a^

o'irûiv, fjcKelvov yyovvrat, ifjvêodai }

TTOV

aXr]9fj

efmtOjitoAoycuv

ra 6Vra

0EO. ITavu U,ev ouv.

O.VTOV

B 2n. OUKOW r^v aurou a.vj/feuS^ (ruy^copor, ei

r-^vra)i> yy

d\Yjdfj elvai;

0EO.

2n. Oc Se y* aAAot ou crvyxaipovaiv eavroTs

Secrât;

EO. Ou ya/o ouv.

. '0 8e y' au oyu-oAoyet /<rat Taur^v dXrjOrj rrj

j

EO. OatVerat.

apa0,770

d/ji(f)L(j^rjT'^(Jrai } /maXXov Se VTTO ye e/cetiôu

oftoAoy^crerat, orav ra> rdvavTia Aeyovrt

dXrjOrj avrov Soaeu>, rore /cat o

C auros1

CTuy^cop^crerat jLti^reKm>a /x^re rov eVt-

ruôvra avOpajTTOV fierpov etvat/ZTySe Trept eVos

ou at'/.IT) fjiddr^. ov% ovrcos;

EO. QVTCOS.

211. Ou/COuV TTLOr) d{JL(f)lCrl3r]TlT(UV7TO TTa

i<z \ * if t TT / > \ 'D JJ '

ouoevt ai^ et^ )) llpcorayopou aA7)c/etaa

U \ if\ \ >/ > > ^ > /

oi>re rtvt aAAa> our avrco Kivco.

110



THEAETETUS

it was true, and people in general do not agree with

him, in the first place you know that it is just so

much more false than true as the number of thosewho 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

pretty result;he concedes about his own opinion

the truth of the opinion of those who disagree withhim 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 men, beginning with Protagoras,

will dispute or rather, he will grant, after he

once concedes that the opinion of the man who

holds the opposite view is true even Protagoras

himself, Isay,

will concede that neither a dog nor

any casual man is a measure of anything whatsoever

that he has not learned. Is not that the case ?

THEO. Yes.

soc. Then since the " truth" of Protagoras is

disputed by all, it would be true to nobody, neither

to anyone else nor to him.

Ill



PLATO

@EO. "Aycu>, c5 Hoj/cpaTes", rov eTalpov JJLOV

KaTaOeo/JLev.

2fi. 'AAAa rot, a)(f>iXe, aSÂo^ el Kai rrapa-

OeofjievTO op66v. ei/co? ye dpa eKelvov rrpea^VTepov

ovra ao(f)O)Tpov rjfjLcoveivai' KOI el aurtVa ev-

TV0V dvCLKVlfjl fte^pt TOV aVêVo?, 77oAAa O.VfJL

re e'Aeyâ? Xrjpovvra, ajs TO etVo?, /cat ere o/xoAo-

, KaraSvs aV CUÔITO aTrorpe'âjv. aAA'7]û,tv

, 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. 'EjLtot yovv So/cet.

23. 2H. 'H /cat ravrrj av /jLaXtara laraoOai

rov Xoyov, ^L ^ftet? VTieypd^jaêv fiorjdovvr&s

Tlpwrayopq, to? TO, /xey TroAAaT) So/cet, ravrr) Kai

eanv eKacrra), Oepfid, ^pd, y\VKea, rrdvra oaa

rov rvTTOV rovrov el oe TTOV ev Ttcrt

$ia(f)epeiv aAAov d'AAou, rrepi rd vyiewd Kaivocra)or)

eOeXfjaai dv(j>dvai fj,r)

rrdv yvvaiov Kai iraioiov,

Kai 9r]piov oe, IKOVOV elvai Idodai avrd yLyvcoaKoveavraJ TO vyieivov, aAAa evrauda

877d'AAoi^ ct'AAou

Siacfrepeiv, e'iTrep TTOV;

EO. "^fjiocye So/cet OVTCOS.

172 2n. QVKOVV Kairrepl TroAtTt/caiv, KaXd fiev Kai

alo"%pd Kai OLKaia Kai d'St/ca /cat ocrta /cat/mij,

ola

dv eKaarr] 770At? olrjOelo-a dfJTai. v6f.iLfjia avT-fj,

ravra Kai eivaiTTJ dXrjdeia e/caaT7y, /cat ev TOVTOLS

ovoev aoficvTepov ovreloLOJTrjv ISicbrov ovTe

TroXeajs eivai' ev oe TO) Gvêpovra eavrfj

112



PLATO

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

o/zoAoyTycret avfjLôvXov re avjJLôvXov

/cat TToXetos ooav erepav erepas rrpos dXyB /cat OVK dv rrdvv roA/^crete (f>rjaai,

a oV

Tf6\is avfjLtfiepovTa. olrjOeiao, avrfj, Travros

raura /cat avvoiaeiv aAA' eVet ou Aeyco, eV rot?

St/catot? /cat dSt/cots1 x

/cat ocrtot? /cat avocrtot?,

eBlXovaiv la-^vptêadai cos OVK eori<f)vcri avr&v

O'jSei^ ovaiav eavroveôv

aAAa TOKoivfj So^-av

TOVTO yiyverai aXrjOes rore orav So^ /cat ocrov av

So/C7y "^povov /cat ocrot ye 17

2

//.i]Tra.vrd7Ta.ai

rov Upcorayopov Aoyov Aeyoucrtv,3

cS8e TTCOS" r^v

ao(f)iav ayoucrt. Aoyo? Se â?, <5 0eoSa>pe, e/c

C Aoyou jLtet^cove' eAarrovo? KaTaXafjLJ3dvL.

0EO. Ou/cow crôAî' dyofjiev, d> ^coKpares;

. Oau>o/ze$a. /cat 77oAAa/ct? /xeV ye 8i],a)

ovie, /cat aAAore /carevo^CTa, dra/9 /cat

et/corco? ot ev rat? ^tAoao^tats" TroAi)^

et's1 ra St/cacrr^ta tdvre? yeAotot

pr/ropes.

0EO. Tlcus" 817o5if Ae'yet?;

2n. KtvSyvejJOfcrtyot

ev St/cao'TT7/)tots

>

/cat

rot?TOLOVTOLS K V.O)V /CuAtvSoUjLteVOt 77^0? TOl)? eV

D <f>iXoao(f)ia/cat T^ rotaSe SiaTpi(3fj

cus1

ot/ceVat 77/369 eXevOepovs reOpd^Qai.^

0EO. 11^ ST^;

2n. 'Ht rot? ftev TOVTO o av eiTres del Trapecrrt,

crôA^, /cat TGI)? Aoyou? evcipiijvrj

erri axoXijs

7TOLOVVTCLL' COaTTCp r^JLGlSVVvi TpLTOV 7JSr) X6yOV

1/ecu dSkots W ;

om. BT. 25r? BT ;

&i> Schanz.3\6yov<nv Naber, with inferior MSS. ; X^wcrtf BT.

4Te0pd(f>6ai W ; rerpd^dac BT.

114



THEAETETUS

tageous to the state, or the reverse, Protagoras againwill agree that one counsellor is better than another,

and the opinion of one state better than that ofanother 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 advantageousto itself are perfectly sure to prove advantageous.But in the other class of things I mean just and

unjust, pious and impious they are willing to say

with confidence that no one of them possesses bynature an existence of its own

;on the contrary, that

the common opinion becomes true at the time whenit is adopted and remains true as long as it is held

;

this is substantially the theory of those who do not

altogether affirm the doctrine of Protagoras. But,

Theodorus, argument after argument, a greater one

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 ?

soc. In this way : the latter always have that

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 fjiTaXa/j,^dvofjLV, OVTCO /cd/cetvot, eav

CLVTOVS 6 TT\Oa)V TOV7TpOKLjJLl>OV fJidXXoV

Tîta? d/oecrry/cat Sta

/za/cpa)i'

ovoev XeyeiVy aV [JLOVOV TV^WQ-L TOV oVro?' ot Se ev

aaôAta re aet Xeyovoi /careTretyet yap vSajp peov

E /<:at ou/c lyôjpel rrepl ov aveTnOv/JLijcraiai rovs

Aoyou? TTOielaQai,

aAA'

avdyK^v eâ)V6

<f)aTr)Kv /cat VTroypafirjv

a)v 6KTOS ov p7]TOV ty avTCOfjLoaiav KaXovaw 1

ot oe Aoyot aet Trept ofJioSovXov Trpos

ev LP^ TLVa $tKTV eoi^ra, /cat

otaya)ves

ouSeVorer^v aXXcos

aAA' detr^

auroir TroAAa/ct? Se /cat 77ept i/tv^s 6Sp6fj,o$

173 ajar5

e aTravTCDV TOWTCO^ evrovoi /cat

ytyiô^rat, eVtcrra/xep'ot TOVSecrTroT^v Aoyaj re

dajTrevaai /cat epya> âpto-aaât,2

a/miKpol Se /cat

ou/cop$ot ra? ^VXOL?- rfv yap av^fjv /cat ro euî;

re /cat TO eXevOepov3

9ê/c vecov SowAeta

a(j)ri

dvay/caôvcra rrpdrreiv a/coAta, /zeydAou?

vou? /cat (f>6(3ovs eVt aTraAats- J/ffât? e'm

ou? ou SvvdfjicvoL fjiera TOV St/cat'ou /cat dXr]9ovs

U770</epetv, evOuseVt TO

ijjevoo? TC/cat

TO dAAÂoy?dv'TaSt/cetv Tpeno^voi TroAAa

KOUJLTTTOVTCLI /cat

1

T)V avTun-oaiav Ka\o\j<nv MSS.; om. Abresch et al.2

xaptcracrâi BT ; vire\dt1v Cobet from Themistius.3 TO t\evOepov BT ; ro eXevd^piov Themistius.

116



THEAETETUS

greatly bent and stunted. Consequently they passfrom youth to manhood with no soundness of mind

in them, but they think they have become cleverand wise. So much for them, Theodorus. Shall wedescribe those who belong to our band, or shall welet 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 bandare 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 whyshould 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 senate-

house, 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,

and meetings, and banquets, and revellings with

chorusgirls 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, otSev ou8e yap OLVTOJV aTreêrai rov

/ct/zetv

âpiv,

dAAd ro> 6Wt TO acofjia/zoVov

Vrfj

77oAet /cetrat aurou /cat eVtS^/êt, ^ Se Stavota,

TCLVTCL TrdvTariyrjaafjievri crfjuKpd /cat ou8eV, arifJLa-

cracra TTavraxfj ê'oerat-1

/caret IltVSayoov,

'

ra?2

re ya? virevepQe

'

/cat TO, eVtVeSa yeco/xerpoucra,'

ovpavov re yVe/o

'

acfTpovoîovaa, /cat Traaav

174 TTcivrrj <j>voiv epevvto/jievr] TOJV ovrcov e'/cdorov

6'Aou, et? raiv eyyi)? ouSey avrrjv cruy/ca^tetaa.

0EO. rTaj? TOVTO Aeyet?, c5 Haj/c/oare?;

/cat

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

rt? fjLp.Xrj?/cat âptecrcra OepaTraivls aVocr/caji/rat

Aeyerat, cos* ra /xev eV ovpava) TrpoOvfjLOiro et'SeVat,

ret S* efJLTrpoaOev avrov /cat Trapa TroSa? XavOdvoi

CLVTOV. ravrov 8e dp/cet cr/cai/z/â e?7t Trdvras oaoi

B 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

Trpdrret, dAA* dAtyou/cat t

dV^pajTrd? CCTTLV r\ ri\\ n f '' >'^"/D /

aAAoupefjifjia'

rt oe 77or ccrrtv avupcoTTO? /cat rt

r) Trdcrêtv ^ret re /cat 77pdy/zar'

yap TTOU, a> 0ed8cope.>/

7? ou;

0EO. "Eycoye* /cataXr)9fj Ae'yet?.

2H. Totydprot, (6<^>t'Ae,

tSta re afyyiyvd/ievos' o

1faperai BT ;

Tre'rerat B2W, Iambi., Clem., Euseb.2ras Campbell from Clement ;

T C ;TCI T.

120



PLATO

TOIOVTOS CKacrra) KOL Sr^/xoata, orrep a

C eXeyov, orav eVSiAcaarrypitij r\

TTOV aXXoOi aVay/ca-

o6fi Trepl TCOV rrapd Trobas Ka.1 TO>V eV o(f)9aXfjiois

8iaAe'ye<7$a6, yeAtura Trapêi ovJJLOVOV parrou?

aAAa KOLL TO) a'AAto oÂco, etV ff>peard re KOL

OLTTOpiaV fJi7TL7TTOJV V7TOOLTTCLpLa?, Kal

7]

vd/3eAre/3ias' Trapeô/zeV^ eV re yap

rat? XoiSopiaLs t'Stov

eêt

ouSej^ ouSeVaAotSopetv,' > '5^ > '^^ '<?< *

ar OUAC eioco? KCLKOV ouoev ofoej/o? e/c rou

arropaJv ovv yeAoto? âtVerat. eV

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

TTpoaTTonJTO)?, aAAa TO; 6Vrt yeAaiv e

ytyvo/xep'os1

Xrjpo'jSrjsSo/êt eiVat. Tvpavvov re

yap ?^ fiaoiXea eyKO)fJLia,6[JLCVOVeVa

rawolov

(jvficorrjv T) Troi/^teVa T}'rtva fiovKoXov, Ty

a/<ouetv ei)8at/xovtô/xevov TroAu /38aAAovra' Sucr-

KoXwrepov Se IKCWOJV ,a)ov KCU eVi/ôuAorepoi'

Trot/zaiVet^ re /cat fiSdXXeiv vo/JLiâ avrovs, aypoiKOV

Se :at aTrai'SeuTOv U77O aaôAta? ouSev TJTTOV ratv

E rofjiecov TOV TOLOVTOV avayKdlov yiyvecrOat,, crrjKov

eV opet TO reiô? TrepifSe^Xrjpevov. yrjs Se orav

TrXedpa T)ert TrAetco aKOvar) a>s Tt? apa

Oavfjiaara 7rXr)0i KeKrrjrai

&OK6L aKOveiv ts aVacrav elojOcbs rrjv yrjv

TO, 8e817 yevT] vfjivovvrajv, cos yewato? rt? eVra

TTOLTTTTOVS TrXovcrLOVS ecov aVovai, TTavra.7TO.aLV

Kat 7?t afJiiKpov opcovrcjv

175 CTTCLiVOV, V7TO a.7TOLl&VoiaS OV OVVafJLCVCJV 6LS TO

122



PLATO

lorivr]v So/coucrt, TzA^yat re /cat Odvaroi, c&v evtorc

TTOicrxovaiv ovbev dSt/cowre?, dAAdrjv

dSvvarov

E e/cûyetv.

EO. TtVa817 Aeyet?;

2n. napaSety/mrcov, a></>t'Ae,

Iv TO) oi^rt earto -

Tcoy, TOU /xev êtou euSat/zoêo-raroy, rou 8e ddeov

dÂtcorarou, ou^ opajvres on OVTOJS ^X L>

)̂Tro

TyAtîor^To? re/<rat

T^? ecr^dTT]? dvota? XavOdvovai177 ra>

yitev oyLtotoUjttevotSid rd? dSiVou? Trpdêis, TO)

8e dvoiJiOLOVfjLevoL. ovor]

TLVOVOI oiKrjv ,tt)VTs rov

LKOra filOV d)OfJiOlOVVTOLL' 6OLV S'

lTT(JJfJ,V OTl, OLV

r] a77aAAayd>at TT^? SetÔT^TO?, /cat reAeuT^CTavras'

fS" tKelvos fjitv6 TOJV KO.KUJV KaOapos TOTTOS ov

at, eV^dSe Serrjv avrols ofJLOLorrjra rrjs

Siaycoyry? det tôvai, KCLKOI KOLKOLS

ravrarj

KOI TravrTraaiv )s 8etvo6 KCLL Travovpyoi

TLVOJV dKovaovrai.

0EO. Kat fj.dXa or),a>

OiSd TO i, d) eratpe. eV êvroi ri avrois'

orav

1

iSi'a Adyov oerj Sowat re /cat

/cat

TToXvv ^povov VTrofjiclvai /cat

</>uyeiV,2 rdre droTTa)?, co Sat^tdvte, reAeuraivTe? ou/c

dpeaKovaiv avrol avrois irepi &v Aeyoucrt, /cat ^

prjTopLKr] KLvri TTOJS dTTOfjiapaiveTai, cocrre

fjirjoevSoKeiv oiaêpeiv. irepl fJL6i>

ovv TOVTUIV, e

/cat Trdpepya ruy^dvet Aeyd/zeâ, dTroo-roj/xev et 8e

ftT^,TrXeio) det cTnppcovra, /cara^cucjet rjfjicov

TOP

1 6V &p W, Iamb.;on av BT.

2(pvyelv W ; 0eu7ei^ 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. What penalty do you mean ?

soc. Two patterns, my friend, are set up in the

world, the divine, which is most blessed, and the

godless, which is most wretched. But these men do

not see that this is the case, and their silliness and

extreme foolishness blind them to the fact that

through their unrighteous acts they are made like

the one and unlike the other. They therefore

pay the penalty for this by living a life that con-

forms to the pattern they resemble;

and if we

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, andhere 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 un-

scrupulous cleverness that they will think our words

the talk of fools.

THEO. Very true, Socrates.

soc. Yes, my friend, I know. However, there is

one thing that has happened to them : whenever

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

becomestrangely

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



PLATO

\ f >\O\\J/ f\ >/ *

hoyov em be ra e^rrpoauev tco/zev, et /cat

aot So/cet.

EO. 'E/zot ^tei;ra rotaura, c5 Saj/cpaTe?, OI)K:

drjoeorepa aKovew' paco yap rrjXiKqjSeovri

26. 2n. QVKOVV ei>Tav9d TTOVr\\i.ev

rov Ao-

you, ev a) eâ/zev rows' T^V (fjepo/JLevrjvovoiav Xeyov-

ras, KCLL TO del So/cow e/cacrra) rovro /cat etvatTOVTCO a> So/cet, ey /xev rots- d'AAot? edeXeiv 8uaxvpi-

D êaOaiy /cat oy^ ^'/ctara vrept rd St/cata, co? Travrds1

fjiaXXov a dv OrjraL TidAt? Sofavra avrfj, ravra /cat

ecrrt St/cataTT^ 6e/jLevr), eojanep av /ce^rat' Trept

O\ 5 /D^l "^' 5 ^ "/]' " *oe rayauov

1 ouoeva avopeiov eu ovra)? eivai,

ojcrre roAftaV Sta/xdêCTât ort /cat d dV aiêAt/xa

olrideicra TroXiS eavrfj Ofjrai, /cat ecrrt roaovrov

Xpovov oaov av/cer^rat wêXi/jia, TrXrjv

et TI? TO

oVo/xa Aeyof rovro Se 77oucr/ccD/z/^'

dv etTj Trpd?

o XeyojJLev. OV%L;

EO. IldVu ye.

E 2n.M-^ yap Xeyera)

TO6Vo/za,

dAAd TOrrpdyp,a

TO ovouat,6iJievov Oeaypeira).2

EO. M-^ yap.

. 'AAA' o dv rovro ovo/Jid^r), rovrov OTJTTOV

aivofjioOerov/JLevrj, /cat rrdvras rovs vop,ov$,

*

ooov ocerai re /cat SwaTat, co? (L

eavrfj riOerai' rj rrpos d'AAo Tt jSAeVoucra

relrai;

O BW2; rd7aâ TW.

2 rd 6vo/ji.a'6/u.ei>ov êwpeirw W ;5 6voj.(.o.^6^vov êw/jetrat B ;

w . . . /irj 7a/j om. T.

132



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 !

soc. Continuing, then, and proceeding from this

point, every one would more readily agree to this

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

future. For when we make laws, we make themwith the idea that they will be advantageous in after

time;and this is rightly called the future.

THEO. Certainly.

soc. Come then, on this assumption, let us ques-

tion Protagoras or someone of those who agree with

him. Man is the measure of all things, as your

school says, Protagoras, of the white, the heavy, the

light, everything of that sort without exception ;for

he possesses within himself the standard by which to

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 judgeof 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

the future to prove right ? Or perhaps the opinion

135



PLATO

YlpcoTayopov X6yo$ eTrerarre, /cat aKerrreov rrjv

(frepofjLevrjv ravrr^v ovaiav Sta/cpouovTa,1etVe vyies

etVe aaQpov (f)9eyyTa.i' f^d^rj^v 7T P^L &VTYJS ov

<f>a.v\j]01)8' dAtyots" ye'yovev.

27. 0EO. IToAAoi; A<rat 8et(f>av\rj etvat, dAAa

TTfpt jLtev r^ 'IcDvtav feat e77tSt8ajcrt TrdfJLTroXv. ol

yap TOV 'HpaKXeiTOV iralpoi ôpr^yovai TOVTOV

TOV Xoyov /xaAae

2H. To) rot, a) ^t'Ae 0eo8a>pe, jLtaAAot'

E /cat e' dpxfjs, tjaTrep avrol

0EO. IlavTaTTacrtyLtev

ovv. /cat yap, c5

Trept TOI;TCOV TOJV 'Hpa/cAetreta>v 17, tooTrep cru

Aeyets

1

, '0/x7ypeta>v/cat

ert TraAatorepcov, aurots

1

/xev rots1

77ept TT)V "Eêaor, oaot

e/x77etpot etiât,2

oi)8ev fjidXAov olov re

^ rots1

olcrrpaJcnv. are^yaj? yap /cara ra avyypdfju-

fjiara (frepovrai, TO 8' eTrtyLtetvatem Adya> /cat

epcor^jLtart /cat âu^tco? eV /xepet a77O/cptVaaât

ISO /cat epeoBai rJTrov aurot? eVtT)

TO p,rjoev /xaAAov

S\ o / ^^ * '^* "? * * ' ?> ^ <

V7TppaAAL TO QUO OfOCV TTpOS1 TO

/XTÔe (JfJilKpOV

evewai rols avftpdaw ijcru^ta?.dAA' aV Ttva T:

6/0^, OHJirep e/c âpeVpa? p-^/uaTtcr/cta

dTToroêvovcn, /caV TOVTOV,r]Tfjs

Tt eprjKev, eepa) TreTret /catva?

8e

oi5SeVa a^TcDv ou8e ye e/cetvot auTOt 77po?B Aouy, dAA' eu Travy </>uActTTOUcrt

TO jLt^Sev /5e)8atoi'

1

diaKpovovra TW ;dfcotôi'Ta B.

22/u.ireipoi

fli>at Vindob. 21; fyireipot BT, Euseb.

140



THEAETETUS

Protagorasl

enjoined upon us, come up closer and

examine this doctrine of motion as the fundamental

essence, rapping on it to see whether it rings soundor unsound. As you know, a strife has arisen about

it, no mean one, either, and waged by not a few

combatants.

THEO. Yes, far from mean, and it is spreading far

and wide all over Ionia;for the disciples of Hera-

cleitus are supporting this doctrine very vigorously.

soc. Therefore, my dear Theodorus, we must all

the more examine it from the beginning as theythemselves present it.

THEO. Certainly we must. For it is no more

possible, Socrates, to discuss these doctrines of Hera-

cleitus(or,

as you say, of Homer or even earlier

sages) with the Ephesians themselves those, at

least, who profess to be familiar with them thanwith 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

answering and asking in turn, their power of doingthat 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 whatso-

ever 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

1 See 168 B.

141



PLATO

lav ctvai/-t^r*

eV Aoyco /x^r'eV rat?

rjyovfjievoi, to? ejitot So/cet, ai)ro ardoiôv eivai'

rovro) Se TroW TroAe/noucrtv, /cat /ca$' ocroi> Swavrat

. "Icrco?, co eoScope, rows' aVSpa?

elprjvevovcriv Se ou (jvyyeyovas' ov yap

crot eratpot etatv aAA', otftat, ra roiavra rots'

eVt crôA^? (frpdôvoiv, ovs av fiovXaivrcu

uTot? TTOifjaai.

EO. Ilotot? ^Lta^rats', c5 Sat/z,ovte; ouSe yt-

C yverat rcDy Totourcov erepos erepov fjiaOr^mj?,aAA*

dva^vovrai, oTroOev av T^T? e/caoros

IvQovoidaas, Kal TOV erepov 6 erepos ovSev

7]yetrat et'SeVat. Trapa (j,evovv TOVTCDV, orrep fja

pa>v, OVK av TTOTC Aa/3ot? Aoyov cure eKovrajv our'

avrous1 Se Set TrapaXafiovras

2n. KatfjLeTpiojs ye Ae'y^t?.

TO ye ST)

aXXo TL 77apetA^</>a/xev Trapa /zev ra>v dpâicuv /Ltera

D 77Ot7^Crea)S' TTLKpV7TTOfJLVCJt)VTOVS TToXXoVS, CO?

^yeVecrt? TCOV d'AAcoy TrdvTCov 'O/ceayos

1 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 ao<j>iav

dhcovcravres /cat Travacuvrai At^tco? oto-

fjiVOLTO,

/êv eordvaiy rd Se KiveioOai TOJV OVTOJV,

fjiaOovres Se ort rrdvra Kivelrai TifJicjcnv avTOVs ;

oAt'you Se 7TXa66f.irjvJco OeoScope, ort d'AAot

rdvavrla TOVTOIS a7T(f)r)i>avTO,

142



PLATO

E oibfa.K.ivt]Tov

reXeêtv 1o> TTO.VT

/cat a'AAa ocra Me'Atcrom re /cat HapfJieviSaievav-

rracrt TOVTOIS Stto-utôvrai, a*? eV re

77ra ecrrt /cat ecrrrjKev avTO ev aura ou/c

%tOpOV Vfl

KiVelTCLi. TOVTOIS OVV, O) Talp, 7TO.GL

TL%pr]cr6[jLe9a; /cara afiiKpov yap Trpo'CovTes AeAi]-

â/xev dÔTepcov etV TOJJLCO-OV TTtTTTCjOKOTes, KOL

I SIai^ /z^ 777^ 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 OVVfJLOL TOVS TpOVS

<JK7TTOV, </' OVO~7Tp WpfjUJaajJieV, TOVS pOVTCLS'

/cat eav /xeV rt<f>a.iva)VTai Aeyo^re?, aweXôpei' /iter

CJLVTOVS, TOVS Tepovs

(JL6VOL- eav Se ot rou 6'Aou crracrtcDTat dXrjOecrTepa

Aeyetv 8o/ccDcrt, (f)6V^6p,Oa Trap* avTOVs aV au 2

B ra d/ctV^ra KLVOVVTUJV. d/xôrepot 8* aV

fJiTpiov XeyovTes, yeAotot eao/xe^

itv TL

Aeyetv <j)O.v\ovs oVraj, TtafJiTfaXaiovs5e

/cat 7Tao~a6<f>ovs aivopas drrooeSoKLâKOTes- opa ovv y

a> OeoScope, et AucrtreAet et? TOUOVTOVTTpo'ievai,

K.iv'oVVOV.

EO. OuSev /xev om' dvtKTov, c5 Soj/coar

ou Stacr/ceJ/facrât rt Aeyouatv e/ccxre/ootTOJV d

Stallbaum ; reX^êt BT.2

/a'ai)roi)j aTr' a& TWV Schleiermacher ; TTO/)' ai/roi)s aTr'

r&v W;

OTT' avT&v r&v wap ai)roi)s B;

rwi'Tra/)'

auroi)s

T.

144



THEAETETUS

soc. Then when we were asked " what is know-

ledge ?

"we answered no more what knowledge is

than whatnot-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"

;

for"thus

"

would no longer be in motion ; nor,

again," not thus." For there is no motion in

"this

"

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 mightbe most fitting for them, since it is indefinite.

THEO. At any rate that is the most appropriateform of speech for them.

soc. So, Theodorus, we have got rid of your friend,

arid we do not yet concede to him that every manis a measure of all things, unless he be a sensible

man;and we are not going to concede that know-

ledge is perception, at least not by the theory of

universal motion, unless Theaetetus here has some-

thing different tosay.

THEO. An excellent idea, Socrates;for now that

this matter is settled, I too should be rid of the dutyF 153



PLATO

, dAAd/ZT) els piav riva tSe'av, etT

Tt ê^ KaAetv, Trdvra ravra ^vvreivei,

Std TOVTOJV olov opydvaiv alaOavoweda oaa

0EAI. 'AAAa /zotSo/cet ovra> /xaAAov -^

Kiva>s.

2n. TouSe rot eVe/ca aura crotSta/cpi/foifyzai,

t rtvtrjfjLtov

avraJv rai avro) StdjLtet' 6<f)6aX[jLcJi)v

<f)iKvovfjLe9a AevKwv re Kal jLteAavcov, Std Se TOJV

E d'AAcov 4repa)v av TLV&V, /cat eêt? epajrcjfjievos

rrdvTCL TO, rotaura et? TO crto/xa dvacfxEpeLV. taco?

8e jSe'Artovae Aeyetv aura dnoKpivo^vov fjidXXov

7} e/>te TJTre/3crou TroAurrpay/zoj'eti'. /cat

jitot Aeye*

Bep/Jid/cat oK\r]pd /cat Kovâ /cat yAw/cea St' coi^

alaOdvei, apa ou rou CTcoftaros1

e/caCTra riOrjSi ^

aAAou rtvos1

;

EAI. OiJSevos' aAAou.

2n.TH /cat eêAô-et? ojuoAoyetv, a St' erepa?

185 SiW/xea>? aladdvi yaSwaroy efvat St' aAA^s

/->>>

n/

/i ? \c>>>^

51

'"/M \

raur ctLOueaUau,, OLOV a ot a/co^?, ot o//eaj?, r/ a

S>J/ I C> > >

t oifJO)S,ot a/co^?;

EAI. rials' yap ou/c edehrjcra);

2n. Et rt apa 77ept a/zôrepcDV Stavoet, ov/c av

8ta ye TOU erepov opydvov, oi)S' au Std, TOU erepov

Trept dfjL(f>orepa)v alaOdvoC av.

0EAI. Ou yap ow.

2n. Ilept ST) (bujvfisKal Trept ^poa? Trpajrov fj,ev

158



PLATO

avTO TOVTO Trepl dp,(f)OTpa)v rj Stavoet, on

0EAI. "Eya>ye.

2H. QVKOVV /cat art e/cdVepov eKarepou /xet>

Tepov, avTO> oe TOLVTOV;

B EAI. Tt/x-^v;

2n. Kat 6Vt aÔTepaj Suo, eKoirepov Se eV;

0EAI. Km TOVTO.

2H. OUKOW Krai etre avoôia) etre o/Ltotco aAA^-

Aotv, Suvaros1

et eTriaKei/jaaOai;

0EAI. "Icraj?.

2n. Taura S^ TrdVra Sta rtVo? Tic/ataurotv 8ta-

voet; oure yap St* d/co^s" ovre St' 6i/Ja)s olov re TO

KOIVOV Xa.p,f3dvw 7Tpl avTwv. eVt Se /cat roSe

TK[Jiijpiov rreplov Xeyoêv el yap OVVCLTOV

eit]

d(ji(f)OTep(ju oKei/jaaOai, dp* <JTOV dXfjLVpaj r) ov,? f\t w> >*?* // \ * if

OLGU OTI eget? etTrety to eTriOKeyei, KCU, TOVTO OVTC

OVT6 aKorj âtVerat, dAAa TL a'AAo.

rp / O> > /\ \ W O \ ÊAI. It o ov /xeAAet; ^ ye ota

rr^?

i. KaAcDs' Aeyet?. 178e

897Sta

TO T* eVt Traat KOIVOV /cat TO em TOVTOLS orjXol croi,

a> TO'

ecrTtv'

eVovo/xaêts1

/cat TO'

ov/c ecrTt,"

/cat a vwST^ rjpajTcofjLev Trepl OLVTOJV; TOVTOIS Tfdai

Trota aTToScoo-ets' opyavaSt* 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 is one ?

THEAET. Yes, that also.

soc. And are you able also to observe whetherthey are like or unlike each other ?

THEAET. May be.

soc. Now through what organ do you think all this

about them ? For it is impossible to grasp that which

is common to them both either through hearing or

through sight. Here is further evidence for the

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.

THEAET. Of course it is, the faculty exerted

through the tongue.soc. Very good. But through what organ is the

faculty 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 beingand 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 like-

F 2 161



THEAETETUS

ness and unlikeness, and identity and difference,

and also unity and plurality as applied to them.

And you are evidently askingalso

through whatbodily organs we perceive by our soul the odd and

the even and everything else that is in the same

category.

soc. Bravo, Theaetetus ! you follow me exactly ;

that is just what I 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.

soc. Why, you are beautiful, Theaetetus, and not,

as Theodorus said, ugly ;for he who speaks beauti-

fully is beautiful and good. But besides being

beautiful, you have done me a favour by relievingme from a long discussion, if you think that the soul

views some things by itself directly and others throughthe 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

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 ?

THEAET. Yes.

soc. And how about beautiful and ugly, and goodand bad ?

THEAET. I think that these also are among the

things the essence of which the soul most certainly

163



THEAETETUS

views in their relations to one another, reflecting1

within itself upon the past and present in relation to

the future.

soc. Stop there. Does it not perceive the hard-

ness of the hard through touch, and likewise the

softness of the soft ?

THEAET. Yes.

soc. But their essential nature and the fact that

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, then, possible for one to attain"truth

"

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

in the process of reasoning about them;

for it is

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



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 wrongas

we proceed, I will try to give another, just as I have

given this.

soc. That is the right way, Theaetetus. It is

better to speak up boldly than to hesitate about

answering, as you did at first. For if we act in this

way, one of two things will happen : either we shall

find what we are after, or we shall be less inclinedto think we know what we do not know at all

;and

surely even that would be a recompense not to be

despised. Well, then, what do you say now ? As-

suming that there are two kinds of opinion, one true

and the other false, do you define knowledge as the

true opinion ?

THEAET. Yes. That now seems to me to becorrect.

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

been troubled before, so that I have been much

perplexed in my own reflections and in talking with

others, because I cannot tell what this experience

is which we human beings have, and how it comes

about.

THEAET. What experience ?

soc. 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 methodthan 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



PLATO

E877, CO? OIKV, TTpOS TOLVTOL

(f)T]aOfJLV

'

OTCLV y

aXr]0rj ot^rat oto/zevos"

'

rjTTCOS epou/zev;

0EAI. OuTO)?.

211.TH ovv Kal aXXoOi TTOV TO roiovrov ecrnv;

EAI. To TTOLOV;TTH/ < **. / f < $ \ >^/

2H. Jjjt Tts* opa /xev rt, opa be ovoev.

EAI. Kat TTOJS;

. 'AAAa/XT^V

et eV ye rt opa, ra>y oVrcov rt

T^CTI) otet Trore TO eV ev rot?

{j,r)ovaiv eivai;

EAI. Oi)/c eycoye.C/~\ >/ W / < ** t **

2H. U apa ev ye rt opcov ov rt o/oa.

EAI. OatVerat.

189 2n. Kat o apa rt OLKOVOJV eVye'

rt d/couet fcai 6V

a/<:oyet.

EAI. Nat.

2fl. Kat o drrTOfjievos 817 rou, eVo? ye TOU aVre-

rat /cat ovros, etTrep eVo?;

EAI. Kat rouro.

2fl. '0 8eSi) Soââjv oup^ ev rt

EAI. 'Avay/o^.

2n. '0 8' eV rt Soââjv ou/c 6V rt;

EAI. Suy^copai.

2il. '0 apa /^ 6V

EAI. Oi) ^>atVerat.

2n. 'AAAa^T)V

6'

ye jLt^Se^ 8ofaa>vro

7ra.pa.7Tav

ovSe

EAI. AÂov, a? eou<ev.

1 tv TI BT ; eV 76' n W.

174



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.


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

in his 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

to hold a false opinion.

THEAET. Now you seem to me to have said what

is perfectly right. For when a man, in forming an

opinion, puts ugly instead of beautiful, or beautiful

instead of ugly, he does truly hold a false opinion.

soc. Evidently, Theaetetus, you feel contemptof me, and not fear.

THEAET. Why in the world do you say that ?

soc. You think, I fancy, that I would not attack

your " truly false "by asking whether it is possible

for a thing to become slowly quick or heavily light,

or any other opposite, by a process opposite to itself,

in accordance, not with its own nature, but with that

177



THEAETETUS

of its opposite. But I let this pass, that your courage

may not fail. You are satisfied, you say, that false

opinion is interchanged opinion ?

THEAET. I am.

soc. It is, then, in your opinion, possible for the

mind to regard one thing as another and not as

what it is.

THEAET. Yes, it is.

soc. Now when 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

time or in succession.

soc. Excellent. And do you define thoughtas I do ?

THEAET. How do you define it ?

soc. As the talk which the soul has with itself

about any subjects which it considers. You must

not suppose that I know this that I am declaring to

you. But the soul, as the image presents itself to

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

so I define forming opinion as talking and opinionas talk which has been held, not with someone else,

nor yet aloud, but in silence with oneself. How do

you define it ?

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



THEAETETUS

soc. Now call to mind whether you have ever

said to yourselfthat the beautiful is most assuredly

ugly, or the wrong right, or and this is the sum of

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 is, after all,

certainly even, or anything of thatsort.

THEAET. You are right.

soc. Do you imagine that anyone else, sane or

insane, ever ventured to say to himself seriously and

try to persuade himself that the ox must necessarily

be a horse, or two one ?

THEAET.No, by Zeus,

I do not.

soc. 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 is beautiful, or anything of

that sort.

THEAET. Well, Socrates, I do give it up; and I

agree with you in what you say.

soc. You agree, therefore, that he who holds an

opinion of both things cannot hold the opinion that

one is the other.


soc. But surely he who holds an opinion of one

181



THEAETETUS

only, and not of the other at all, will never hold

the opinion that one is the other.

THEAET. You are right ;

for

he would beforced 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

a thing is something else. And so anyone who sets

out to define false opinion as interchanged opinion

would be talking nonsense. Then neither by this

method nor by our previous methods is false opinionfound 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

consider the matter in every way. For I should beashamed 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

speak of others as involved in those absurdities, and

we ourselves shall stand free from ridicule. But if

we find no escape from our perplexity, we shall, I

fancy, become low-spirited, like seasick people, and

shall allow 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

which he knows, and thus to be deceived. But

there is a way in which it is possible.

183



PLATO

EAI.T

Apa Aeyet? o /cat eyco rore V

)VLK avro efia/jievTOIOVTOV etWxt, on evioT* eya>

yiyvcbaKtov Sco/cpar^, TroppcoOev oe opajv aXXov6V ov yiyva)aKO), (Lrjdrjv

elvai Saj/cpar^ 6V otSa;

yap 8rjev TO> TOLOVTCV olov Aeyet?.

QVKOVV oLTTearrjfjLev avrov, ort a t'o/êv

?]/>ta? et'Soras"ju,

1

)) et'SeVat;

EAI. Havu /xev ow.

5n. Mi) yap OVTCD nOajfiev, dAA' c58e' tcrco?

C 7^2?1?A

t "' cruyâjprô-eTat, taajs' Se dyrtrei/et. dAAa

yap eV TOLOVTCO eô/aeâ, ev a> avdyKr) TTOLVTCL /zera-

arp(f>ovra \6yov fiaaavl^ziv. GKOTrei ovv ei rt

Aeyco. apa ecrrtvjU7^

et'Sora rt rrporepov vcrrepov

EAI. "ECTT6[JLEVTOL.

2n. OUACOUV /<:at avOi? erepov KOLI crepov;T* r <^y >r

0EAI . 1 I O OU ;

2H. 0e? S^ /lot Aoyow eVe/ca ev rat?

rj/jicovIvov KTjpivov eKfjiayelov, rco

fjiev /zetôf, TO)

8' eXarrov, /cat TO)jitev KaBapcorepov KTjpov, TO)

e

KO7Tpa)ocaTpov,/cat

CT/cA^porepoy, evioisoe

D vyporepov, ecrrt 8' of? ^terptcos1

eôvro?.

EAI.TiOrjJjLL.

2n. Acopov roivvv avro<^co/xev etWu

riy?TCOP'

MOUCTCOV lATjrpos MvrjfjLoavvrjs, /cat e? TOVTO, o rt

aV /3ovXr)6a)tJiv {JLvrjfJiOvevaaicbv av

ioa>/JLi>l

7}

aKOvacofJiev

2

rj

avroleVvoâcu/zev, VTreôvras

1 auro

rat? ata^crecrt /cat ervotats", aTrorvTrovaOat,, (jj

Sa/crvAtcov CTT^/zeta eVcr^/xatvo/zevous" /cat o

1

eldu/j-ev B.2

&Kov<j}fJt,ev BT.

184



THRAETETUS

and whatever is imprinted we remember and knowas 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 thingswhich 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 knowsare sometimes things which he knows and sometimes

things which he does not know. For we were wrongbefore in agreeing that this is impossible.

THEAET. What do you say about it now ?

soc. We must begin our discussion of the matter

by making the following distinctions : It is impossiblefor anyone to think that one thing which he knows

and of which he has received a memorial imprint in

his soul, but which he does not perceive, is another

thing which he knows and of which also he has an

imprint, and which he does not perceive. And, again,

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

is what he knows;nor can he think that what he

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

somethingelse which he does not

perceive;nor that

what he does not perceive is something which he

perceives. And, again, it is still more impossible, if

that can be, to think that a thing which he knows and

perceives and ofwhich he has an imprint which accords

187



THEAETETUS

with the perception is another thing which he knows

and perceives and of which he has an imprint which

accordswith the

perception. Andhe

cannot thinkthat 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 ;

northat 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

another thing which he does not perceive. In all

these cases it is impossible beyond everything for false

opinion to arise in the mind of anyone. The possi-

bility that it may arise remains, if anywhere, in the

following cases.

THEAET. What cases are they ? I hope they may

help me to understand better;

for now I 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 I am even more out of the runningthan before.

soc. Then let me repeat it in a different way. I

know Theodorus and remember within myself what

sort of a person he is, and just so I know Theaetetus,

but sometimes I see them, and sometimes I do not,

189



PLATO

Tore 8' ov, /cat OLKOVCO77

TWO. aXXrjv aia9r)aiv

alo9dvofjLaL )rore 8' aiaOrjcrw fJLev ouSe/xtW

Trept VIJLWV, /jLefJLvrj/jLaL 8e vfJLas ovoev ^rrovem'crra/zat auro? eV e/zaurai;

E EAI. Jlavu/xei'

ow.

Touro TOLVVV irpwrov fJLa.de&v /3ouAo/zai

ecrrt /zev a ot8e ^17 ala9di><j6ai, ecrrtJ

8e

EAI.

2H. OUKOW /cat a/XT) otSe, 77oAAa/<:t? /zev eart

e alcr6dveo6a,i, TroXXaKis 8e aloOdveoOai ôvov;

EAI. "Ecrrt /cat TOUTO.

2H. 'ISeSr)

eai^ rt /zaAAov vvvemcTTTT^. Sco/cpa-

193 TI^? et ytyvcua/cet

'

2

0eo'Sapoy /cat SeaLrrjrov, opa8e /LtTjSerepo^, /X7]8e aAAr^ aiardrjcris

OLVTO)

7Tpl aVTOJV, OVK CtV 77OT6 eV O.VTO) od<Jl.l>

6 0eatVi]Tos' eart 060860/309. Aeyco rtr) ou8eV;

0EAI. Nat, dXr]9rj ye.

2H. ToUTOjLtei'

TOIVVV KWO)V TTpOJTOV fy COV

EAI. v yap.

2n. Aevrepop' TOLVVV, on rov {JLVrov 8e ai L*vcoo*KO)v, alaQa.v6evo? Se

fJL-T]06TpOV,OVK OV 77OT ttU

olfjdeiTJVOV OLOOL IVCU

t\ \ Tôi^

/u,7)otoa.

EAI. *Qp9a)S.

2n. TpLTOV Se, jjLrjoerepov yiyv&OKWV fJLr^Se

B>n/ > '/O' rt > f 1? " '

aLcruavo/jLevo? OVK avoii]U.if]v ov

[Li]otoa erepov

etmt a>v/XT)

otSa. /cat rdAAa ra 77porepaf/-~ '

J*/-\' x >r'O/>

e^T]? vofJLLêTraAiv

a/c^/coei/at,ei> ot? ouoeTror

1 tVrt . . . yU7?5e alaOdveadai below om. B2

et yi.yi>u<rKei W ; tTTiyiyvucrKei. BT.

190



PLATO

0EAI. Ov yap ovv.

2fl. Tovrop,r)v eAeyov, on yiyvuivKoiv rov

erepov /cat atcrâyo/zevo?, KO! rrjv yv&oiv KaraaiaBirjaw avrov e^cuv, ovSeVore ot^crerat elvai

avrov erepov TWO, ov ytyvcocr/cet re KOLL

/catrrjv yv&aw av /cat e/cetVou eêt /cara

CTtv.T^V yap rovro;

EAI. Nat.

.

riapeAetVero

8e

ye

TTOU TO vvv

Xeyoêvov,ev w877 (â/zef r^v i/jevSfj Soâv yiyveaQai TO a

yiyvajaKOvra /cat ajuco opojvra TJriva

194 aladrâiv eôyra aôlv TOJ OTêtcox

^,7)/cara

avrovaiaOiqcrLV eKarepov eêtv, dAA* ofo^

(fravXov teVra TrapaAAaât rou CTKOTTOV

/cat djLtapretv, oSi]

/cat tfjevoos apa covo/xacrrat.

EAI. Et/corcos" ye.

Kat orav roivvv ra>/Ltei^ napf) aicrOijcris

T&

,TO) 8e

û,^,TO Se TT^? o.7rovcrr)s

Trapovar) Trpoaap/jioar), Trdvrrj ravrrj

r)oidvoia. /cat eVt Aoyaj, Trept tSv /zev /ZT)

otSe Tt?

B ^7;Se vjarOero2

TrcuTTOTe, ou/c eWtv, ws1

eot/cev,

tpevoeaOai ovre ifrevorjs ooa, el Tt yw 7]ftet?

eyofjiev Trepl oe (hv tcr/zev T /cat alaOavo-

eV auTOt? TOVTOL? arp(j)eraL /cat

Soâ ijjevSrjs/cat dXrjOrjs yiyvoêvr],

/cat /caTa TO i5^t TO, ot/ceta ovvdyovaa 0,7:0-

rvTTcofjiaTa /cat TVTTOVS dXr)6r/s, els TrAayta 8e /cat

ovcoAtaijjevoins.

EAI. Ou/couv /caAcD?, cS Sco/cpaTes1

, Ae'yeTat;

1 rw ffri^dd} al. Heusde;

T< o-Tj/ue/y TW2;r6 o-êtov BW.

2/i?;5^ -fiffdeTo TW; /ti/S^ tirfLdero twrjaffero B ; /ui;5'

B2.

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 whomaccords with the perception. That was the case,

was it not ?

THEAET. Yes.

soc. But we omitted, I believe, the case of which

I am speaking now 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

proper perception ;like a bad archer he shoots

beside the mark and misses it ;

and it is just thiswhich is called error or deception.

THEAET. And properly so.

soc. Now when 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

every such instance. In a word, if our present view

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

fairlyand squarely upon one another, and false when it

applies them sideways and aslant.

THEAET. Well, then, Socrates, is that view not a

good one ?

195



PLATO

C 2H. "Ert TOIVVV KOI Taoe aKovcras p,dXXov avTo

TO fjiv yap raXrjOes oo^dêcv KaXov, TO oe

ala^pov.

0EAI. ITa)? S' ov;

2n. Taura TOIVVV(f>aalv evOevSe yiyveaQai.

OTOLV fJLV 6 KTIpOS TOV VTfl $V)(f] /3cL0VS T KCLl

TToXvs Kal Aeto? /ecu (JLTpLO)$ wpyaa/jievosl

fj,ra

IOVTCL OLOL TOJV alo~6r]O~tL>v, evcn^cui/oîem et? TOVTO

TOT7J$ i/JVXTJS KO.p, O

(f)7]

"

TOV Krjpov o/xotor^ra, rarefjiev

Kal TOVTOLS

D Kadapa racr^/zeta eyyiyvofieva /cat LKavajs TOV

fidOovs %ovTa TroXvxpovid T yiyveTaL Kal etcrtv

Ot TOLOVTOLTTpOJTOV fACV eVfJiaOels,

7TLTa

etra ov TrapaXXaTTOVVL TO>V alo-Orjaeaivra

dAAa Sofaôucrtv dXyOrj. aa(f)-rj yap KOI V evpv-

%<jopia ovTa Ta%v Siavefjiovcnv em ra avTwv eVaara

eKyLtayeta, a 8^ 6Vra /caAetrat, /catcro</>ot 81)

OVTOL

/caAowrat. ^ 01) So/cet crot;

0EAI. 'Y7Tp<f)Va)S fJ.V OVV.

E sn. "Orav TOIVVV \daiov TOV TO 2

Keap y, o

eTrfjvecrev6 TrdvTa

o~o(f)6s' TroirjTTJs, rjOTQ.V KOTrpa

Kal /x^ KaOapov TOV Krjpov, TJ vypov o*<f)6opa rj

GKXrjpov, aJv/J.6V vypov, vâ9els fteV, ernXtjamoves

oe yiyvovTai, d)V Se aKXrjpov, TavavTia. ol oe or)

Xdaiov Kal Tpa%v Xi6a)Os TLf) yrjs r) Korrpov

1

wp-yaa^pos Suidas, Timaeus ; dpyafffj.ei>os BT.2 TOV rb] TOVTO TO B.

196



PLATO

7ra)7TOT eaKiffaro Ae'yon' 77/36?CLVTOV KOI

77ocra TTOT* ea-riv, /cat 6 fJiV ns etTrev olrjOel? eVSe/ca

aura, eti'at, o Se ScuSe/ca, rj Trdvres Ae'youcrt re /cat

o'iovrai SaJSe/ca aura eivai;

EAI. Ou //.arov Ata, aAAa TioAAot

817/cat ey-

B 8e/ca* eav 8e ye ev TrAetow apiO/jLO) rt?

crâAAerat. ot/xat yap ere rrept

2n. 'QpOws yap olei' /cat evdvôv /JLT^rt Tore 2

ytyverat aAAoT)aura TO, Scu8e/ca TO, eV ra>

e'/c/xayeta)

cVSe/caolrjdrjvcu.

EAI. "Eot/ce' ye.

2H. Ou/cow et? ror)? Trpcorovs TraAtvayTy/cet

Aoyou?; o yap rouro TraOayv, o olSev, erepov auro

oterat etvat c5v au ofSev oe'</>ap,ev aSwarov, /cat

C Tovra) avra) ?}vay/caô/i,ev ^17 etrat ifjevftrj Soây,

tva/x^ TO. avra o auras' avay/caôtro et'Sa)? M^

/ ?/

etoevat a/aa.

EAI. ÂXrjOearara.

. Oi)/cow a'AA' OTLOVV Set aTroâtVetv TO ra

Soâêti^ T)Stavota? Trpo? ata^crti^ TrapaAAa-

et

yapTOUT'

-^v,ou/c aV 770Te eV

a^TOt?Tot? $iavorjfjiOL(nv eiftevftofjieOa. vvv Se ^Vot ou/c

ecrTti/Jv$r)s So^-a, 7)

a Tt? otSei/, otov Te /x^ et'SeVat.

/cat Toirrcov Trorepa3

atpet;

0EAI. "ATropov al'peaiv rrporiOrjs, a>

D sn. 'AAAa fjievToi aû</>oTepa ye /ctvSuveuet o

Aoyo? ou/c eacretv.oyacos" Se, Trdvra yap

Tt et

EAI.

1/iaXAoi' om. W. 2

r6re W;

TTOTC BT.3

7r6re/)a W ; Tror^pav BT.

202



PLATO

elrrelv rrolov ri TTOT* earl TO

EAI. Kat ri TOVTO avaio")(VVTOV ;

2H. "Eoi/ca? OVK Ivvoelv on rrds

6 Aoyo? ,TJTY]aLs yeyovev eVtcmît^?, to? OVK et'Soat

ri 77or'

EAI. 'Ewoto

"E77etr' OUAC avatSe? So/cet, /x^ et'Sora? eT

aTTOâiveaOaiTO eniaTaadac olov IGTLV;

E aAAayet/),

to 0eatT7]re, TraAat ecr/xev

TO/ZT^ Ka9apa>s oLaXeyeaOai. nvpidKis yap

Ka/jiV TO"yiyvtjoaKo^zv

"/cat

"o?)

\ <( > / n > > \ > > / /) w/cat 67naTafj.eUa /cat ov/c eTrtCTTa/xet/a, to?

Tt crwteVres- dAAÂtov eV a) ert eVtcrr^/x^v ayvoovêvcl 8e /3ouAet, /cat vw ei^ TO) TrapcWt

av TO) " o.yvoelv " T /cat " cruvteVat," to?

aurot? ^p^crât, CLirep aTepo/meOa

0EAI. 'AAAct rtVa TpoiTOV StaAeêt, to

TOUTtoy,_ /^k'^' " rt > /

197 2fl. Uwoeâ tov ye o? et/zf et

Aoyt/co?, oto? dv^p et /cat yw Traprjv, TOVTCOV T* aV5/

/)^fx^ J'^ 5 ^ C\>\/

aTreêac/at /cat T^^Lttv acpoop av a eyto Aeyto

eVetSi) ow eV/xev (f>avXoi, jSouAet

L7TiV OLOV tOTt TO 67TLO~TaO~6ai ; (j>aiVTai

yap /xot rrpovpyov Tt aV yeveaOai,.

EAI. ToAf

aa TOLVVVvr)

Ata. TOVTCOV 8eJLIT)

a7reô/u-eVto aot eWat TroAA^ avyyvcofjirj.

36. 2fl. 'A/c7y/coa? ow o vui 1

Ae'youcrtv TO

EAI. "Icrto?' ou /JL6VTOL ev ye TOJ rrapovTi

B sn. 'ETTtcrT^/x^? 77Oi e^tv (f>aalv avTO etât.

204



THEAETETUS

soc. To undertake to tell what it really is to know.

THEAET. And why is that shameless ?

soc. You seem not to remember that our wholetalk from the beginning has been a search for know-

ledge, because we did not know what it is.

THEAET. Oh yes, I remember.

soc. Then is it not shameless to proclaim what it

is to know, when we are ignorant of knowledge ?

Butreally, 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 ;

and at this very moment, if you please, we have

again used the terms "be ignorant" and "under-

stand," 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

scathingly. But since we are poor creatures, shall I

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. Haveyou

heard whatthey

saynowadaysthat knowing is ?

THEAET. Perhaps ; however, I don't remember

just at this moment.

soc. They say it is having knowledge.

205



PLATO

EAI.'

roivvv cr/JLLKpov fJieraOwfJieda Kal

L7TCO/JLV

0EAI. Tt ovv8rj <j>rjais

rovro eWtVou8ia</>e'/5eti>;

>/T \ > rt 5.5 T * > /

2H. iaa>s fjievovoev o o ovv OOKZL, aKovaas

EAI. 'Eav77ep ye oto? T* a>.

. Ou roivvv[JLOL

raurov âtVerat TOJ KKrfj-TO

a)vfjir) (fropo'i,

2

eêty juev OVK av avrov

avro, KKTrjcr6ai ye p,r]v

3

ât/zei/.

EAI. 'QpOaJs ye.

2n. "Opa orjKal

Tno~Tij[jir]Vec Suvarov OUTOJ

KKTr}jJiVOl> fJirj %LV, ClAA'60CT77ep

t Tt9 OpVlOo.?

aypta?, TrepicrTepas rjTL ct'AAo, Orjpevaas O'IKOI

KaraaKvaad/jLVos Trepiarepf.cova rpe'ôt. rpoTrov

fjiev yap av TTOV TLva(fraifjiev

avrov auras1 aet eêt^,

art817 KKTr)Tai. y yap;EAI. Nat.

2fl. T/ooTToy Se y* a'AAov oi'8e/xtW eêtv, aAAd

aura)?7e/3t aura? TrapayeyovevaL,

êV ot/cetaj

Tve/otôAco UTT-oêtptou? eVoti^-D aaro, Aa^Setv Acat crêtv, eTretSctv jBovXrjrai, Oypev-

aaêvoj rjvav del

edeXr),Kal TrdXiv

d(f)ievaL'/cat

rovro ^LvaL TTOLCLV, oTroaaKis av ooKrj avra).

EAI. "Eart raura.

2n. IlaAtySi], a)o-7Tp ev rot? rrpooQev Krjpivov

Tt ey rat? /ffXa^? KareaKevdôfjiev OVK 018' o rt

au ev Kaarrj

1e/ vulg. ex emend, apogr. P ; om. BTW.

20opot vulg. ; <f>opuv b ; 0o/?uJ B ; 0opa5 TW.37e /y.V W ; ê STJ B ; 76 T ; 5^ 76 vulg.

206



THEAETETUS

THEAET. True.

soc. Let us make aslight change and say possess-

ing 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 me to differ, and then help me to test myview.

THEAET. I will if I can.

soc. Well, then, having does not seem to me thesame as possessing. For instance, if a man boughta 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. Andrightly.

soc. Now see whether it is possible in the same

way for one who possesses knowledge not to haveit, as, for instance, if a man should catch wild birds

pigeons or the like and should arrange an aviaryat home and keep them in it, we might in a wayassert that he always has them because he possesses

them, might we not ?

THEAET. Yes.

soc. And yet in another way that he has noneof 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 when-

ever 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.


soc. Once more, then, just as a while ago wecontrived some sort of a waxen figment in the soul,

so now let us make in each soul an aviary stocked

207



PLATO

oW TWO, TravroSaTTajv opvi9a)V, ra?

KOLT' aye'Aa? oucra? ^cupi? TOJV d'AAcov, ra? 8e /car

oAtya?, ena? 8e //.oVa? Sta Traaajv 07777 av

E EAI.IIe7rot7]CT^co 87^.

aAAa ri rovvrevOev;

2n. FlatStaJv/JL6V

OVTCJV (f>dvai %pr) eivai TOVTO

TO ayyeTov KZVOV, avri 8e TCOV opvlBaiv e

vofjcrai' TJv8* ay

eTncrTTJfjirjv KTr)ad[jLvos

el? rov TTpifio\ov, $><ivcLiavrov

fjvprjKcvai, TO Trpay/xa oy-^v auVi^ 77 emcmy/z^,

TO eTriaraadai TOUT* etvat.

EAI . "EcTTO) .

TOLVVV TTaXiV O.V

crTr}/JLO)v Qrjpeveiv /cat Xafiovra tcrêtv /cat au$t?

cr/coTret TIVOJV Semit ovodraiv, e'tVe

OLVTOJV &v TO Trptorov ore eKrdro etVe

8' r

[Jiev yap Aeyets*

0EAI. Nat.

2H. TauTT^v 8?) VTToXafie Qripav CTncrrrj/Jiwv dp-

TiOV T /Cat 7TplTTOV TTOVTOS.

EAI .

2n. TauTT^ 817, ot/zat,

B %ipiovs TCLS 67TL<JTr)fJL,asT&v dpi6{Jia)V e'êt

/cat

aAAaj 77apaSt8acrtv o TrapaStSoJ?.

EAI. Nat.

2n. Kat KaXovfjLev ye TiapaStSdp'Ta /zev St8a-

<jKiv, TrapaXafjifldi'ovTa Se fjuavOdveiv, ôvra Se

Si)TO) KKTrj<j9cu eV TO> TTepicrrepeajvt,

tvreudev B.

208



THEAETETUS

with all sorts of birds, some in flocks apart from the

rest, others in 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

this receptacle is empty, and we must understand

that the birds represent the varieties of knowledge.And whatsoever kind of knowledge a person acquiresand 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 holdingand letting go again whichever he please of the

kinds of knowledge, whether they are the same

expressions as those needed for the original acquisi-

tion, or others. But you will understand better byan 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 manhas 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, and when anyone, by having acquired them,has them in that aviary of ours, he knows them.

209



THEAETETUS

should we express ourselves in speaking about them

when an arithmetician undertakes to count or a man

of letters to read something ? In such a case shall

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 mandoes not know that which he knows, but that it is

possible to conceive a false opinion about it ? For

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

kindsfly about, he makes a mistake and catches one

instead of another;

so in one example he thought

eleven was twelve, because he caught the knowledgeof twelve, which was within him, instead of that of

eleven, caught a ringdove, as it were, instead of a

pigeon.THEAET. Yes, that is reasonable.

soc. 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 TOVfjiev

a eVtcrra^ratft 17

em-

araaOai aVÂAay/xeâ* a yap KKTTJ/jida (JLTJ

KKTrjo*0ai ovoa/jiov ert cru/a,/3aiVet,ovre

ifrevadelcri

OVTC nrf. SeivoTepov fjievroi naQos aAAo

aivadai{JLOI,

8o/<:et.

0EAI. To TTOLOV;

5H. EtTI

yevrjaerai Trore

EAI. ITa)?

D 2fl. ripcDrov /u,evTO rtvo? eôvra e

rovro avro ayvozlv, /XT) dyvajfjioavvr] aA

lavrov7nartjiJirj'

eVetra erepov av TOVTO

,TO 8' eYepov TOVTO, TTtos ov

TroXXrj aXoyia,

7rapay>vofjLvr)s yvtovai IJLCV T^V ifjv%r]v

ayyoâat Se TrdWa; e/c yap TOVTOV TOV

Aoyou /cajAuet ouSev /cat ayyotav Trapayevo/xey^v

t Tt TTOLrjaaiKCLL

TV(f)XoTrjTa tSetv, etVep

^ dyvor]<jai TTOTG TivaTTOiijoei.

E EAI. "Icrco? yccp, co Sco/cpaTe?, ou K-aAcu? Ta?

/<rat veTfLUTTif-Loavva.? Tievan o/xou

evas evTrj ijjvxf],

al TOV drjpevovTa TOTC

Tno*Tr][Jir)v Aa/x/^dVovTa, TOTC 8'

Gvvr), dXrjOfjSe

2n. Oi) paStov ye, c5 eatV^Te, /xiênaivelv cre

m

6 fJLevTOi eiTTes 7raAtv e7rtcr/<:ei/fat . eVrco /xev yap

214



THEAETETUS

catches the ignorance will, you say, have false

opinion. Is that it ?

THEAET. Yes.soc. 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. Of course.

soc. Hence he will fancy that he has caught, andhas, knowledge, not ignorance.

THEAET. Evidently.

soc. Then, after our long wanderings, we have

come round again to our first difficulty.For the real

reasoner will laugh and say," Most excellent Sirs,

does a man who knows both knowledge and

ignorance think that one of them, which he knows,is another thing which he knows

; or, knowingneither 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 know-

ledge of the kinds of knowledge and of ignorance,

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

possesses them, even if he has them not at hand in

his soul? And in this fashion are you going to be

compelled to trot about endlessly in the same circle

without making any progress?" What shall we

reply to this, Theaetetus ?

H 217



PLATO

EAI. 'AAAo.fjLa At", a) Zco/cpare?, eya>ye OVK

ri xpr) Aeyetv.

. Â->' ovv rjfJtiV,c5 ?rat, /caAtu? o Aoyo? em-

7T\r]TTei,/cat Ivfte'iKwrai ort ou/c op9a>s tfjevSrj

So^-av Trporepav ^rovfjiev &iricrrrjfj/ris, eKelvrjv a</>-

D eVres1

; TO 8' ecrriv a&vvarov yvuvai, Trplv ctV rt?

LKO.VO)S AaSr rt TTOT' ecrrtV.

@EAI.

'AvdyKT],co

^(jjKpares,

eV rco

s Aeyet? otecrât.

38. 2H. Tt ouv rt? epet 77

ILT]V;ov yap TTOV aTTepovfJtev ye TTCO;

@EAI. "Hxrto-ra, edvrrep jjirjcrv ye airayopevrjs.

. Aeye 817,rt ai> auro ^taAtcrra eiTrovres

av ttv ayrot?

E 0EAI. "Orrep eTreêtpou/zev, c5 ^coKpares, eV

TCO TrpoaOev ov yap e^cu eycoye aAAo oiJSeV.

2H. To TTolov;

0EAI. Ti)v dArjOrj Soâv eTnaTtj^v elvai. ava-

fjLapTrjTOV ye TTOV eartv TO Soâêtv dXrjOrj,/cat TO,

UTT' aurou ytyro/xeva Travra KaXa Kal dyada

yt'yverat.

. '0 TOV TTora/jLov KaOyyov/Jievos, t3 0eatT7yre,v

apa oeetr avro- /cat rovro eav tovre?

Ta-% av e^TroStov yevoucvov avro

201 (f>rjveiV TO ^TOV/JLCVOV, (jievovcn Se

EAI. 'Qp6a)s Aeyeis* c/,AA' ta/xeV ye /cat ovco-

218



PLATO

. QVKOVV rovro ye

yap crot oA^ oijjLtaiVei /z-êtWu

ImaTTJfJLrjv avro.

EAI. Ha)? 17; Kai ris avnfj;

Sfl. 'H raiv fjieyiarajv ei? oo<f>iav, ouV17

criv prJTOpds re /<:ai St/cai'i/cous'. ourot yap TTOU

eavraJv TXvf)

TreiOovaiv ov StSacr/covres', aAAd

TTOiovvres a aV fiovXajvTai, .

T)cry otet

rtva? OVTOJ StSacr/caAous" etvat, wore ofs1

B ^117 TrapeyevovTO rive? a.7TO(JTpovfjLevoi$ ^p^/JLara

r\n d'AAo ^taô/xeVots", rourot?

: SvvaaOai Trpos

a^JLLKpov StSa^-at iKavaJs TOJV yevojjievtDV

EAI. OuSa/xaJ? eycaye olfjiai, aAAd TretcratjU,eV.

2fl. To Tretcrat S' o^X^ So^ctcjat Aeyet? Trot^crat;

BEAI. Tt/xrj^;

2H. OUACOUV orav St/catco? TreioOajcnv St/cacrrat

\r>^' 2' " "j1 ' "^^ o>>

77-6/01cuv looim "

IJLOVOV eoriv etoevat, aAAcu? oe

raura rdre e^ aKorjs KpLvovreSy

C Xafiovres, avev eViCTTTû,^? eKpivav, opOd

L7rep ev e'St/cacrav;

EAI. YlavTaTracrifjiev

ovv.

s~\ * ^j'\ " >< T o //Uu/c av, a <ptAe, et ye TOLVTOV

i]v ooga T

Kara 3 ^LKaartLa 4/<:at eTnartiry 60d

TTOT' aV SiKaarrj? drpo? e'Soâê^ dVey

w Se OLKV d'AAo rt KaTpov

1

TOI/TOIS] rourofs T.2

/56/rt] eZSov r^ B ; et'Son W.8 Kara Jowett ;

/ecu MSS. ; om. Heindorf.4

5i/(acrT?7pia] St/caor^pio^ T ; 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

opinion they like. Or do you think there are any

teachers so clever as to be able, in the short timeallowed 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;but I think

they can persuade them.

soc. And persuading them is making them have

an opinion, is it not ?

THEAET. Of course.

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, judgingof 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 knowledgewere the same thing in law courts, the best of judgescould 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

d/coucra? eTreAeA^cr/z^v, vuV 8* evvooo'<f>r)

Se T^y

/u,ei> /u-era Adyou dXr)9rj ooav eVtcrr^ft^v efvat,

D T^y 8e dAoyoy e/cros" eTnarrjfJLrjs'/cat cbv fj,V ^rj

e'crrt Adyo?, ou/c eVtcrr^ra etvat, ourcocrt /catOVO/JLOL-

y ^ >/ > /

t,a>i>, a o eêt, emoT^ra.

2n.TH KraAcD? Aeyet?. TO, Se

817 eVicrr^Ta

TOLVTCL /cat/IT^ 777y St7y/o6t, Aeye, et a/oa /cara raura

re /cayco

0EAI. 'AAA' ov/c ot8a et eêvpijcra}' Xeyovros

eVr* av erepov, cos eycpfjiai, a/coAoi>$i]crai/z'dV.

1

39- 2n. "A/coue S^ 6Vap dvrt oveipa.ro?. eycu

E yap au e'So/cout' d/couetv TLVOJV ort TO, /xev Trpajra

OLOVTTtpel crrotêta, e^ cuvrj/JLeis

T crfy/cet/zeâ /cat

rdAAa, Adyov OVK eôt. ai)rd yap /ca^' aurd e/ca-

OTOV dvo/xdcrat [LOVOV eirj, Trpoaenrelv 8e ouSe^V\ \ (J.

/ >//)> f ' >'/)> f ? WaAAo oyvarov, out; cos COTLV, ovu cos OVK ecmv

202 rjorj yap av ovaiav ^ fJLrjovaiav aural TrpoariBeaQai,

oelv oe ovoev Trpoaêpeiv, etVep avro e/cetvo fj,6vov> X > <> \ \ <( > \ 'V \ > xs >

rt?epet.

e77et ouoe TO auro ouoe TO e/cetvo

><>.\ \ / > '^^ * ' " QÔUO6 TO KCLO~TOV OVO TO [JiOVOV OVOCt( ^ / 'S'" 1^ ^^ v

TOVTO TrpoaoLareov ovo aAAa TroAAa TOtauTa*

TCLVTCL p,V yap TreptTpe'ôvTa ?7acrt77pocr</>epeaât,

eVepa 6'vTa e'/cetVcov ot? TrpoariOeraL, oelv Se,

etVep -^vSuvaTov auTo Ae'yecrât /cat etêv ot'/cetoy

auTOU Adyoy,dVeu TOJV dAAtov aTrd^Tcov

XeyeaQai.vvv oe dovvarov elvai OTLOVV roav rrpoorcov prjOfjvai

1aKO\ovdr)<ra.Lfji.'

SLV Schanz ; a.KO\ovdi)ffalfJii]v BT ; d

crai/ju al.

222



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

expression and true opinion. When therefore a man

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 know-

ledge of it;but when he has acquired also a rational

explanation he may possibly have become all that I

have said and may now be perfect in knowledge.Is that the version of the dream you have heard, or

is it different ?

THEAET. That was it exactly.

soc. Are you satisfied, then, and do you state it in

this way, that true opinion accompanied by reason is

knowledge ?

THEAET. Precisely.

soc. Can it be, Theaetetus, that we now, in this

casual manner, have found out on this day what manywise men have long been seeking and have grown

grey in the search ?

THEAET. I, at any rate, Socrates, think our presentstatement is good.

soc. Probably this particular statement is so;for

what knowledge could there still be apart from reason

and right opinion ? One point, however, in what

has been said is unsatisfactory to me.

THEAET. What point ?

H 2 225



PLATO

"0 Ka.1 So/cet \eyeo9ai KOfiiftorara, co? ra

v crrotêta ayvcocrra, TO 8e TOJV at>AAa/3a>v yeVo?

E yvcuoToV.

EAI. QVKOVV 6p9a)$;

2H. Icrreov877' cucrTrcp yap ofirjpov? eô/Jicv

rov Xoyov ra TrapaSety^tara, 01? xP i*JlJievos e ^7

Travra raura.

EAI. Hota

2n. Ta TOJV ypa/XjLtaTOJV crrotêta T /cat cruAAa-

jSas". T?otet aAAocre 7701 jSAcTrovra ravra

rov elTTovra a Aeyo/xev;

0EAI. OL/C, dAA' etV ravra.

203 40 2fl. Bacraw^co/Ltev Si]aura avaAa/xâ

/LtaAAov

SeT^/xas

1

awrot;?, ovrcus-^ ou^

ovrajsy/)a/x-

fiara efiddofjiev. <f>ep Trp&rov dp' at /xev

jSat Aoyov ôvai yra Se oroiêta aAoya;

0EAI.

/cat

rou? yow et rt? epotro r^v Trpoirrjv

ovrcocri"

'

(3Qeairrjre, Aeye

rt eVrtcra>;

'

rt

(1770/cptvet;

EAI. "Ort CTtyjLta/cat c5.

2il. Ou/cow rovrov eêts1

Aoyov r^? ovXXafifjs;

EAI. "Eycoye.

B 2n. "I^t ST;, ovrais etVe /cat rov rou crty/xa

Aoyov.

EAI. Kat TTCU? TOU crrotxet'ou rt? epet crrotêta;

/cat yap 877,co Sco/cpares

1

,TO Te aty/xa

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

alphabet, and their combinations, the syllables]

;or

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.

soc. I think so, too, decidedly. Now if anyoneshould ask about the first syllable of Socrates

;

"

Theaetetus,tell

me,what is SO ?

"What would

you reply ?

THEAET. I should say" S and O."

soc. 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.

Howcan

one give any elements of anelement ? Forreally, Socrates, the S is a voiceless

ando-uXXajS??, originally general terms for

element and combination, became the common words for

letter and syllable.

227



PLATO

ecm, i/s6(f)os rts" [Jiovov, olov ovpiTTGvarjs rrjs

rrjs' TOV 8' av Prjra ovre(f>a)vr]

oi>Ve i/roô?,ovSe

TOJV TrXeLCTTCDV OTOtêt'cov ware TTOLVV ev ^6 TO

XeyeaOai avra aAoya, cur ye ra evapyearara aura

ra eTT-ra<f>covr)v IJLOVOV xei

> ôyov 8e owS' ovnvovv.

2fl. Tourt/Ltev apa, cu eratpe,

EAI.

Oatvo/xeâ.C sn. Tt Se; TOjLtiy yvcocTTo^ etvat TO

d\Xa rrjv avAXafirjv dp9

op9a>s a77oSeSei'y/ze0a;

EAI. EtVo? ye.

2H. Oe'/oe Si], T^V orvXXa^rjv Trorepov Ae'yco/xevJ

TO, djLtôrepa o-Totêta, /cat e'ar TrAetco7^ r) Suo, Ta

t'Se'ttv yeyovutav

avrcijv;

0EAI. To, aTravTCLefjiOLye SOKOV/JLCV.

2fl. "Qpa Sr)eVt Suotv, olyâ, Kal to. d/iôTe/oa

77 7Tf)(jL)Tr) cruXXaftr) TOVefjiov oVo/zaTO?. aAAo

Tt o yiyvaxyKOiv avTrjv ra ap,(f)6rpa yt-yvcoa/cet;

EAI. Tt ^17^;

2n. To aty/xa /cat TO c5 apa yiyv'cocr/cet.

EAI. Nat.

T< / O> * / v / \^/2H. ltd; KaTpov ap ayyoet, /cat ovoerepov

ctStu? dfJL(j)6rpa ytyvt6cr/cet;

EAI. 'AAAa 8etvo^ /cat oAoyo^j c5 Scu/cpaTes*.

2n. 'AAAa pevroi et ye avdy/c?) e/caTepcv ytyvcu-

cr/cetv, etVep dfjiôrepd Tt? yvtuaeTat,1

\tywjj.ei> B ; Xô/xej' T et al.

228



PLATO

TO, orotêta aVacra oVay/c-^ TO)/LteAAoi/nt

TTOTC

yvcoaeadai avXXaf3r)v, KOI OVTCDS r)fj,iv6 /caAo?

Adyos1

aVoSeSpa/ca^s1

O6\'ôrerat.

E EAI. Kai fjidXa ye eai(fnrr)S-

2n. Ov yap /caAaj? auTov

yap to-co? T^V avXXafirjv TiOeadaifjirj

ra crroiêta,>\\ >> > / w \ T^ >^ /

aAA e^ e/cei^cov ev TL yeyovo? eioo?, toeav

auro avrov

EAI. DaVu /xev ouv /cat rctâ y' aVetco?

. S/ceTrreov /cat ou TrpoSoreov ourco? av-

fteyav re /cat oe^vov \6yov.

EAI. Ou yap ow.

204 2n. 'Eêrcu 817 ai? vw ^>a/xev, jut'atSea e^

e'/caarcov TOJI^

ouvapiiorrovrajv aroL^LO}v yiyvo-fAevYj rj cruAAa/??^, ofioicjos

eV re ypa/xyuacrt /cat eV

rot? aAAot? aVacrt.

EAI. IIdVi> /xev ouv.

2n. Oi)/cow /xep^ auras' ou Set etvai.

EAI. TtST};

"Ort ov avfj êpr), TO oXov ovaryKJ] ra

fji^pf]eii'at. ^ /cat TO 6'Aov e/c

Ae'yet? yeyoyo? eV rt etSos1

erepov ra>y

EAI. "Eya>ye.T>\o\ \x/\ / <

2n. lo oeOT)

Trav /cat TO oAov rrorepov ravrov

B /caAets"T) eVepov e/caTepov;

EAI. "Eâj /zev oi)Sev aafies, ori 8e /ceAeuet?

OTI eVepov.

'H /xev vrpoû/zta, c5 eatV^Te, 6p6ij' et

8e /cat17 aTrd/cptat?,

230



THEAETETUS

ever to know a syllable must certainlyknow the

letters first, and 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 combinationis

a single form arisingout

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 youassert 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 toanswer boldly, so I take the risk and say that theyare different.

soc. Your boldness, Theaetetus, is right ;but

whether your answer is so remains to be seen.

231



PLATO

0EAI. Aet Se' ye 817.

l

41. 2fl. OTJ/COW Sta</>epotaV TO 6'Aov TO>

cos o wv Aoyo?;0EAI. Nat.

rri / O> V O. / \ / \ < **. M V

2H. It oeor);

ra navra. /cat TO Trav eaa o Tt

otov fVet8ay Aeyca/j-ev eV, 8uo, Tpta,

C/ / w> \>\ ov ' ^ *

rerrapa, Trevre, e^, /cat eav ot? Tpta 17 T/3t?

^ rerrapOL re /cat SuoT) Tpta /cat Svo /cat eV,

V Trdcrt TOVTOt? TO auTOT) erepov Aeyo/xev;

EAI. To aj5To.

2H. ^A' aAAo Tt r

0EAI.

EAI. Nat.

2fl. IlaAtv 8' oi>x eV 3 Aeyo/zey TO. Travra \4yovres;

EAI. 'Avay/cry.

2fl.TH aAAo Tt

T)TO, e;

EAI. OuSeV.

D 2n. Tavrov apa eV ye Tot? ocra e^ dpt^/xou

ecrTt, TO Te ?rav Trpoaayop^vo^ev /cat Ta aVaKTa;

EAI.OatVeTat.

2H.TQ8e

8)7 TreptCLVTOJV XeywfJLev. 6 TOV TrAe-

^pou api9fj,os /cat TO TrXedpov TavrovT) yap;

EAI. Nat.T7-\f /* O/ ^ f '

2n. Kat o TOV oraotouor) acrauTCO?.

EAI. Nat.

Kat/xr)v

/cat o TOU arparoTreSov ye /cat TO

1 5^ 7e 5J BT ; 7e 5^ W.2 iravra TO, BT ;

Trdrra W.3 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 spokenof all the six ?

THEAET. Yes.

soc. And again do we not speak of one thingwhen we speak of them all ?

THEAET. Assuredly.soc. That is, of six ?

THEAET. Yes.

soc. Then in all things that are made up of

number, weapply

the same term to all in the plural

and all in the singular ?

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 thefurlong

likewise.

THEAET. Yes.

soc. And the number of the army is the same

233



PLATO

2fl. TldXiv817, orrep apn eTreêtpouv, ou/c,

TI avXXafir] fjir)ra crrotêta eariv, aVay/c^ avrty

B ff>7to?

[Atpy ^Xil> âvr

^STO.

arotêta, 7}

raurov

oucrav aurot? O/JLOLCOS Kivois yvajorrjv efvat;

EAI. Oura>?.

TOUTO ?i/a/UT) yeV^rat, crepov av~

avryvEAI. Nat.

T ' O> > X N \\ O "2X1. it o ; L

fjirjra crrotêca ovAAap^?

/ >/ V \ \ V

>c\/ /

eart^, t'X61? a/M arra etTretf a ftepr^ {Jiev

ecrri

CTuAAa/5i]s"j01) yueVrot crrotêta y' e/cetVT]?;

EAI. OuSa/zcos1

. et yap, cu Saj/cpare?, ftopt'

arra avrfjs1

Gvy^copoiiqV) yeAotov TTOU ra arotêta

d<j>evra eV d'AAa t'eVat.

C 2n. YlavraTraaL877,

c5 eatr^re, /cara rov

t'w Aoyoi^ /zta rts" t'Sea afieptoros

1

avXXa^r] av irj.

EAI. "Eot/cev.

2X1. Me/xvT^CTat ouv, c6 <^tAe, ort dAtyov ev TO)

rfpoadev a77e8eô^teâ r/yovfêvoL ev XeyeaOai ort

raw Trptorojv OVKCLYJ Aoyo? e^ cuv rdAAa cruy/cetrat,

Stort ai)ro /ca^' auro e/cacrrovetT] davvBerov, /cat

oj)8e ro'

etrat'

Treptavrov 6p0a>s ^XOL npocrfie-

povra L7Telv, ovo " rouro," cu? erepa /cat aAAorpta

Aeyo/zeva, /cat aur^ ST) 7}atrta d'Aoyov re /cat

v > \

ayvoiorov avro Trotoi,*

EAI. Me/xvTy/xat.

D 2X1.TH ow

d'AAT] rt? 77 aurT} rjatria rov aovo-

eiO$ re2

/cat dêpiarov avro elvai; eyd) [lev yap

oi>x opaj dXXrjv.

1

/J.bpi&rra avrrjs W ; fj.6pia TavTijs BT.2re W in ras. B ; rt T.

236



PLATO

0EAI. Ov yap ovv817

2n. QVKOVV els TCLVTOV efiTTeTTrcoKev rj av\Xa/3r)

etSos" e/cetVa>,

etWp /xep^re

fjirj eêt/cat

/zt'a

larlv

tSea;

0EAI. TlaVTOLTTacriJJL6V

OVV.

Et /zev apa 77oAAa crroiêta rj cruAAa/S^ eartv

/cat 6Aoi^ TL, fjieprj8' avrfjs ravra, o/zoi'co?

at re

<jvXXaj3ai yvuioTcu, /cat p^rat /cat ra

7TL7Tp TO, TTaVTO. ^pt] TO) 6'AoJ TaUTOV(f)dvr]

.

E 0EAI. Kat jLtaAa.

Et 8e ye eV re /cat d/zepe?, oftot'a)?

tuaavTOJS Se crrotêtop' a'Aoyov re /cat

77 yap avrrj ama Trot^cretaura rotaura.

0EAI. Oi)/c â> d'AAcu? etVetr.

TOVTOyu,ev apa /XT^ aTToSeâS/zeâ, o? dV

Ae'yr^

fj,ev yvwarov^

/cat prjrov, oroiêlov 8eTovvavriov.

0EAI.M-)) yd/3, L7Tp TO) AdyO) 7Tl06fJ,0a.

206 5n. Tt S' au; rovvavriov Aeyovro? dp' oi5

fjidXXov dV aTToSe'âto e^ cuv aurd? ovvoioQa crauraj

ypajLt/xrcov

0EAI. Td

2n. 'Ds1 ou8ev d'AAo navBdvaw StereAecra?

T)rd

orotêta eV TC2

TT^ 6'i/et Staytyvcoa/cetv

/cat eV r$ d/co7yauro /ca^' avr e/caorov, tva

o-e rapdrrot Aeyo/xeVcov re /cat

0EAI.'

AXrjOeaTara Aeyet?.

2fl. 'Ey Se Kidapiarov reAeaj? /ze/xa^/ceVat

B dAAo Tt TJV T^ TO TO) <f)96yycp eVdcrTa) SvvacrOai

W; tiyvuffrov pr. BT.

2 re W;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 andis a

singleform ?

THEAET. Yes, unquestionably.soc. If, then, the syllable is a plurality of letters

and is a 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

the same as the whole.THEAET. Certainly.

soc. But if one and indivisible, then syllableand

likewise letter are equally irrational and unknowable ;

for the same cause will make them so.

THEAET. I cannot dispute it.

soc. 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 if we are convinced by our

argument.soc. But would you not rather accept the opposite

belief, judging by your own experience when youwere learning to read ?

THEAET. What experience ?

soc. In learning, you were 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 bytheir sequence when they were spoken or written.

THEAET. That is very true.

soc. And in the music school was not perfect

attainment the ability to follow each note and tell

239



THEAETETUS

which string produced it;

and everyone would

agree that the notes are the elements of music ?

THEAET. Yes, thatis all

true.soc. Then if we are to argue from the elements

and combinations in which we ourselves have ex-

perience to other things in general, we shall say that

the elements as a class admit of a much clearer know-

ledge 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 thatthe 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

out, I think;

but let us not on that account lose

sight of the question before us, which is :

What is

meant by the doctrine that the most perfect know-

ledge arises from the addition of rational explanationto true opinion ?

THEAET. No, we must not.

soc. Now what are we intended to understand by"rational explanation

"? I think it means one of

three things.

THEAET. What are they ?

soc. The first would be making one's own thoughtclear through speech by means of verbs and nouns,

imaging the opinion in the stream that flows throughthe

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 hewho does that speaks or explains.

soc. Well, that is a thing that anyone can do

sooner or later;he can show what he thinks about

24-J



THEAETETUS

anything, unless he 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

opinion apart from knowledge.THEAET. True.

soc. Let us not, therefore, carelessly accuse himof 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 meantthat 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,

says, "a hundred pieces of wood in a wagon."1

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, perhaps, would think we were

ridiculous, just as he would if, on being asked about

your name, we should reply by telling the syllables,

holding a right opinion and expressing correctly what

we have tosay, but should think we were gram-

marians and as such both possessed and were ex-

pressing as grammarians would the rational explana-tion of the name Theaetetus. He would say that it

is impossible for anyone to give a rational explana-tion of anything with knowledge, 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).

243



PLATO

0EAI.'"EipprjOr] yap.

. OUTCO Toivvv KalTrepl d^Ltd*^? rjfJias

>/ ^ > / * ^* S * < f \ > f

X.eiv oogav, rov oe ota TOJV ZKOLTOV eKe

C ovvdfjievov SteAêtv avrrjs rrjv ovaiav, TrpoaXa-

fiovra TOVTO, Aoyov re TrpocretA^êVat rf}

80^17 Kal Civrl SoâcrrtACOU TC^VLKOV re /cat e

[jiova TTepl afjidr]s ovaias yeyovevai, Sta

TO oAov TTepdvavra.

0EAI. Ou/cow eu So/ctcrot,

c5

2fi. Et o-ot, co eralpe, SOKEL, Kal a

Sta aroLêiov StefoSoy Tre/ate/cacrrou Aoyov\^\ > ^^Dvv x v ^

>"

TT)Voe Kara avAAapas rf

/cat /cara /uei(,ov ert

D aAoytav, TOVTOJJLOI Ae'ye, tv' avro

0EAI. 'AAAa Traû a7roe'ô/zat.

2n. Tlorepov 7]you/zeô? eVtcrr^/xova etvat o

OTOVOVV, oTav TO avTo Tore-1

jitev rou

rjavTO) etvat, rore Se eTepov, TJ

/cat orav TOU

aurow rore/zev' erepov, rore Se erepov ood,r);

EAI. Ma At" oi)/c eycoye.

2n. Etrad/JLvrjfjLoveis

eVTT^

rail' ypa/x/Aarco^

/Lta#r?cret/car' ap^ds

1 aaurov T /cat TOUS- d'AAou?

0EAI. Âpa Ae'yet? TT^? avTrjs avXXafifjs TOTC /xev

E eVepo^, Tore 8e eVepov ^you/xeVous1

ypd/xâ, /cat

TO auro Tore /zev etV T-^V Trpocr^/coucray, Tore Se

ct? dXXrjv rtêVra? avXXafirjv;

2fl. TauraAe'yco.

EAI. Md At" ou Toivvv djivrjiovoj ovoe yeTTCO rovai eTrioTaaBai TOVS OVTOJS

r6re W;

tfre BT.



THEAETETUS

THEAET. Yes, it was.

soc. So, too, he would say that we have right

opinion aboutawagon, 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 acquiredtechnical knowledge of the essential nature of a

wagon, in place of mere opinion, by describing the

whole in terms of its elements.

THEAET. Do you agree to that, Socrates ?

soc. If you, my friend, agree to it and accept the

view that orderly description in terms of its elements

is a rational account of anything, but that descriptionin 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 anyonelias 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.

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 some-

times 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. That is what I 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 ; OTOLV ev TO) roiovrco /caipoi

"0eat-

Trjrov

'

ypd<f)cw Tt? Orjra KOI el oivjraLl re Sety

208 ypdêiv/cat

ypdifsrj,/cat

av

'

Qe68copov

'

em-êipcljv ypd(j)Lv rav KOI el

ovryrai1 re Setv

Kalypdifjrj, dp' eVtcrracrât

<f)Tjcrofjievavrov

irpwrrjv ra>v vjjtereptov ovo/zarcov ovXXaf3rjV ;

0EAI. 'AAA' aprt co/xoAoy^cra/xev rov OUTCO?

. KcoAuet ow rt icat Trept TT)V Sevrepav crvX-

/cat rpirriv /cat Terdprr^v OVTCDS

EAI. Oi)SeV ye.

. 'Ap' ow rareTT)V

Sta crrotêtou 8teôSoi'

ypaj/ret

'

QeairrjTOV'

/xera opOfjs 80^77?,

orav e^s* ypa^*^;

0EAI. AÂov ST;.

B/^k> >/ > / >/ *fl^?^2H. Uu/cow ert ave7ncrTr]iJia>v wv, opc/a oe

EAI. Nat.

2n. Aoyov ye e^cov /zero, opOrjs

yap Sta TOU aroiêiov oSov e^cuv e'ypaêi',

Aoyoy wEAI.

Eartv apa, c5 eratpe, /xerd Aoyou o

vTTO} Set ^taT^/x^v /caAetv.

EAI. KtvSwei;et.

43' 2H. "Ovap Sry, cos" eot/cev, e

eêtv rov dXf]9eararov eTito'T^r^s' Aoyoi'.

Karr]'yopa)fjiei>; LCTCOS yap ov TOVTO

1

oi^rat] oterat BT.



THEAETETUS

soc. Take an example : When at such a stage in

his progress a person in writing "Theaetetus" thinks

he ought to write, and actually does write, TH andE, and again in trying to write " Theodorus

"thinks

he ought to write, and does write, T and E, shall

we say that he knows the first syllable of your

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 sameperson 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

description in terms of letters, and will write

" 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 ex-

planation ;for he wrote with the method in terms

of letters in his mind, and we agreed that that wasrational explanation.

THEAET. True.

soc. There is, then, my friend, a combination of

right opinion with rational explanation, which cannot

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

247



PLATO

C avTov opietTat, aAAa TO XOLTTOV etSo? TOJV

<Lv evye' ri e</a/xev \6yov 6r}crea9ai

TOV e

opiôfjievov S6av etyat opOrjv fJLra Aoyou.

EAI. 'Op^co? VTTjjivr)oras'ert yap ev AotTroV.

TOyLtev yap r^v Siarota? ev

(f>a)vfj wcnrep et'

< O* v \ /l\ C>\ / '^ v '^ \ "TO o aprt Ae^t7ei^

ota orrotêtou ooo? em TO o

\o\o-\ / / \ /

TO oeor) rpiTOv n Aeyet?;

2fl. "Ovrep av 06 TroAAot etVotev, TO eêtv Tt

fJiiOV 17TIV d) TOJV CLTTOLVTaJV 3ia(f)pL TO epO)Tr)6eV.

EAI. Qlov Tiva. TtVo? eêt? /xot Aoyov etTretv;

D 2H. Otov, et fiovAei, rjXiov rrepiLKOVOV

aoi etvat aTrooeâaOai,, OTI TO Xa^npoTdTovTOJV KOLTa TOV OVpaVOV LOVTOJV 7Tpi yfjv.

0EAI. Haw /Ltevovv.

Anvox T / >f o\ef2n. Aape or)

ov xaP lv ^tp^Tac. ecm oe o?7ep

apTt e'Ae'yo/zev, oj$ apa T^V Staôpai^ eVaaTOU aV

Xafji/3di>r)s fj TOJV aXXojv 8ta</>epet, Aoyo^, co? âcrt

Ttve?, A^j/fer eco? S' av KOLVOV TWOS (f)a,7TTr) ,

KLVOJV TTtplOOL OTO.L 6 AoyO? O>V ttV

7) KOlVOTrjS fl.

E EAI. Mai'fldVar /catjitot

So/cet /caAto? ^X iv

AoyOV TO TOLOVTOV Ka\LV.

2H. "0? S* aJ7 jLter' opOrjs o6rj? rrepi OTOVOVV

TOJV OVTCUV TTJV OLa<j>opav TOJV aXXojv

248



THEAETETUS

is not this, but the remaining one of the three possi-

bilities one of which we said must be affirmed by

anyone who asserts that knowledge is right opinioncombined 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 peoplewould 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 ex-

planation 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

brightest of the heavenly bodies that revolve about

the earth.

THEAET. Certainly.

soc. Understand why I say this. It is because, as

we were just saying, if you get hold of the distin-

guishing 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

to some common quality, your explanation will pertain

to all those objects to which the common quality

belongs.

THEAET. I understand ;and it seems to me that it

is

quite right

to call that kind a rational

explanationor 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 emcrrry/zcoi' yeyovcos* carat, ov 7rpo7pov r\v

0EAI. Oa^LteV ye /z^v ovra).

2H. Nw> $rjra,w catT^re, 7Ta.vraTra.aiv eycoye,

1

i^ eyyi)? tocnrep cr/ctaypa^r^taTos" ye'yova TOU

^vvirjfjiiouSe a^LLKpov ecu? Se

d(f><jr'^Krj

, e<f>a.Lver6ri

{JLOI Aeyeaât.

0EAI. Ileus1

rt TOVTO;

209sn. Opacreo,

eavoto? re yeVco/zat. opOrjv

eya>ye2

e\'a>v Soâv Trept crou,

rov aov \6yov, ytyvcucr/cco Sr^ ere, et Se

EAI. Nat.

5n. Aoyo? Se' ye ^v ^ rrj?

EAI. QVTOJS-* TT / T- 5 '/ 5*

' ""^ Trivc/c ow eoogaôv fjiovov,

aAAo n a) TWV

Staê/aets1

,TOUTCOV ouSevos"

Stavota;

0EAI. OuK OLKV.

2n. Taiv Koiv&v n apa

ov /xaAAov -^ rt? aAAos e'êi.

B EAI. 'Avay/c^.

2n. Oepe ST) TT/DOS* Atos" TTOJ? 77ore e^ TO)

TOLOVTO) ere /xaAAov eBoâôv TJaXXov OVTLVOVV;

6es yap /xe SiavoovyLteôv cu? ecrriv OUTO?

OS" aV17

re avdpajnos KCLL e^77 ptâ /cat

/cat crro/xa /cat ourco81^

eV e/cacrrov raw

ouv7^

Stavota ea^' o rt /xctAAov vrotTycret

1Tfo.vro.iro.aiv gyuye W ; TravTa.Tra.ffi ye ^yu> T.

8I7w7e W ; ^70; T.

50



THEAETETUS

will 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

like coming close to a scene-painting.1 While I

stood off at a distance, I thought there was some-

thing in it.

THEAET. What do you mean ?

soc. I will tell 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,otherwise I have merely opinion.

THEAET. Yes.

soc. But explanation was, we agreed, the inter-

pretation of

your

difference.

THEAET. It Was.

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 whichyou possess

no more than other

men.

THEAET. You must have been.

soc. 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" andso

forth, mentioningall

the parts.Can this thought make me think of Theaetetus any

1 In which perspective is the main thing.

251



PLATO

0eatT7iTOVTI 0eoScupov StanceloQai, T)

TWV Aeyo-

/zeVcov Mucraiv roV eaârov;

EAI. Tt yap;A\\>>0\ \ / < W t~ \

2n. AAA eavorj fjirj fjiovov TOV eôvra pwa KO.L

C6(f)OaXfJLOvs SiavoTyâj, aAAa /<rat rov

aijjiov re /cat

>/- ' in \ ' ^ ? ~\\ ^ b/ <\>

egcxpUaAfiov, fir]rt ere au yLtaAAov ooâcrco -^ e/z,auTov

^ ocrot TOIOVTOI;

EAI. 0?)8eV.

2n. 'AAA' ou Trporepov yc, olfjiai, Qcairirjros Iv

e/xot $oaa9ri<jTai, Trpiv avr) aifjiOT^s GLvrrj

TUJV

a'AAcov aLjJLOTTJTOJViLv eycj ecopa/ca Staôpov rt

livrjfjieiov Trap* e/zot eVcr^^va/^teV^ Acara^^rat, /cat

^\\ w >/ f- f / \/-i >> >/

raAAa owra; eg cuv et cnr7) e/xe/ /cat eav avpiov

dvafjivrjcrei, /cat Trotâet op$a

EAI.

D 2n. Ilept TT)V StaôpoTT^ra apa /cat

o. / > ti e / /

ooga av177

e/caorou?7ept.

EAI. OatVerat ye.

2n. To oi)v TTpoaXafielv Aoyov rr^ op^^ ^0^77 rt

oV ertetT^;

et/zei' yap 77pocjSoacrat Ae'yet rj 8ta</epet

Tt TCOV aAAcov, Trayu yeAota ytyverat 77 eVtrafts1

.

EAI. ricD?;

2fl.rO^ opOrjV 6av eô/zev T^

TO>V aAAcov Sta-

<f>pi, TOVTOJV TrpoaXafie'iv /ceAewet T^/xas" opOrjv

Soai>T^

rcov aAAcuv Sta<êpet. /cat OVTCOSrj fj,ev

1el o-tf ^ ^ Wohlrab ; el <ry- ^ /* W (but ^ added

later) ;

el en) ^^ B ;ei'cret ^ T.

252



THEAETETUS

more than of Theodoras or of the meanest of the

Mysians,1 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.

soc. No;

I fancy Theaetetus will not be the

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 ex-

amples 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 again tomorrow, will awaken mymemory and make me have right opinion about

you.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

or explanation to right opinion ? For if it is defined

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 certainthings

differ from otherthings,

we are

told to acquire a right opinion of the way in which

those same things differ from other things ! On this

1 The Mysians were despised as especially effeminate and

worthless.

253



PLATO

rj imepov 7}orov

Sr) Xeyerat,

E Trpos ravrrjv rrjv eTriraîv oi5Sev av Ae'yot, rv(f)Xov

Se TrapaKeXevcTLS av /caAoiro SiKaiorepov TO

yap, a XOfjLv, ravra TrpoaXafieLV KeXeveiv, Iva

a Soâô/xev, TTO.VV yevvaiais eot/cev e'

EAI. EiVe 8^1rt vvv

3rj J)s epaJv 7rvOov;

.

Et TO Xoyov, d> TTGU, TrpocrXaêlv yvaivai

Jet, dAAa ^ Soâcrat T^V Sta</opoT7^Ta, 7]8j)

,' avctry

rou /caAAtcrrou ra)i> Trept

Aoyou. TO yap yvajvat 7narrjfjLrjv TTOV A

210 earwrj yap;

EAI. Nat.

. OI)KOW epajT^êt?, to? eoi/ce, Tt earw

6Vt Soâ dp^ /xeT

. Aoyov yap TrpoaXrjijJis TOUT* dV

117/caT* ZKtlvov.

EAI. "Eoi/cei>.

Kat TTavraTTaai ye cvrjOes, ,r)TOVVTtov r)â>v

(f)dvat, op6r]v e.lva.1[JLer' e'mcm^LO]?

eiVe SiaôpoTtyro? etVe OTOUOUV. ovVe apa aitrdrj-T r\ ' >' o ' / 5 \i^ " '

ai?, to (yeatTT^Te, OUTC ooa aA^c/r)? OUTE

B dXrjOovs So^9 Aoyoj TTpoayiyvo^vos e

EAI. Ou/C OLKV.

i?T (and W in marg.) ; ct 76 5?? B ;

ef 76 STJ B2W.

254



THEAETETUS

plan the twirling of a scytalel or a pestle or any-

thing of the sort would be as nothing compared with

this injunction. It might more justly be called ablind 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 is acquiring knowledge, is

it not ?

THEAET. YeS.

soc. Then, it seems, if asked, " What is know-ledge ?

"our leader will reply that it is right opinion

with the addition of a knowledge of difference;for

that would, according to him, be the addition of

reason or explanation.


soc. And it is utterly silly,when we are looking

for a definition of knowledge, to say that it is right

opinion with knowledge, whether of difference or of

anything else whatsoever. So neither perception,

Theaetetus, nor true opinion, nor reason or ex-

planation combined with true opinion could be

knowledge.THEAET. Apparently not.

1 A (TKVTdXr) was a staff, especially a staff about which a

strip of leather was rolled, on which dispatches were so

written that when unrolled they were illegible until rolled

again upon another staff of the same size and shape.

2.55



PLATO

*TJ T " / \ / 92H. ri 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 raurajitev

rrdvrarj

ave/ittata <^7^crt ycyev^crât /cat

0EAI. aVTOLTTaGlfJL.V

OVV .

44-2n. 'Edv roivvv d'AAcuv

fjiera

ravraey-

KVfJicov 67n%(,pfjs yiyv<jQaLi, o> 0eatT7^re, edVre

C yiyvr), /feArtdVajv ecretirAijprjs

Stdrr)v

vw eêracrtv,

edvre /cevo? 7)?, TTJTTOVcaret, fiapvs rot? ovvovai

/cat êpcurepos", aa>(}>p6va)s OVK otojLtevo? et'SeVat

a/LIT)

olaOa. roaovrov yap \LOVOV TJ efjir) re^vr)

Swarat, TrAeov Se ouSeV, ouSe rt otSa a>v ot dAAot,

oaoi jiteyaAot /cat Oav^daioi aVSpe? eto-t re /cat

yeyovacrt. TT)V8e fjiaceiav ravrrjv eycij

re /catrj

fjirjrrjpe/c êou eAaôêv, 77 /Ltev

raiv yuvat/caiv,

eyto Se TOJV vecov re /cat yzvvaiajv /cat ocrot /caAot.

D Nuv/Ltev

ovv aTTavrr^Teov /xot et? TT)Vrou fiacnAeajs

OTOCLV enlrrjv MeA^rou ypa(f>r)v, r\v fj,e yeypaTrrat'

^

Se, to OeoScope, Seupo TraAtv cL

256



THEAETETUS

soc. Are we then, my friend, still pregnant and

in travail with 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 in me.

soc. Then does our art of midwifery declare to us

that all 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 byreason 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 muchand 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 againstme. But in the morning, Theodoras, let us meet

here again.

1 Meletus was one of those who brought the suit which

led to the condemnation and death of Socrates.

i 2 257



THE SOPHIST



INTRODUCTION TO THE SOPHIST

IN The SophistTheodorus 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, andthe 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 easier and slighter matter is

desirable. The method employed in defining first

the angler and then the Sophist is that of comparisonand division successively into two parts. This

method was probably, at the time when this dialogue

was written, something of a novelty, and is employedalso 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

Sophist the avowed purpose of the dialogue is

261




carried on in a satirical and polemic spirit which is

abundantly evident even when it is no longer pos-

sible to name the particular persons against whom theattack is directed.

But all this occupies only the opening and con-

cluding passages. It is interrupted by what is in

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 jugglerand deceiver, and the question arises whether decep-tion or falsehood does not involve the assumptionof Not-Being, which was persistently opposed byParmenides and the Eleatic philosophers in general.

Plato refutes the doctrine that Not-Being; cannotO

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

positive notion of Difference. This is the most

important doctrine promulgated in this dialogue.

Hereupon follows the discussion of the nature of

Being, and the conclusion is reached that everythingwhich 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.The problem of predication of the

possibility of

assertion is solved by making the distinction be-

tween 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

262




is false. How far this is original with Plato is

difficult to determine. Other subjects discussed in

this dialogue are the theory of knowledge, therelation between reality and appearance, and that

between the one and the many. The introduction

of the five" forms

"or categories Being, Motion,

Rest, Same and Other is an interesting feature

which may be interpreted as marking a stage in the

development of the theory of ideas. This dialogue

is important in content, though not especiallyattractive in form.

The date of The Sophist cannot be earlier, and

may be considerably later, than that of 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. Kararrjv X@S o/AoAoytav, a) Za>/cpares,

avroL reACOCT/XICO?

/cat ro^Se rtvct evov

rojjiev yeVo? e'^ 'EAea?, eralpov 8e TCOV

Hapfjievi$7]v /cat Z^vcuva,1

/xaAa Se avSpa

<f)lX6(JO(f)OV.TA > T ? /"v /^ > >/ '\\ /

2H.

Apouv, a>

Weootope,

ou $.vov aAAa rwa

Oeov aycov Kara rov'Qfjiijpov \6yov XeXr]9as; o?

B ^crtv dXXovs re Oeov? rols dvOpwrrois OTTOGOL

p,ere%ovaLv alSovs St/cata?, /cat817

/cat TOP ^iviov

ov^ riKiora Qeov ovvorra&ov yiyvo^evov vfipeis re

/cat evvojjiias ra>v dv6pcj7ra>v KaQopdv. rd-% ovv

dv /cat crot ris euros' TOJV Kpeirrovutv

(fravXovs r)(J<ds ovra? eV rot? Aoyot?re /cat eXeya>v, 6eos &v rt? eAey/crt/cos

1

.

@EO. Ot>x ovros 6 rporros, a> Haj/cpares', rov

1

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. Are you not unwittingly bringing, as Homer

says, some god, and no mere stranger, Theodorus ?

He says that the gods, and especially the god of

strangers, enter into companionship with men whohave a share of due reverence 1 and that theybehold the deeds, both violent and righteous,

1 of

mankind. So perhaps this companion of yours maybe 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 rrepi rds epioas

LKorajv . /cat /zot So/cet êos* ftev dvrjpl

C ovSajjLOJs elvai, Oelos fjLrjv rrdvras yap eyo) rovs(f)iXocr6<f)OVs roiovrovs rrpocrayopeva}.

2H. KaAaJ? ye, ta ^tAe. rovro JJUEVTOI

TO yeVo? OT) TioAw rt pqov, cu? eVo? etVetv,

SiCLKpiveiv r)TO rov 6eov' rravv yap d^Spe?

2ovrot

Travroloi (fravraôfjievoi 8tar-^v

raiv aAAcov ayvotav

7TiOTpa)(f)a)<JL TroAâ?, ot/x^ 77Aa<7Ta)9 dAA'

<f)iX6oo(f)O(,, Ka9opcuvTs v^69ev rov ra)v Kara)

/cat rot? [lev ooKovaw elvai rovfjirjoevos rifuoi,

TOLS 8' ct^tot TGI; rravros' /cat rore ^tev TroAtrt/cot

D <j>avrdt,ovraiy rore 8e oro^tcrrat, rore 8* Griv

ols ooav rrapdo"%oivro av a>s Travrdnaaiv eôvres1

rov /zeVrot êVou T^^ttJ/ rjoea)sav rrvvda-

cl (friXov avra), ri rav6* ol rrepl rov c/cet

217 TO77OV yyovvro /cat

0EO. To, 77Ota

2H. 2o</>tCTT^y, 77oAtrt/cov, <f>t,X6cro<f)OV.

0EO. Tt 8e jLtdAtcrra /cat TO vrotov Tt Trept a.vra>v

? tpeaOai oievorj0r]s;

TdSc*irorepov

ev rrdvra ravraevofjLLôv

TI ovo, TJ KaOaTrep rd ovofjiara rpia, rpia /cat yeVi?

oiaipovfjievoL Kad* ev 6Vo//,a yeVos1

e/cdo-TO) Trpoa-

rjrrrov;

0EO. 'AAA* ouSet?, co? eya)/xat, (f)06vosavra)

oieXOelv avrd'r) TTOJS, a) êVe, Xcyajfiev;

B HE. QVTOJS, c5 0ed8cope. <f)66vos fiev yap

ovoe -âXeTTov etVetv 6Vt ye T/3t"

Bekker; dvyp BT.

Bekker ; fi;>5/>es BT.

266



THE SOPHIST

character;he is more reasonable than those who

devote themselves to disputation. And thoughI

do not think heis

a god at all,I

certainly dothink he is divine, for I give that epithet to all

philosophers.

soc. And rightly, my friend. However, I fancyit is not much easier, if I may say so, to recognize

this class, than that of the gods. For these men I

mean those who are not feignedly but really

philosophers appear disguised in all sorts of shapes,1

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. Andsometimes they appear disguised as statesmen and

sometimes as sophists, and sometimes they may give

some people the impression that they are altogethermad. But I should like to ask our stranger here, if

agreeable to him, what people in his country thoughtabout 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 youhad 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 ?

STR. Just what you did, Theodorus;for I have no

objection, and it is not difficult to say that they1

Cf. Od. xvii. 485-7.

267



PLATO

cKaarov uyv OLOpiaaaOai cra^co? TI TTOT'

eariv, oj) cr/xt/cpovou8e paSiov e'pyov.

0EO. Kat jLtev S^ Kara rvyr\v ye, to

Adytov eTreXdftov TrapaTrXrjcricova>v /cat Trptv

Seup' eXOelv SteptoTtovTe? a^TOV ervy^dvo^v o

8e ravra aVep Trpos ere yw, /cat TOTC eaKTjTrrero

rrpos 7^/xas"77et Sia/c7]/coeVat ye (f>7]o~iv

iKavajs

/cat ou/cdfjiV7]p,oveiv.

C 2. 2n.MT]

roivvv,

to

êVe, rjjjiojv rr\v ye Trpto-TTIV alrr)o~dvra)v âptv d7Tapvr)9eis yevrj,

roo~ovo

8*Tîttv ^>paê* rtorepov etcoâ? 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 Adyou?

Tray/caAous1

Trapeyevd/x^v eyto ve'o? tov, CKCIVOV

fidXa 817 TOTC OVTO? rrpeafivrov ;

HE. Tto ftev, to Sco/cpaTe?, cxAwTrto? TC /cat

evrjvicos TrpocrStaAeyo/zeVto paov ouVto, TO Trpo?

d'AAoy et 8e/X7y,

TO /ca$' auTov.

2n. "EêcrTt roivvv rcov Trapovrwv ov av fiov-

Xrjdfjs K\eâadai rrdvres yap vrraKOvaovral crot

Trpatos" crvfjifiovXto p,r)v e/ôt ^pwfjicvos rcova

atprjaei, Seairrjrov rovoe, r)/cat Ttov o

t Tt? O*Ot /CttTO, VOW.

EE. ^D Sco/cpaTes", atScus" Tts" /x* eêt TO

cruyyeô/xevo^ ?5/>ttv /AT)/caTa cr/xt/cpov eVo?

TTOs 7rotetCT0at T^V o~vvovo~iav, aAA' e/CTet-

dirop,r]KVViv Xoyov avxyov KCLT* lâvrov,

E etTe /cat Trpoj erepov, oiovl

eVt'Sei^tv Troiovfjievov'

TO) yap OVTL TO vw> prjQev oi>x oaov c58e epwryBeveA77to-etev av auTO etjât Tts, aAAa Tuy^ctvet Adyou

1oTo^ Ast

;ficroy BT.

268



THE SOPHIST

considered them three. But it is no small or easytask to define clearly the nature of each.

THEO. The fact is,

Socrates,

that

bychance

youhave hit upon a question very like what we happenedto 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 thoroughlydiscussed and remembers what he heard.

soc. In that case, stranger, do not refuse us the

first favour

we have asked ; but justtell us this :

Do you generally prefer to expound in a Jong un-

interrupted speech of your own whatever you wish

to explain to anyone, or do you prefer the method of

questions ? I was present once when Parmenides em-

ployed the latter method and carried on a splendid dis-

cussion. I was a young man then, and he was very old.

STR. The method of dialogue, Socrates, is easierwith 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 pleaseof those present ; they will all respond pleasantlyto you ;

but if you take my advice you will choose

one of the young fellows, Theaetetus here, or anyof the others who suits you.

STR. Socrates, this is the first time I have come

among 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 anexhibition

;but I must, for really the present subject

is not what one might expect from the form of the

question, but is a matter for very long speech. On



PLATO

ov. TO Se av aol/LIT) xapteo-0ai /cat

rotcrSe, d'AAcos1 Te /cat <rou AeâvTOS' co?

a^Gvov TI /caTa</>aiVeTat (AOL /cat ayptov.218 0eatVi7TdV ye TOV 77poaStaAeyoju,ei'ov

etvat Seô/xat

TravTaTraatv e' coV auros1 re irporepov StetAey/Aai

/cat au ra vw/>tot

Sta/ceAeuet.

EAI. '''Apa TOLVVV, 60 êVe, OVTO) Kdl KadoLTTp

cine Sco/cpar^s1

7Ta.cn /ceâptcr/xeVo? ecret;

HE. KtvSuveuet TT-pos" p>ev ravra ovbev ert Ae/creov

ctvat, eatTTyre- Trpos1 Se ae

17817TO /zero, TOVTO,

eoiK, yiyvoiTQ av 6 Aoyo?. a.v o dpa rt rco

77ovtov a^^, ^17 e'/zeat'rtacrât TOUTCOJ^, dAAa,

e TOUS (TOU9 eVatpou?.

B EAI. 'AAA' Ot/xat jLteV Si)VW OVTOJS OVK 0.7T-

epetv av 8* apa rt TOLOVTOV ytyv^rat, /cat roVSe

Sco/cparTy, rov

Se TÂiActtur^v/cat

a cruvtaTiOT'etv /zer* e/zou ra TroAAa oi/c

3- HE. Eu Ae'y^t?, /cat raura/zet'

tSta /SouAeucret

Trpotoyros' TOU Aoyov Kowfj Sejiter* e/xou crot

<jvcrK7TTOV dpôfjLeva) TTpaJTOV, co? ejLtot (âtVerat,

vw aVo TOU oo(j)Larov, ^TOVVTI /cate/z</>ai>t'oj'Tt

C Aoyto rt 77-or* ecrrt. vw yap 817cru /cayto rourou

77-e'pt TOVVOfJLO, [JLOVOV )(OfJLV KOLVfj'TO O pyOV

e^>'co KaXovfjLev e/carepo? Ta^' av t'Sta Trap' T^/ztv

aurot? eôt/zev Set 8e det Travro? vre'ptTO Trpay/xa

auTO /zaAAov Sta Aoycov ^ Tovvoâ [LOVOV avvofjio-

Aoyrâaaât ^topis' Aoyou. TO Se (frvXov o vvv eVt-

VOOVjJLEV ,r]T6lvOV 7TOLVTCOV pCLOTOV avXXa^LV Tt

270



THE SOPHIST

the other hand it seems unfriendly and discourteous

to refuse a favour to you and these gentlemen,

especially whenyou

have spoken as you did. As

for Theaetetus I accept him most willingly as inter-

locutor 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

others too ?

STR. I am afraid there is

nothingmore to be said

about that, Theaetetus;but from now on, my talk

will, I fancy, be addressed to you. And if you get

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 thisSocrates,

the namesake of the other

Socrates;he is of my own age and my companion

in the gymnasium, and is in the habit of workingwith me in almost everything.

STR. Very well; you will follow 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 searchout 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 conceptionof it in our own minds

; however, we ought alwaysin every instance to come to agreement about the

thing itself by argument rather than about the merename without argument. But the tribe which wenow intend to search for, the sophist, is not the

easiest thing in the world to catch and define, and

271



PLATO

TTOT* eoriv, o crouton]? ocra 8* au TOJV

Set 8ta7rovetcr#at /caAa)?, 77eptrcov roiovrajv Se'So/c-

Tat Traoiv /cat TrdAat TO rrporepov ev a/JLLKpois

D /cat paoow aura Setv /zeAerdV, Trptvev avrot? TOI?

/xeyujTOt?. vw ow, <3 eatr^re, e'ycoye /cat vaiv

ovTO) avfJLôvXeva), xaXeirov /cat SvaOrjpevrov rjyrj-

cra/xeVot? etvat TO TOU ao(f)Larov yevos Trporepov Iv

aAAa) paovi rrjv peOoSov avrov TrpofJLeXeTdv,et

,i7cru TToOev evTrerecrrepav eêt? etVetv dXXrjv 6$>6v.

> * \ \ >/

0EAI. AM OLI/C e^w.EE. BouAet S^Ttt 776pt TtVO? TCOV (f>avXa)V fJ,TlOVTS

a6a>iJiv TrapaSety^ta auTO 6ea9aL rov fieiôvos;

E EAI. Nat.

HE. Tt S^Ta TrpOTaâ/jite^' ay zvyvaiarov p,V /cat

crjut/cpoV, Aoyov 8e /x^Sevos1 cXdrrova

fj,i,6va)v ; olov dorTraAteuT^s" ap' ou Tracrt

yvcopt/zov /cat crTrovS^? ou TTOLVV Tt TroAA^?

EAI.

219 HE. MefloSov ft^v auTov eATTt^co /cat Aoyov ow/c

dveTTtT^Setov T^ty eêtv 77pos"o fiovXofjieOa.

EAI.KaAcDs"

aveôt.

4. HE. Oepe 8^, T?^8e dp^to/ieâ avrov. /cat

/not Aeye* Trorepov a? TC^VLTTJV avrovr^

riva a

vovy aXXrjv oe Swa/xtv eôwa O^jaofJiev;

EAI. "H/ctaTa ye aVe^voy.

HE. 'AAAct /z^v TCUI/ ye Te^tuv TTavajv

e'ior)Suo.

EAI. Hcos1

;

HE. Feorjpyta ftev /catocrTy Trept TO QvrfTov irav

crco/xa BepaTreia, TO Te au Trept TO ovvQerov /cat

B 77AaCTTdV, o817 OKevos tbvofMaKafjLev, TJ

re

272



THE SOPHIST

everyone has agreed long ago that if investigationsof great matters are to be properly worked out we

ought to practise them on small and easier mattersbefore 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 perhapshave 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 unworthyof 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 withan 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 thingswhich are put together or moulded

(utensils we call

273



PLATO

vp,TravTa TavTa St/catoraT* av 1evl Trpocrayo-

pevoiT*av oVo/zart.

EAI. IlcD?*at

TLVI;SE. riaV 07Tp av

p,r) rrporepov rt? 6V varepov

els ovaiav dyrj, TOV fiev ayovra iroizlv, ro Se dyd-TTOV

0EAI.

EE. Ta e ye vw 87)a

els TOVTO rrjvavrajv 8vvafjuv.

0EAI.

2 arravra

SE. otTt/cr^ roivvv avra

C 0EAI. "E7TO>.

SE. To 8e fjLa9r]iJLaTLKov av /zera TOVTO

oAov rat TOTT^s

1

yvajpio-etos TO re

/cat aycovtcrrt/cov ACCU dypevTiKov, eTr

ovoev TOVTCDV, TOL 8e 6Vra Kal yeyovora ra

Xoyois Kal Trpd^eai, Ta oe Tots

OVK TTiT7TL, >taAtar' av Tfov 8ta

raura ^vvdrravTa ra^te/37^ Te^vrj TI$

av

EAI. Nat' TrpeTTOL yap av.

5. HE. KT^rt/c^? 817/<:at

TroirjTiKfjs

D OUCT60V TO>V T"Xytii)VV 7TOTpa TTjV

a> eatr^re,

0EAI. 'Ev KTrjTLKfj TTOV ofj\OV .

-\r <* ov 1?' > / '"^ * \ c /

SE. I\TY]TLKr]SO ap OV OVO

LOfj;TO fJLV KOV-

)v Trpo? KOVTas /xeTa^SA^TtKov 6V 8ta re Saipetov

Kal [uaOcjoecjv Kal dyopdaeajv, TO 8e AotTroi' rj

15iKcu6raT' ftt- BT ; 5i/cat6rara W, StobaeuS.

8 & om. BTW.

274



THE SOPHIST

them), and the art of imitation all these might

properlybe called by one name.

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

brings it into being produces it and that which is

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 pro-

ductive art.

THEAET. Agreed.

STR. And after this comes the whole class of

learning and that of acquiring knowledge, and

money making, and fighting, and hunting. Noneof these is creative, but they are all engaged in

coercing, by deeds or words, things which already

exist and have been produced, or in preventing

others from coercing them;

therefore all these

divisions together might very properly be called

acquisitiveart.

THEAET. Yes, that would be proper.

STR. Then since acquisitiveand productive art

comprise all the arts, in which, Theaetetus, shall we

place the art of angling ?

THEAET. In acquisitive art, clearly.

STR. And are there not two classes of acquisitive

art one the class of exchange between voluntary

agents by means of gifts and wages and purchases,

and the other, which comprises all the rest of

275



PLATO

/car' epya 77Kara Aoyous* x iP^fJLpov v{JL7rav

aV

0EAI. OatVerat

yowe/c rcov el

HE. Tt Se'; TJ]V xeipojTiKrjv dp' ou

EAI. 11^;

HE. Tofjikv dvaâvSov 6'Aov a

E TO SeKpv(f>a.lov avrrjs TTOV

@EAI. Nat.

HE. Trjv Se ye /AT^V dr^pevriKr^v aXoyov TOfjirj

ov

0EAI. Aeye 07717.

HE. Tojjiev difjvxov yeVous

1

SteAoêVou?, TO 8'

EAI. Ttysf]v; etVep earov ye a/

220 HE. Deo? Se ou/c earov; KOI Set ye ^/xas1 TO

6V2

TrAy /<raT* etaKoXvfJL^TLKrj? aTTCL

fJipr]Kdi TOtaUT* aAAa

âlpeiv eacrat, TO Se', TCOV l^v-^v ^wtov

o#crai> Qripav, Trpoaenrzlv ^coodTqpiKTJv.

0EAI. "Eorco.

HE. Zcoo^pt/cT^? Se ap' ov StTrAow etSo? av Ae'-

yotTO evStVo],

TO /xev TreôvyeVou?,

77oAAot? et'Seai

/cat oVojitaor St^p^/xeVov, TreôOrjpiKov, TO S* eVepov

VCVGTLKOV ,a)ov Trow ewypoOrjpiKov ;

EAI. IldVu ye.

B HE. Neuo-Tt/cov /z^v TO ftev Trrrjvov cf>v\ov 6pa>-

y TO Se eVuSpov;

0EAI. Jlcos" S' ou;

HE. Kat TOU TTTTJVOV fLrjV yeVou? Tracra ^/ztv 17

Aeyerat' 7701; Tts" opvidevTiKrj.10<^ras Stobaeus J êi/res BT.

2d? Heindorf

; ây BTW.

276



THE SOPHIST

acquisitive art, and, since it coerces either by word

or deed, might be called coercive ?

THEAET. It

appearsso, at

anyrate, from what

youhave said.

STR. Well then, shall we not divide coercive art

into two parts ?

THEAET. In what way ?

STR. By calling all the open part of it fighting

and all the secret part hunting.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 it into the hunting of the lifeless

and of the living.

THEAET. Certainly, if both exist.

STR. Of course they exist. And we must passover 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 hunt-

ing 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 andermany 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 ofwinged creatures is called,

as a whole, fowling.

277



PLATO

0EAI. Ae'yerat yap ovv.

HE. Tou Se eWSpou crêSov TO avvoXov dAteim/ci?.

EAI. Nat.rp f <Z f / * \ /) / T>>^HE. It oe; TG.VTr\v av TTJV urjpav ap OVK civ

Kara jLteytcrra fJ^cprjovo SteAo///,?^;

EAI. Kara Tfola;TT- r\-> \ \ / > //) i

HE. Kaa a TO /xev epKccrw avrouev L

T^ Orjpav, TO Se TrA^yf}.

@EAI. Ilajs1

Aeyet?, Kat777^ Statpou^tet'o

HE. To /xeV, 6Vt ?rav oaov aV eVe/ca

C ttpy^ rt Trepteôv, ep/cos" et/co? ovojjidêiv.

EAI. HaW /xe^ ow.

HE. Kv'prous1

17/cat OLKTVCL /cat ^poôvs KO.I

TTOpKOVS KOI TO, TOLCLVTO.[JLtOV

d'AAo Tt

EAI.

HE. TourojLtev apa IpKoQiqpiKov Trjs aypas TO

/xepo? (j>âo{JiV rjTI TOLOVTOV.

EAI. Nat.

HE. To 8e dy/ctcrrpot? /cat rptoSoucrt TrA^yry

yiyvo^vov erepov [lev EKCLVOV, TrA^/crt/c^v8e rtva

Oijpav r)/j,ds 7Tpooei7TLVIvl

Aoya>1/uv

^pecuv -^

rt

Tt? dV, 0eatri]Te, etTrot /cdAAtov;

EAI.'AjLteAcD/zev TOU oro/zaros" dp/cet yap /cat

TOUTO.

HE. T^S" TOLVW TrXrjKTlKrjS TO fJ,V VVKTtplVOVy

L, 77po? TTVpos <f)a)s yiyvoêvov VTT* avrajv TO>V

EAI. Ildvu ye.

HE. To Se' ye /le^fteptvoV, cos" I-ÔVTCDV Iv d/cpotj

ay/ctarpa /cat ra)y TptoSoj^rcoy, Trap dy/aoTpetm/coV.1 ayr6êy al. ; ai)r60i BT.

278



THE SOPHIST

THEAET. It is.

STR. And the hunting of water creatures goes bythe

general nameof

fishing.THEAET. Yes.

STR. And might I not divide this kind of huntinginto two principal divisions ?

THEAET. What divisions ?

STR. The one carries on the hunt by means of

enclosures merely, the other by a blow.

THEAET. What do you mean, and how do youdistinguish 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.

STR. May not, then, wicker baskets and seines

and snares and nets and the like be called enclosures ?

THEAET. Assuredly.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, bymeans 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 mind the name;

that will do

well enough.STR. Then the kind of striking which takes place

at night by the light of a 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.

279



PLATO

E 0EAI. Aeyerat yap ovv.

6. HE. To roivvv dyKLCTTpevTLKOV Trjs

KTJS TO IJLZV avaiOev ei? TO Kara} yiyvo^zvov8ia

TOTO i? Tpiooovcrw OVTO) /zaAiora ^p^cr^at T/cuo8oi>Tia

TI$, ot/zat, KeKXrjTCLL.

0EAI. Oacri youy rive?.

HE. To 8e ye XOITTOV ecrrw ev en /JLOVOV to?

EAI. To

HE. To T^? evavrlas ravrrj TrXrjyfjs,

re ytyvo/xeyov /cat TOJV l)(9va)v oi>x fj TLS av

221 TOU OCLIfJiaTOS, 0)(77Tp TOLS T/)to8oUCTtV, ttAAa

rrjv K<f>a\r)V Kal TO oro/za TOU OrypevOevTOS e/cct-

CTTOT6, ACttt KOLTa)6V 1$ TOVVOVTIOV OVO) pdft

/caAa/xoi? ava(jTTa)p,evov ov TL ^^cro/xev,

, Seir TOWO/ZO. \eycaBai;0EAI. Ao/<:a /^eV, 6Vep a/OTt

TOT' auTO

7. HE. Nw apa T-^? do*7raXiVTiKfjs TrepL ov 1

B Te Kayo) avva>fioXo'yrjKafjLv ov /JLOVOV Tovvofia,

aAAa :at TOI^ Aoyov ?7ept auTO Tovpyov iXTJ<f>a[j,V

vjJL7rdar]$ yap Texvys

TO

KTrjTiKov rjv, KTTJTIKOV oe

TIKOV oe QrjpevTiKov, TOV 8e OrjpevTiKov

,a)o9r]piKov 8e evvypoOrjpiKov, evvypodripiKOV 8e

TO KOLTwOevT/jirjfJLa

o\ov dXievTiKov, dAteim/dy? 8e

rrXrjKTLKov, TrXrjKTiKrjs Se dyKioTpevTLKov TOVTOV

oe TO7re/36 Trjv

KaTOjQ^v dvojTrXrjyrjv dvauiTa)iJL.vr}v ,

1ait Heindorf; oi5 <rJ BT.

1 Plato's etymology do-TraXieurt/c?? from avaffiroiffffai 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 barb-

hunting^

that

part

whichproceeds

downward from

above, is called, because tridents are chiefly used in

it, tridentry, I suppose.THEAET. Yes, some people, at any rate, call it so.

STR. Then there still remains, I may say, onlyone further kind.

THEAET. What is that ?

STR. The kind that is characterized

bythe

opposite sort of blow, which is practised with a

hook and strikes, not any chance part of the bodyof the fishes, as tridents do, but only the head and

mouth of the fish caught, and proceeds from below

upwards, being pulled up by twigs and rods. Bywhat name, Theaetetus, shall we say this ought to

be called?

THEAET. I think our search is now ended and wehave found the very thing we set before us a while

ago as necessary to find.

STR. Now, then, you and I are not only agreedabout the name of angling, but we have acquiredalso a satisfactory definition of the thing itself. For

of art as a whole, half was acquisitive, and of theacquisitive, 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 frombelow upwards at an angle

l has a name in the very

The words at an angle are inserted merely to give a reason

in English for the words which follow them.

K 281



PLATO

C arr' avTrjs rfjs Trpdêcos dfiofjioiajOev TOVVO/JLGL, r)

vvv do7raAiVTLKr) ^rrjOelcra em/cA^v ye'yovev.

EAI. HavTOLTTacrL fJiV ovv TOVTO ye iKavojs o-

8. EE. Oe'pe 877,/card TOVTO TO TrapdSety/za

/cat rovao(f)i<jTr)V e77t^;etpa)/zev evpelv, o ri TTOT'

0EAI.

HE. K(X6/U,7)j/

6KiVOy* 7]V

TO^TT^jLta TTpOJTOV,

TfOTepov t'Stctjr^v 17rtva Tiyyr\v eôvra 6eTeov elvai

TOV O.UTTaXiVTrjV .

EAI. Nat.

HE. Kat yw 8^ TOVTOV LOiOJT'qv Orjcrofjtev,aj

D QeairrjTe, r)TravTarraoiv cjs dXrj6a)s o~o(f)L(jTijv ;

0EAI. OuSa/^tu? LOLOJTriv' (jLavGdvci) yap o Aeyetj,

to? Trayro? 8et Totouro? x etvat TO ye 6Vo/xa TOVTO

HE. 'AAAa Ttva

eot/ce,

0EAI. TtVa TTOT' ow819

Tav

HE.T

Ap' cS Trpos êaiv riyvor^Kaêv Tav'opos TOV

EAI. TtVa TOU;

HE. TdvacrTraAteuTî' TOU

EAI.Il7y;

HE. S^peVTOL TIV6 KO.Ta(j)aiVo9oV afJL<f)tD fJLOL.

E EAI. TtVo? drjpas OLTepos; TOVfJLev yap .Ttpov

L7TOfjLV.

HE. Atâ 77ou vw 8^2

StetAo/xev T^V aypav

Tfaaav, VCVOTLKOV fiepovs, TO 8e rreôv Te/xvo^Tes1

.

1

TraiTcs 5e? rotouros Winckelmann;

TTOLVTUS Set rotoOroj B ;

Trdirwy e? TOLOUTOV T. 2pC? 5?j T ;

Ôy 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 madeperfectly clear.

STR. Come, then, let us use this as a pattern and

try to find out what a sophist is.

THEAET. By all means.

STR. Well, then, the first question we asked was

whether we must assume that the angler was just a

man or was a man with an art.

THEAET. Yes.

STR. Now take this man of ours, Theaetetus.

Shall 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

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 ! Have we failed to notice

that the man is akin to the other man ?

THEAET. W7

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

of hunters.

THEAET. What is the hunting of the second ? Wehave spoken about the first.

STR. We just now divided hunting as a whole

into two classes, and made one division that of

swimming creatures and the other that of land-

hunting.

283



PLATO

0EAI. Nat.

EE. Kat TOfjiev 8i?]A$o/zev, oaov Ttepl ra vev-

<7Tt/ca Ttov evvopajv TO oe Tre,6v eLo-aanev aa^taro^,

eiTTOVTeS OTL 7ToXvLO6S 11].

222 0EAI. Tldvv ye.

EE. Me'^pt pev Toivvv evTavBa 6 oo^tcrr^? re

feat o aa7TaXL6VTr)S a/za cbroTT^ST

0EAI. 'EotVarov yovv.HE. 'l&KTpeTreadov Se ye a77o

o/u,ej^

eVt OaXaTTav rrov KOL TroTafJiovs /cat

TOUTOI?

EAI. Tt

HE. '0 8e ye eVt T^V y^p'/cat rroTa/jiov? erepovs

av rtjâ?, TrouTou /cat

d(f)06vovs, TOV TOVTOIS

B EAI. IlcDs1

Aeyet?;

EE. T^? 7re^? Oujpas ylyvtaQov 3uo

EAI. Do tot' cKa.Tpov;

EE. Toytte^

rcovrjjjLepajv,

TO Se rcD^ dypccov.

p. 0EAI. Etr' ecrrt rt? ^pa raiv rfêpcov;

SE. Ei-Vep ye'ecrrti/ avOpanros ^'/xepov

<> \ </ / o \ /) v w >'

oe0777^ âtpet?, etre p,r]oev rtfet? rjêpov, etre

a'AAojLtev rj/Jiepov rt, rov 8e avOpajirov aypiov, etre

TJfjLepov fjiev Ae'yet? au roy avdpcorrov,

oefjirjoefJLLav rjyei Oypav TOVTOJV O77orep' av

<f)i\ov

elpfjadaiaoi, TOVTO

r^jilv biopiaov.

C EAI. 'AAA'T^ju-a?

rerjfjiepov,

a)

re dvQpamajv eivai Ae'ya>.

284



THE SOPHIST

THEAET. Yes.

STR. And the one we discussed, so far as the swim-

ming creatures that live in the water are concerned ;

but we left the land-hunting undivided, merely

remarking that it has many forms.

THEAET. Certainly.

STR. Now up to that point the sophist and the

angler proceed together from the starting-point of

acquisitive art.

THEAET. I think they do.STR. But they separate at the point of animal-

hunting, where the one turns to the sea and rivers

and lakes to hunt the animals in those.

THEAET. To be sure.

STR. 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 heintends to coerce the creatures in them.


STR. Of land-hunting there are two chief divisions.


STR. One is the hunting of tame, the other of

wild creatures.

THEAET. Is there, then, a hunting of tamecreatures ?

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. Why, Stranger, I think we are a tame

animal, and I agree that there is a hunting of man.

285



PLATO

EE. AtTTT^V TOIVVV KOI TTjV rjfJLpoOrjpLK7]V t77CO//,V.

0EAI. Kara ri Aeyovre?;

HE. TT^V fjiev ArjcmKrjV /cat aVSpaTroStOTt/o^ /cat

TvpavviKrjv /cat ^vfJLTraaav rr)V TroAe/xt/c^v,It' TrdVra

jStatov dripav optcrajLtevot.

0EAI. KaAcDs1

.

HE. 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. 'Op^cD?.

EE. Tr^? 17 TTiOavovpyiKrjs Strra XeywfJiev yevrj.

EAI. Ilota;

HE. To /ze^ erepov tSta, TO Se S-^/zocrta ytyvo/ze-

EAI. Tiyva9ov yap ovv etSo? eKa

HE. Ou/cow au T^? tSio^7]peL'Tt/c^S' TO

oQapvri'TLK.ovleari, TO Se Stopo</>opi/cdV;

0EAI. Oi) âvOavaj.

HE. T^7 TCOV epa)VTO)V Oijpa rov vovv, ws eot/cas1

,

OVTTO)

EAI. Toy

HE. "0 TO 6? drjpevOelcn Sajpa0EAI. 'AXrjOeaTara Aeyet?.

HE. TOUTO/u,ei>

roivvv epcoTt/c^j Ttxvrjs terra)

EAI. ITavu ye.

HE. Tou 8e' ye ^na9apvrirLKOv TO ftev

Xovv Sta âptTo? /cat vravTaTracrt Si' 7]So^? TO

oVAeap TT7TOLr)fjivov /cat TOI' fjLia9ov

rpo<j>r]Veavra) \iovov KoXaKiKi/jv,

1

fua-dapvrjTtKoi' Heindorf; fuo-fla/êvrt/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 wejustify

that assertion ?

STR. By defining piracy, man-stealing, tyranny,and the whole art of war all collectively as hunting

by force.

THEAET. Excellent.

STR. And by giving the art of the law courts, of

the public platform, and of conversation also a single

name andcalling

them all

collectivelyan art of

persuasion.

THEAET. Correct.

STR. Now let us say that there are two kinds of

persuasion.

THEAET. What kinds ?

STR. The one has to do with private persons, the

other with the community.THEAET. Granted

;each of them does form a class.

STR. Then again of the hunting of private personsone 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-verses to furnish gratification and makes pleasure

exclusively its bait and demands as its pay only

maintenance, we might all agree, if I am not mis-

287



PLATO

223 TrdvTs <t>aljJiVav

r)

xfjovvTiKTJv TLVOL

clvai.

EAI.

Hois yap ov;SE. To 8e eVayyeAAo/xevov /xev cos aperq? eVe/ca

ra? o/xiAia? 77Otou/xevov, /xtcr$oV Se vo/xtoyxa Trparro-

apa ov TOVTO TO yeVo? ere/DO)

EAI. no)? yap ov;

SE. TtVt817 TOVTCO; TretpaJ Aeyetv.

EAI. AÂoy 807' TOV yap O-O^LCTT^V /xot

TOUT ovv eycoye elrrajv TO TrpoafJKov

av rjyovfjiaiKaXelv avTov.

10. SE. KaTa8r)

ToV vvv, a) eatV^Te, Aoyov,

eot/cev, r) Te^^S ot/cetcoTt/cr^?,

, ^cooOrjpias,3

êpCTata?, 07;

ta?, ISioO'rjpias, p.ia9apviKrjs,

TOTTO}\LKrjS, SoÔTTaLOeVTLKTJS, VO)V TrAoUCTtCOV Kal

ev$6cov yiyvo\juivr] Qr^pa TTpocrprjTeov, a)$ o

Aoyo? TIIÎV o"t>/x/?aiVet,

EAI. HavTctTraat

SE. "ETt 8e arat Tr^Se t'Sco/xev4 - ov yap TI

(f>av\r)s//> / \ ~. y r MV/xeTOôv ecrTt Te^T^? TO vuv L^TOvêvov, aAA

v /xaAa 77Ot/ctA^?. /cat yap ow ev Tot? TrpoaOev

etpr^^teVots" <f>dvTaafJia TrapeêTat, txr)TOVTO o vvv

avrorjfJiels <f>afJLev

aAA' eVepov etât Tt yeVoj.

EAI. n^y 817;

SE. To TT^? KTVJTlKfjS Te^^? StTfAoWT)V CtSoj

TTOU, TO ytxev OrjpevTLKov /xepo? eôv, TO 8e aAAa/cTt/cov.

1

^ Heindorf ; ^ om. MSS.2

xei/>am/c?}y add. Aldina; KT^TLK^ MSS.; seel. Schleier-

macher.3

fyo0?7pi'as ireôd-qpla's MSS.; TrefrodTjplas seel. Schleierraacher.4

idu/j.ev W ; eldu/j.ev BT.

288



THE SOPHIST

taken, to call the art offlattery or of making things

pleasant.

THEAET. Certainly.

STR. But the class which proposes to carry on its

conversations for the sake of virtue and demands its

pay in cash does not this deserve to be called byanother name ?

THEAET. Of course.

STR. And what is that name ? Try to tell

THEAET. It is obvious;for I think wr

e have dis-

covered the sophist. And therefore by uttering

that word I think I should give him the right name.

STR. Then, as it seems, according to our present

reasoning, Theaetetus, the part of appropriative,

coercive, hunting art which hunts animals, land

animals, 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

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. HOW SO ?

STR. 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.

HE. Tfj$ Tolvvv dXXaKTLKrjs Suoet'Si^ Ae'ycu/zev,

TOjjiev ocoprjTiKov, TO oe T6pov dyopaoTLKov ;

EAI.ElprjaOco.

EE. Kat[Ar]i>

av (^TJooêv dyopaoriKrjv o^xf)T '~

fJivecrOai.

EAI. 11^;

HE. Tî/ /xev rcop' avrovpyaJv avTO77a)\iKr)V Stai-

povp,VOL, rrjv Se ra dAAorpta e/oya

0EAI. yu ye.

HE. Tt Se; TT]? /zera/JA^Tt/o^s- ou^ 17 //,ev

dAAay?y, crêSov avrrjs tffJiicrv /xepos" 6V,

EAI. Nat.

EE. To Se ye e'^ aAAi]? et? d'AA^v TTO\IV StaAAar-

TOfJLVOV2

OJv KOIrp / o > >/

EAI. It o ov;rp^>5 ?>> /)//)

SE. iTys1 o ep,7TOpiK7]S ap ou/c

rjcrurj/Jiuaort TO

Eyu,ev OCTOt? TO cra)/za rpeêrai Acat ^p^Tat,

3

TO Se

7 ^^X9?77<Âoi7v Std.

vofjiivfjiaTOS aXXdrreraL;

EAI. nco? TOVTO Ae'yets;

SE. To Tvept TT)V i/JV)(r)v LOCUS ayvoovêv, eVet TO

TpOV 7TOV vVLjJLV.

EAI. Nat.

224 EE. MOUCTIACT^ T Toivvv ^vvciTTaoav

1KaTT7J\lKT] bt

;Kal TT^Xt'/CT; BT.

5ia\a.TTO[j.j>oji> BT ; diaXdrrov W.3

/cat ^/)9jrat Heindorf; /cexpT/rai BT.

290



THE SOPHIST


STR. Now shall we say that there are two sorts

of exchange, the one by gift, the other by sale ?

THEAET. So be it.

STR. And we shall say further that exchange bysale is divided into two parts.

THEAET. HOW SO ?

STR. We make this distinction calling the partwhich sells a man's own productions the selling of

one's own, and the other, which exchanges the worksof others, exchange.

THEAET.Certainly.

STR. Well, then, that part of exchange which

is carried on in thecity, amounting to about half of

it, is calledretailing, is it not ?

THEAET. Yes.

STR. And that which exchanges goods from city

tocity by purchase and sale is called merchandising ?

THEAET. Certainly.STR. 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 under-

stand the other division.

THEAET. Yes.

STR. Take, therefore, the liberal arts 1 in general1 The word /zoimK??, here rendered "

liberal arts," is muchmore inclusive than the English word " music," designating,as it does, nearly all education and culture except the purely

physical. In the Athens of Socrates' day many, possibly

most, of the teachers of music in this larger sense were

foreigners, Greeks, of course, but not Athenians.

291



PLATO

KOLOTOT 1? 7TO\IV V0V

Seerepojcre e yo/xeî/ /cat TmTpaaKOfJLevrjv, /cat

ypa^LKrjv Kal OavfJLaroTroiLKrjV /cat TroAAd erepa

rrjs ifjvxfjs,TO, [lev TrapafivOias, ra Se /cat cnrovSfjs

/cat TrcoAow/xeva, rov ayovra /cat

rjTTOv rrjsrcov airiajv /cat TTOTCUV

Trpdcrecos e/jiTropov opOcos av Aeyo^tevov

EAI. 'AA^êCTrara Aeyet?.

B EE. Oz)/cow /cat rovfjia6rjfjiara vvcuvov[JLevov

TroAtv re e/c 77oAecos yo/xtayLtaros1

a/xetjSo^ra

Trpoaepels ovoâ;0EAI. 2ô8pa ye.

II. HE.'^? ifjvxefjiTTOpiKfjs ravTrjs ap* ou

TO/êp' eTTtSet/crt/CT]

St/catorara Ae'yotr' dV, rd 8e

yeAotov jLtev ou^ rjrrov TOV Trpoadev, o/xco? Se

ovaav Trpdaiv avrrjv dSeA(/(p rtvt rr^

dw/xart irpocrziirelv dvdy/c^;EAI. ndVu /zev ouv.

EE. Taurus' TOivvvrrjs /ia^/âroTrcoAi/C'^S'

TO

C /u,ey 77ept Ta TCOI/ d'AAcov re^vcov /jLaOâara erepa),

TO oeTTtpi TO T^? dperfjs d'AAa) TrpoaprjTeov.

0EAI. Hois' yap ou;SE. Te^vo77coAt/cov yLt^v

TO ye TreptTaAAa dV

apfjiOTTOL- TO 3eTrept ravra <ji>

TrpoOujJLrjOrjTi

Ae'yetv ovo/xa.TT" \ / i\ v\ \ V 1 \ i\

EAT. J\at Tt Tt? av aAAo ovofâ CLTTCOV OVK a.v

TrA^^jiteAotTy TiA^ TO vvv r]TOVfjivov avro efvat

TO ao<f>i<jTiKov yeVo?;

EE. OuSev d'AAo. WiST)

j-'W

auTo Aeyoj^Tes- cos" TO/CTT]Tt/c7y?,

1i'î yw BT (5)? above the line T) ;

Wi 5^ W.a

fJ.fra^\r]TiKijs} fJ.CTa.p\rjTiKbi> BT.

292



THE SOPHIST

that constantly go about fromcity to

city, bought in

one place and carried to another and sold painting,

and conjuring, and the many other things that affectthe 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 to him

who buys up knowledge and goes about fromcity to

city exchanging his wares for money ?

THEAET. Certainly.

STR. One part of this soul-merchandising might

very properly be called the art ofdisplay, 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 nameakin 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, efJLTTOplKrjS,1

ljJV)(fJL7rOpLKrjS TTepi X6~

you? Kai jjiaOâra, dperrjs rrw\7]riK.ov oevrepov

dve<j)dvr) ao(f>LariKTq.

EAI. MctAa ye.

HE. Tpirov oe y* oifjLai ae, Kav el ns avrov

pu/xeVos1 ev TroAet, ra êv cop'ou/zevos

1

, ra Se

t TKraiv6jJLVOs OLVTOS fjia9^fjiara Trepl ra aura

ravra Kai 7ra>Aa)v e/c TOUTOU TO ^t' Trpovrdâro,

KaXelv ovSev d'AAo 77

XTJV onepvvv

STJ.

0EAI. Tt 8* GJ) /zeAAco;

EE. Kat TOKrr)TiKr]s apa [JLTaf3Xr)TiK6v, ayo/oa-

E CTTIKOV, KaTrrjXiKov eiVe auTO77CoAi/cov, af

OTLTrep avfj Trepl ra roiavra

yeVo?, del avTrpcxjepe'is, to? ^>aiVet,

0EAI. ÂvdyKt]' ra> yap Aoya> Set crwa:oAou-

12. HE. "ErtST) 0KO7Ta>fjiv, ec TWI TotaiSe

7TpocTOLKv apa TO i>w ^Lerd^LOJKo^vov yeVos".

225 0EAI. Iloi'aj817;

HE. T-^9 KrrjriKrjs dycwicrriKTJ ri jjiepos TIÎV r]v.

0EAI. v yap ouv.

HE. OVK drro rporrov roivvv earl Stacpetv avryva.

0EAI. Ka^' ovnna Aeye.

EE. TojLtev dfJiiXXrjriKov avrfjs riOevras, TO Se

EAI. "Ecmv.

SE.T-^S"

roivvv jjLaxrjriKTJs rat

fiev

tp.iropi.Kov BT.

294



THE SOPHIST

second time as that part of acquisitive art, art of

exchange, of trafficking, of merchandising, of soul-

merchandisingwhich deals in words and

knowledge,and trades in virtue.

THEAET. Very well.

STR. But there is a third case : If a man settled

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 thanthat which you used a moment ago.


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 mer-

chandising in knowledge, you will always, apparently,call sophistry.

THEAET. I must do so, for I have to follow where

the argument leads.

STR. Let us examine further and see if the class

we are now pursuing has still another aspect, of

similar nature.

THEAET. Of what nature ?

STR. We agreed that fighting was a division of

acquisitive art.

THEAET. Yes, we did.

STR. Then it is quite fitting to divide it into two

parts.

THEAET. Tell what the parts are.

STR. Let us call one part of it the competitive andthe other the pugnacious.

THEAET. Agreed.STR. Then it is reasonable and

fitting to give to

295



PLATO

77790? crco/mra ytyvo/zeVa> cr\;eS6V et/co? /cat TrpeVov

ovofjua Ae'yeti'rt TOLOVTOV rtêfteVou? otoy /Jiaort/coV.

EAI. Nat.HE. Ta> Se Aoyots Tipo? Aoyous rt ris, c5 0eat-

B T7?re,d'AAo e

17777 TrA^v djit^tcr^r^Tt/cov1;

EAI. OuSeV.

EE. To Se ye Trepi ras ajLt^to-^râets1 Qeriov

EAI.

HE. Ka^' ocroyjitev ya/9 ytyverat prjKem re

77/>o?

evavria(JLTJKTI Aoycuv /cat

7re/nra 2

St/cata /cat

a'Si/ca

EAI. Nat.

HE. To 8' ev tStot? ai) /cat

eptoTTJcrecri, Trpos aVo/cptaets" //.toy eldiafJieOa /c

aAAo TrA^y dyrtAoyt/cov;

EAI. OvSeV.

HE. Tou Se dvrtAoyt/cou TO /xev ocrov Trept ra

C vfJift6Xcua ap,<f)Laj3r]TeLTai /xeV, et/cr^Se /cat aVe'-

Xyais Trepi avro Trpdrrerat, TOLVTCL3

Oereov /xe^

etSo?, eVetVep auro Ste'yvcu/cey cos- erepoy 6V o' Aoyo?,

drap 7TO)VViJ,iasov9* VTTO

TWV ep-irpocrOev ervêvovre vvv vfi r)/xa;v ruêt^ aftov.

EAI. *AXr]6rj- /caret a/xt/cpa yap At'av feat

TravroSaTra StTJp^rat.

EE. To Se ye evre^vov, /cat Trepi St/catan^

/cat dSt/ccov /cat Trept raw d'AAcov oAco? d

ap' ou/c epiariKov av Ae'yetv

EAI. ricos1

yap ou;

Stephanus ; aîa^TiK^v BTW.Jrd om. TW. -1

raOra BT;TOUTO al.

296



THE SOPHIST

that part of the pugnacious which consists of bodilycontests some such name as violent.

THEAET. Yes.

STR. And what other name than controversy shall

we give to the contests of words ?

THEAET. No other.

STR. But controversy must be divided into two

kinds.

THEAET. How?STR.

Whenever long speechesare

opposed bylong 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 receivedno name from our predecessors, nor does it nowdeserve 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 in-

justice 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 xP7HJLarLO"rLKOV v Tvyxavei '

EAI. HavTOLTracrL ye.HE. Trjv eirajvviJiiav TOLVVV, r]v eKaTepov Bel

iV aVTO)V} TTeLpaOaJfJLeV eiTTelv.

0EAI. OvKOVV XP1?'

HE. Ao/c<2>jjirjv

TO ye*

8t* rjoovrjv TTJS Trepl raura

Star/otjS^s d/zeAe? TOW OLKtiajv yiyvo^zvov ,

oe TTjV Xeîv rots1

77oAAot? rav O.KOVOVTOJV ov

rjoovfjs aKovofJLevov KaXelaBai /cara

EAI. Aeyerat yap ovv OVTOJ

E EE. ToVTOV TOIVVV TOVVaVTlOV, OL7TO T&V lBlO)Tl-

KOJV epi8a)v xprjfjLCLTiôiJLevov,ev TO*

//.epetov Treipa)

vvv eiTrelv.T7-\/0 M T > \ /

''ÊAI. Kat rt8

rts av av enrwv eTepov OVK e-TtXr^v ye TOV OavfâaTOV TrdXiv eKelvov

av vvv reraproy TOV {jieTaoiCJKOfJLevov v<>

226 HE. Ovoev aAA* ^ TO xP7lfJiarLO

"TLKOV ytvos, ct>?

eoiKev, epio~TLKrjsov Texy*)5 *

T^JS dvrtAoyt/c^s

1

,

^TrjTLKfjs,

3

Trj$ /zcr^Ti/cT}?, Trjs, TTJS KTrjTiKrjs evTiv, d)s 6 Aoyoj av

y 6 aoîaTrjs*

EAI. Ko/u,tS^ pev ovv.

13. HE. 'Opa? ow cu? dXr)6rj Aeyerat TO 77Ot-

KiXov elvai TOVTO TOdrjpiov Kal TO XeyojJLevov ov

EAI. QvKOVV dfJLô'LV

1r6 ye vulg. ; r65e BT

;ro 5e W. 2 H add. Heindorf.

3d/i0i(T/37JT7jrt/C?5s] d/.C0t(T/377Tt/f?}s BTW.

4X7?7TT6J' W ; \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, we must do so.

STR. 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 his hearers, is, in my opinion, called by no

other name than garrulity.

THEAET. Yes, that is about what it is called.

STR. Then the opposite of this, the kind which

makes money from private disputes try now, for it

is 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 dis-

putatious, argumentative, controversial, pugnacious,

combative, acquisitive art, as our argument has now

again stated.

THEAET. Certainly.

STR. Do you see the truth of the statement that

this creature is many-sided and, as the saying is,

not to be caught with one hand ?

THEAET. Then we must catch him with both.

299



PLATO

HE. Xp-j) yap ovv, /cat Kara SwajutV ye ovrco

B rroir^reov, TOtoVSe ri jJieraOeovras LXVOS avrov.

/cat fJLOL Ae'ye' ra>v OLKeriK&v ovojjidrcov KaXovuevarra TTOU;

EAI. Kat TroAAa* drap vrota817

raiv

HE. Ta rotaSe, otov SirjOelv re XeyofJiev

v /cat jSparretv /cat Sta/cptVetv.1

EAI. Tt/AT^V;

HE. Kat Trpo? ye TOVTOIS ert âiveiv,

/cep/ctêtv, /cat /zupta ei^ rat? reât? aAAa rotaura

evovra 7TiardfJLe9a. r\ yap;0EAI. To 7TOLOV aVTCOV

C TrapaSety/xara TrpoOels ravra Kara Trdvrcov vjpov;

HE. Atatpert/ca TTOU ra AeêVra etp^rat

0EAI. Nat.

EE. Kara rove/>tov roivvv Xoyov (Ls Trept

ravra

ovaav ev arfaai rexVTlv eVo? ovouaros d^tcu-

r\v.

EAI. TtVa

EE. Ata/cEAI. "Ecrrco.

EE. S/co7ret817 ravrr)$ a$ Svo dv

rrr)

EAI. aêtav co? e/,tot

D HE. Kat/ZT^V

eV ye rats etp^yLteVat? Sta/cptcrecrt

TOjLtev êtpoy aTTO êArtovos

1 aTrovcotetv w TO

S>e/ 3 I >

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

way.Tell me

;of the

expressionsconnected with

menial occupations some are in common use, are

they not ?

THEAET. Yes, many. But to which of the manydoes your question refer ?

STR. To such as these: we say "sift" and"strain

"and " winnow

"and "

separate."l

THEAET. Certainly.STR. And besides these there are "card" and

"comb" and "beat the web" and countless other

technical terms which we know. Is it not so ?

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 anotion of division.

THEAET. Yes.

STR. Then since there is, according to my reckon-

ing, one art involved in all of these operations, let

us give it one name.

THEAET. What shall we call it ?

STR. The art of discrimination.

THEAET. Very well.

STR. Now see if we can discover two divisions

of this.

THEAET. You demand quick thinking, for a boylike me.

STR. And yet, in the instance of discrimination just

mentioned there was, first, the separation of worsefrom better, and, secondly, of like from like.

1

Apparently a term descriptive of some part of the pro-

cess of weaving ; cf. Cratylus, 338 B.

301



PLATO

EAI. ZêSoV ovrco vvv Aeêy <j>ai.Vrai.

EE. T^? fJiV roivvv 6Vo//,a OVK e^co

TTJS Se KaTa\i7rovor)$ /mv TO fieXriov Sta/cptcreo)?,

TO oe x^lpov diToflaXXovcrrjs e^cu.

0EAI. Aeye rt.

EE. ITacrar) TOLavTr] StaKpicns, co? eyco vvvoa),

Aeyerat Trapa Trdvrajv KaOapô? TL$.

EAI. Ae'yerat yap ouv.

E EE. Ou/cow TO ye KaQapriKov efSo? au SiTrAow1\ /^ /O>

ot' 7TCLS av toot;

EAI. Nat, Kara oôAî' ye tcra)?' oufj,rjv eycoye

Kadopcj vvv.

14. HE. Kat/>t7)j/

TO,Tre/ot

ra aw/mara TroAAd

et'S^ KaOdpaecov evi TreptAa^Setv dvofJLari TrpocnJKei.

EAI. Ilota Krat rtVt;

SE. Ta re TOJV ^cocuv, ocra eyro? ocop,dra)V VTTO

yvjJLvacTTiKfjs iarpiKrjs re opOoJs

227 KaOaiperai KO!Trept ra/cro?,

1etVetv /xev

ocra ftaXavevTLKrj Trape'êraf /cat TCUV

,djv yvaêurt/c^ /cat u/ZT7acra

eVtjite'Aetav TrapeÔjLteV^ /caracr/xi/cpa

/cat yeAota 8o/cowra ovoâra cr%V.

EAI. MaAa ye.

EE. HavraTTaoLfjiev ovv, c5 eatr^re. aAAct yap

T7^

Tojy

Aoytov jJieOoSa) o-TroyytcrTtAC^? ^ </>ap/xa/co-

TTOcrias ov$ev r/rrov ovSe rt /xaAAov ruyâvet fieXov,

et TOjLtev a/xt/cpa, TO Se /zeyaAa â? toêAet /caât-

1Tre/)! TCKTOS] irepira/croj B ; TO,

?re/)lrd Micros & T.

302



THE SOPHIST

THEAET. Yes, as you now express it, that is pretty

clear.

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 awaythe worse.


STR. Every such discrimination, as I think, is uni-

versally called a sort of purification.

THEAET. Yes, soit is.

STR. And could not anyone see that purification

is 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. What are they and what is the name ?

STR. The purification of living creatures, havingto do with impurities within the body, such as are

successfully discriminated by gymnastics and medi-

cine, and with those outside of the body, not nice to

speak of, such as are attended to by the bath-keeper's

art ; and the purification of inanimate bodies, whichis the special care of the fuller's art and in generalof the art of exterior decoration

; this, with its petty

subdivisions, has taken on many names which seem

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

little, the other greatly by its purifying. It en-

303



PLATO

B pov. TOV KTrjcraaOai yap eW/ca vovv rracrcov

TO ^vyyeves /cat TOfjirj ^vyyeves KaTavoelv

pa)jjivrj Tifia rrposTOVTO e laov

rrdaas,/cat

6aTpaT&V Tepwv /caraTr\v oftotor^ra ovolv

yeAotorepa, ae^voTepov Se rt TOV OLOL

rj (fiOeipio'TiKrjs SÂowra drjpevTiKrjV ovoev

aAA* co? TO TroAi) xavvoTepov. Kolor)

/cat

6Vep TJpov,TL Trpoaepovfjiev oVo/za v/JL7rdcras

ocrat craj/za etre e^ûôv etre atjjvôv

KaOaipeiVy ovoev avTrj StotCTet, rtolov TI

C XeÔev V7Tp7TcrTaTov elvai o6i~6L' JJLOVOV %Ta>

X&PLS T&V TT}S tpvxfjs Kaddpcreajv TTOLVTO. vvofjcrav,

ocra aAAo rt KaOaipei. TOP yap rrpl TTJV'oidvoia.v

KadapfJLOV OLTTO TQJV a\\a}V 7TiK)(Lpr]K6V d<f)Opio~CL-

crOai ret vvv, et ye ojrep fiovXeTcu fiavddvofjiev.

0EAI. 'AAAa fjiefJidOrjKa, KCLI crvyxcopaj ovo fj,ev

e'i,or) KaOdpcrea}?, eV Se TOTrepl TTJV i/jvîs etSo? elvai,

TOV Trepi TOCTaifta ôjpt? 6V.

EE. Ilap'TCOv /caAAtCTTa. /catjitot

TO fJLGTaTOVTO

D eVa/couerreipcb/Jievos av TO \)(dev oixfj Te^veiv.

0EAI. Ka^' oVot'aVixfriqyfl 77etpacro/xat crot

15. HE. Ilo^ptW eVe/oov dpeTrjs eV faxf} Aeyo-

Tt;

EAI. ITo)? yap ou;

EE. Kat/ZT^V KaOapfjLo? r]v

TO AetVety2

Tepov, e/c/3aAAetv Se OCTO^ aV?y

TTOW Tt <f>Xavpov.

EAI.TH^ yap ow.

EE. Kat i/JV)(rjs apa, /ca^' oaov av

W ; el\ri<t>a<n BT.2

XefTret? Heindorf;Xwret^ BT.

304



THE SOPHIST

deavours to understand what is related and what is

not related in all arts, for the purpose of acquiring

intelligence ;and therefore it honours them all

equally and does not in making comparisons think

one more ridiculous than another, and does not con-

sider 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

giveto 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

purification of the soul. For it has in our presentdiscussion been

tryingto

separatethis

purifica-tion

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 thenext point and try again to divide the term.

THEAET. In whatever way you suggest, I will tryto 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 andthrowing out whatever is bad anywhere ?


STR. Hence whenever we find any removal of evil

305



PLATO

KOLKICLS d<f>aipcriv riva, KaOapfjLov avrov Xeyovres eV

0EAI. KatfjLoXa ye.

SE. Avofjiev e'iSr] /ca/cta? rrepi ifjv)(r)V prjreov.

0EAI. Rota;

228 HE. Tofjiev

olov voarov eVcrc6/Aart, TO 8*

0EAI. OVK

EE. NOCTOV to-oj? /cat ardaiv ov ravrov

EAI. OuS* av Trpos TOVTO e^co ri xpij fjL

vaodai.

EE. Ilorepov a'AAo rt GTOLCTLV T^yov/xevo? T) r^v rou

vaei ^vyyevovs et< TWOS 8ia(f)6opd$

EAI. Oi)SeV.

SE. 'AAA* a 10-^0? a'AAo rt TrA^v TO

TTOLVTOLXOV SvcretSe?eVov

2

yeVos

>

;

B EAI. OvSa/za}? a'AAo.

EE. Tt Se; eV ^X^ Soâ? eTTiOvfJiLais /cat OV/JLOV

ats /cat Aoyov AwTrats1

/cat Trdvra dAAÂot? ravra

<f>Xavpa)$ eôvrcjv OVKfjcrOrjfjieOa oia(f)p6fjiva;

0EAI. Kat a(f)6opa ye.

EE. Suyyev^ ye ju,7]v e'^ dvay/c^s"

EAI. Da)? ya/o ov;

SE. Tacrtv a/oa /cat voaovrfjs ^X^ irovrjpiav

Xeyovres opdcos epovfiev.

0EAI. OpOorara [j,V ovv.

Crr-i/O>Wl\O / / \

SE. ltd; ocr avKivrjorecos ^raaôvrcL /cat

OKOTTOV TLVCL Geneva1

dia<j)6opas Siafpopdv Galen; 5ia(popas5ia<pOopdi'}$

r

T, Stobaeus,2 ^d^ Schleiermacher ; ^ '6v Stobaetis ; ^ o^ t ; Sf BT.

36cr' a? Cobet ;

6Va BT.

306



THE SOPHIST

from the soul, we shall be speaking properly if wecall that a purification.

THEAET.

Veryproperly.

STR. We must say that there are two kinds of evil

in the soul.

THEAET. What kinds ?

STR. The one is comparable to a disease in the

body, the other to a deformity.

THEAET. I do not understand.

STR.

Perhaps youhave not considered that disease

and discord are the same thing ?

THEAET. I do not know what reply I ought to

make to this, either.

STR. Is that because you think discord is anythingelse than the disagreement of the naturally related,

brought about by some corruption ?

THEAET. No;

I think it is

nothingelse.

STR. But is deformity anything else than the

presence of the quality of disproportion, which is

always ugly ?

THEAET. Nothing else at all.

STR. Well then;do we not see that in the souls

of worthless men opinions are opposed to desires,

anger to pleasures, reason to pain, and all such thingsto one another ?

THEAET. Yes, they are, decidedly.

STR. Yet they must all be naturally related.

THEAET. Of course.

STR. Then we shall be right if 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 W ; om. B.

307



PLATO

jV Trapd<f)opa avrov yiyv^rai1 KOL

a7TOTvy)(dvr) ,

2

Trorepov avrd ^cro/xev VTTO avfjifjierpias

Trpos aXXrjXa r) rovvavriov VTTO dfjierpias aura

EAI. AÂov co? VTTO

HE. 'AAAafj,r)v îv\j]V ye 'La^.v aKOvaav Trdaav TTQ.V

ayvoovaav .

EAI. 2^>oS/)a ye.

HE. To ye /n^y ayvoetv eartv CTT* aAry$eicu> op/xco-

D jueV?]? ifrvxfjs, Trapa(j)6pov crvveaeais

uSev d'AAoTrXrjv Trapa(j)poo"ui>r].

@EAI. Ilaû

HE. ^Fu^v apa avoiqTOV atcr^pav /cat aêrpov

0TOV.

EAI.

HE. "EcrrtST)

Suo ravra, cos âtVerat,

0^777 yevr], TO /zev Trovripla KaXov^Vov VTTO TOJV

TToXXcov, vocros avrrjs aaêVrara 6V.

EAI. Nat.

HE. To 8e ye ayvotav /xev /caAoucrt, KCLKIQV Se

avro eV ^xfl l^dvov yiyvo^vov OVK eOeXovcrw

o/xoAoyetv.

E EAI. KojtttS^ avyôjpr^reov, o vvvor) Aeâvro?

rjfjLffieyvorjo-d crov, TO 8uo eti-'at yeV^ KCLKLO.? ev

l oeiXiav p,ev KCLL a/coAacrtav Acat aSi/aav

vouov eV r^^lv, TO Se T^? TroAA'^s'/cat

dyvoias TrdOos alamos 9ereov.

1

yiyvyrai BT ; yLyverai al.

!

d7roru7X" I/??T ; d7rori'7X^ I' e ' B et al.

308



THE SOPHIST

and miss it on every occasion when they try to hit it,

shall we say that this happens to them through right

proportionto one another

or,on the

contrary,through disproportion ?

l

THEAET. Evidently through disproportion.STR. But yet we know that every s,oul, if ignorant

of anything, is ignorant against its will.

THEAET. Very much so.

STR. Now being ignorant is nothing else than

the aberration of a soul that aims at truth, when theunderstanding passes beside the mark.

THEAET. Very true.

STR. Then we must regard a foolish soul as

deformed and ill-proportioned.


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 theyare not willing to acknowledge that it is vice, whenit arises only in the soul.

THEAET. It must certainly be admitted, though I

disputed it when you said it just now, that there aretwo kinds of vice in the soul, and that cowardice,

intemperance, and injustice must all alike be con-

sidered 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 ireplSuo

TOVTOJ Suo re^va rtê eyeveaOyv ;

EAI. TtVe rovrco;

229 HE. Ilept /xev atoô? yu/zvacrrt/cry, 776/>tSe vo

larpiKif].

EAI. QciLveaOov.

HE. Ou/couV /catTiept jitev vfipw /cat a8t/<rta^ /cat

SetAt'avT] /coAacrrt/ci] 7re(f)VK re)(va)V fjidXicrra OYJ

7Tacra>v

TTpoo-uJKOvaa At'/cjy

1;

EAI. To yow et/cos", co? etVetv /caret T-^V avOpa>-

HE. Tt Se; 77ept ^v^Traaav ayvoiav pcov

TWO,r) SiSacr/caAt/c^ 6p66repov etVot rts

1

av;

@EAI. OvBefJiiav.

HE. Oepe ST]' StSaa/caAt/CT^? 8e apa ev p,6vov

B yeVo? (fraTeov etvat ^ TrAetco, Suo 8e rtê avrrjs

etvatjLteytCTTW, cr/coVet.

EAI. 2/CO7TOJ.

EE. Kat /xot So/cou/xev TT^Se aV771] ra^tara evpelv.

EAI.rify;

EE. T-^y ayôtav t'So^res1

et7797

/card/ze'crov aur^?

2

TOfJiyv e\;et rtva. StTrA^ yap aur^ yiyvoîvr]ort /cat r^v StSacr/caAt/c^v Suo ctvay/caêt /xopta e

ei> e^' evtyejêt

rcov avrrjs e/carepoj.

EAI. Tt ow; /cara</aveV 7717aot ro vw ,r]TOVfjLevov ;

C EE. 'Ayvota? yow3

/ze'ya rt /zotSo/ecu /cat

âAeTrov acf)a}pL<jjJLvov opav etSo?, Tracrt rots' a'AAot?

avrrj? dvTiora.dj.Lov fj^pccriv.

EAI. Do toy817;

SE. To Ln /caretSora rt So/cetv etSeVat* 8t ou

T; Cobet ; SI'/CT; BT, Stobaeus.2

ai'TTjs W ; ai)r^s BT. 3yovv W ;

6' oiV BT.

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 ?


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 ?

THEAET. Probably it is, at least according to the

judgement of mankind.

STR. And for all sorts of ignorance is there anyart it would be more correct to suggest than that of

instruction ?

THEAET. No, none.

STR. Come now, think. Shall we say that thereis 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

this way.THEAET. In what way ?

STR. By seeing whether ignorance admits of beingcut in two in the middle

;for if ignorance turns out

to 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

looking for ?

STR. I at 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. Thinking that one knows a thing when one

311



PLATO

rrdvTa ova Siarota cr^>aAAo/xe#a ylyveoBai

Tfaaiv.

EAI.*AXr]6fj.

SE. Kcu$r]

Kal TOVTO) ye ot/zai [jLovq) Trjs ayzWas

dfjiaOiav Tovvofjia 7Tpoo~pr)6fjvai,.

0EAI. Haw ye.

EE. Tt SeST]

TO) rfjs ScSacr/caAt/c^S' apa /xepet TO)

TOVTO aTraAAarro^rt Ae/creov;

0EAI. Oi)ucu û,ev ow, c5 êVe, TO/Ltev

aAAo

S^/xtoupytKas" SiSacrâAta?, TOVTO Se eVâSe ye

rraioeiav Strjfjiajv KK\fja9ai.

SE. Kat yap crêSoX cS eatr^re, eV Traaiv

"EAA^crtv. aAAd yap 7]/^,tvert A<ra6 TOVTO aK7TTOV,

el aro/xov ^'S^ ecrrt vrav^'

rtva eôv Statpecrtp'diav

9EAI.EE. AoKCt TOIVVV

{JLOLKal TOVTO TL

ITf)

0EAI. Kara rt;

EE. T^? eV rot? Aoyot? StSacrAcaAt/c^?

E rpaûrepa rts1 toiKev 6005 zlvai, TO 8* erepov

avT-fjs fj,6piov Aetorepoi^.

0EAI. To Trotov017

TOVTOJV KaTpov XeycojJi

SE. To/zej^ apâtoTrpeTreV T6 Trarptov, cu

TGI)? Diets' jLtaAtCTr' e'^pcovro re ftrat ert TroAAot

rat TO, vw, orav avTols e'fa/xapravcocrt rt, TO.

230 x^^77"

01^ ^"7"

6?, ra 8e {jLaAOaKWTepcos rrapafjiv

TO S* owv[ji7rai> avTO opôrara etVot

aV0EAI. cTTtV OVTCOS.

SE. To 8e' ye, ei'âat-1

Ttês* au Aoyov eavTols1

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 through our influence called

education.

STR. And so it is, Theaetetus, among nearly all

the Hellenes. 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.THEAET. What shall we call each of these ?

STR. 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

exhortingthem that would most

properlybe called

as a whole admonition.


STR. On the other hand, some appear to have con-

L 313



PLATO

rjyrj(jaa9aiTrdcrav OLKOVCTLOV d/j,a#tW etmt, /cat

ouSeV TTOT* ay eOeXew rov olofjievov eivai

ao(j>ovrovra>v ow ototro

TrepiSetvd?

etWu, ju,erd8e

TroAAou TroVou TO vov9eTT]TU<ov el8os Trjs

(JfJLLKpOVaVVTZLV.

EAI. 'O/^cD? y VO/JLl,OVTS.

B HE. Ta> rot ravrrjs TTJS Sof^? e'mKf3oXr)i>

aAAo)

rporra)

EAI. TtVt

HE. Atepcorcoaty toy a^ ot^rat rts1

n Tre/n Xeyeiv

Aeycov fJirjSeveW are TrAavco/êVajv ra? Sofa?

paStco? eêrdôvcn,, Kal avvayovres ST) rot? Aoyot?

et? raurov nOeacn Trap* aAAÂas", TtêVre? Se

iKvvovcriv aura? CLVTCLLSl

a/xa Trept rcov CLVTOJV

TO, avra Kara raura eVavrtas" ot 8* o

eavrols H<V âAeTratVouat, Trpo? 8e rou? d'AAous"

^fjLepovvTdiy Kal TOVTCO817

ra> rpoTrq) TOJVTrepl

C O.VTOVS /xeydAcoy /catcr/cAi]pa)v Sofaiv aTraAAdrrop'Tat

7rao-a)v2

aTraAAaycDv aKOveiv reYjSicrTrjv /cat TO)

a) Trat<^>tAe,

ot Kadaipovres OLVTOVS, coaTrep ot

TO, crc6jU,ara larpol V^VO^LKCLGI ^rj Trporepov av

Trpoo-êpOjiteV^? rpo^rjs dVoAau'etv SvvaoOaL

?rptv dV rd eyu,7ro8tôvra ev aura) rt? e/c^SdA^, raurov

/cat77e/ot ifjvxfjs Stevo^âav e/cetvot, /u^ Trporzpov

avrrjv efetv TCOV Trpoaêpoêva^v /Lta^/xdrcov ovrjcriv,

D Trptv dV eAeyp^cov rt? TOV eAey^d^Lteyov etj atcrûv^x'1

, rds1

rots' fJLaOyjfjiaaLV e^TroStous1

Sofa?

V, KaOapov a7TO(f)rjvrj /cat ravra rjyovLievov,?<? '?/ / \'^v/

aTre/3 otoev, etoevat /xova, vrAeico oe ^.1

auTats] atfrcus BT.2

Tracrwj' Slobaeus;iravuv re BT.

814



THE SOPHIST

vinced themselves that all ignorance is involuntary,

and that he who thinks himself wise would never be

willing to learn anyof those things in which he believeshe 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 aboutwhich 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 com-

parison 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

themselves. The process of freeing them, moreover,

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 /cat aax^poveardrr] TOW

eêcov avrrj.

HE. Atd ravra or) rrdvra 7]fttv, o> eatnyre, KOI

TOV eXeyxov XeKreov co? d'pa fjieyiarr)/cat KVpia>rdrrj

rajv KaOdpaetvv eori, :at TOV dveAey/crov au

vo/xtcrreov, av /cat rwyxdvr) fiaaiXevs ofjueyas a)V,

E TO, /xeytcrra aKa.Oa.prov ovra, aTTaiSevTov re /cat

ala^pov yeyovevcu, ravra, a Ka.9a.pajra.rov /cat

/caAAicrTOi'77/36776 TOV oVraj? a6fJLVOV evoaifjiova

elvai.

EAI. HavrdrracrL pev ovv.

1 8. EE. Tt 8e; rous" ravrrj ^paj'^vovs rf}

231 rtVa? ^>rjo~ojjiV ; eyco /z,ev yap Ôj8ou/xat cro(f>Lards

cf)dvai.

EAI. Tt 817;

EE. M^ ftetoi> avrot? Trpoo-drrrcofjiev yepas.

EAI. 'AAAd/Lt^v 77/3ocreot/ce

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 rroielaOairr\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-ât

TOTe o77OTay t/cai/co? (frvXarrajaiv .

EAI. Ou/couv TO ye et/cds*.

SE. "ECTTCOST) 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 rrepi rrjv jJidraLov oooao(f>iav

yiyvofjievos e'Aeyô? ev TO) yw Adya> rrapaâvevri

fjur]oevd'AA*

7^/xtvetvat Xeyeodaj TrXr^v rj yeVet yevvaia

O~0(f)LO-TlKTJ.

316



THE SOPHIST

THEAET. That is surely the best and most reason-

able state of mind.

STR. For all thesereasons, 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

art ? I am afraid to say the sophists.

THEAET. Why SO ?

STR. Lest we grant them too high a meed of

honour.

THEAET. But the description you have just givenis 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 discrimina-

tions when people are sufficiently on their guard.

THEAET. No, probably not.

STR. Then let it be agreed that part of the dis-

criminating art is purification, and as part of purifi-

cation 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. Aeye'cr0a> jLteV drropa) Se eytoye 17877Sta

C TO TToAAd Tre^dvdai, TLxpij TTOTC a>? dArjOrj Xeyovra

/Cat Oll(JXVpl,6{JLVOV 61776Iv OVTCOS LVCLl TOV aO^HJTrjV.

SE. Et/corais1

ye GV drropayv. dAAa rot Acaicetvov

^yetcr$ai ^77 vw ^'817 a<f)68pa arropelv 07717Trore ert

8ta8ucrerat TOV \6yov 6p9r) yap 77 Trapot/xia, TO ra?

ctWcras: ^77 paStov etât 8ta^>euyetv. i/w ow /cat

uaAtcrra ImBereov avraj.

0EAI. KaAaj? Aeyei?.

ip. HE. IT/jcorop' 877 ardvre? olov câvaTrvevao)-

fJLv,/cat Trpos

1

77/^5? avrovs SiaXoyiaco/JieOa a/m dva-

D Trauo/xevot, (f>epe,oTrocra

77/0,ô

crofiicrTrjs Treâvrat.

So/ca)jLtev yap/ TO Trptorov rjvpeOrj

veatv /cat

0EAI. Nat.

EE. To Se ye 8e'JTepov e/x7ropd? Tt? Trept TO, TT}?

0EAI. IldVu ye.

SE. Tpirov Se dpa ou77-ept

TauTa TCLVTCL /cd

EAI. Nat, /cat reraprov ye avroTrwXr)? vrept

EE. 'Qp9ajs efJLvrjfJLovevcras. rrefJiTTTOV8* eya;

7TLpdaofjiai fjLvr]jjLovViv T77? yapE

77ept Adyof? 77^ Tt? dÂ77T77S', TT^V

0EAI. v yapSE. To ye jitT^v

e/cTOV dfM(f)La^TTJai.fiov fteV,

8* 0fjiV avra)

t Trept ^v^ty Ka6aprr)i> avrov elvai.

EAI. ayTaTraCTt Ltev ow.

W; 7a/j fij/ BT. 2 ^ add. Heindorf.

318



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 aloss to

know whatin the world to

say hereally is, with any assurance that I am speakingthe truth.

STR. No wonder you are at a loss. But it is fair

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

escape all the wrestler's grips. So now we mustattack him with redoubled vigour.


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 I 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 HE. *Ap' ovv eWoets", orav emcmîcoi'

TroAAcDv <f)aivr)rai, /uas" 8e rexynjs oVo/zart rrpoor-

ayopeinyrat, TO (f)dvTacrp,a. rovro a)S OVK ecr#' vyies,

dAAd BfjXov cos 6rrdo"%OL>v

avro Trpos riva Te^v^v ov

ovvarai /cartSetv eVetvo avTrjs els o TTOVTCL ra

ravra ^SAeVet, Sio /cat TroAAots" ovo/zacrtv

eVo? TOV eôvra a7)ra Trpoaayopevei;

0EAI. KtvSuveuet rovro ravrrj Try /xaAtcrra

B 20. HE. MT) roivvv^/xets" ye awro ev

Si* dpyiav Trda-ôj^v ,dAA* avaAa/^co//.^ irpajrov n

TOJV Treplrov

oo<j)LcrTr)v elp7]êv(jL>v. eV yap rt /xot

/xdAtara Kareâvr] avrov[JLYJVVOV.

0EAI. To Tfoiov;

HE. 'AvrtAoyt/cov avrov(f>afjiV

etvat TTOU.

0EAI. Nat.

HE. Tt 8'; OT) /cat rcDv d'AAcuv avrov rovrov StSd-

CT/caAov ytyêcrât;

0EAI. Tt ^v;HE. 2/co77cD/>tev Siy, 77ept TtVo? apa /cat (f>amv ol

TOiovroi TTOtetv avrtAoyt/cous". ^ Secr/cei/rts

1

7y/xt^ e^

C dpxrjs orco rfj8e rrr\. (fjepe, rrepi rojv deiatv,OCT'

d<f>avr) rot? 77oAAots>

, dp' LKCLVOVS TTOIOVCTI rovro

SpdV;

0EAI. Aeyerat yoi;vx

ST) Treptavra>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,

orroravyeve'cretos

1 re /cat ovacas rrepiKara rrdvrajv

O^ W;

0y BT.

320



THE SOPHIST

STR. Then do you see that when a man appears to

know many things, but is called by the name of a

single art,there is

something wrongabout this

impression, and that, in fact, the person who labours

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,

so that he calls him who possesses them by manynames instead of one ?

THEAET. Something like that is very likely to bethe 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 pupilsable to dispute. Let us begin our examination at

the beginning with this question : Is it about divine

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'AAous1 6Vt TTOIOVGLV dVep avrol ovvarovs;

EAI. TlavTOiTTacri

ye.D EE. Tt 8* au776/31 VOfJidlV

KO.I ^V/JLTTaVTCOV TO)V

7TO\ITLK(JL)V, dp* OV% VTTKJ^VOVVTCLL 7TOLIV

EAI. OuSets* yap av avrots", a>S" erros LTTLV,

SteAeyero JLIT^rovro vmcrî'otyzeVois'.

EE. Ta ye /x^v Trepl Tracrwv re /cat /caret /zi'av

e/cacrr^v reî^Vj a Set Trpo? IACOOTOV avrov rov

SrjiJtiovp'yov avTenrelv, SeS^/xoatco/êVa TTOU

jSA^rat yey/3a/x/xeVa TO) f3ovXofjiVto âOelv.

0EAI. To, Tlpcurayopeta /xot <âtVet 7re/)tre

E /cat TCUV a'AAcuv re^v'ajv etpr^/ceVat.

SE. Kat TroAAajy ye, c5 /xa/capte, erepwv. arap

r)TO

rrjs ap'TtAoyt/c^? rej^wys

1

a/3*ou/c ev /c

t TTOLVTCJV Trpos afji(f)icrl3r)Tr)cri:V iKavr) rts

eot/c* elvai;

EAI. OatVerat yow crêSov ovSev V

SE. 2u80] 77/30? OeaJv, d) TTCLI, SvvaTov ^yet rovro;

raâ yap aVvfjiels /zey o^vrepov ol vioi irpos avro

/SAeVotre, rjfJieisSe afJL^Xvrepov.

233 EAI. To TTolov, /cat Trpo? Tt /âAtcrra Aeyet?; 01)

yap TTCO KCLTCLVOO) TO ^w eptt)Tc5/xevov.

EE. Et Trdvra eVtWaaât Ttva dvOpcjTrajv earl

Svvarov.

EAI. Ma/captov /xevT* av ^/xcDv, c5 eW, ^v TO

yeVo?.

EE. riajs* ow dV TTOTe' Tt? Trpo? ye TOV Tncrrd-avros di'TnarrjfjLO)v cjv SwatT* dV wyteV TI

d^TetTreiv;1

a/i0ccr/3?7T77TiK<ws] a/j.<j)i<r(3i>)TiKOvs T.

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 publishedthat he who will may learn.

THEAET. You seem to refer to the text-books of

Protagoras on wrestling and the other arts.

STR. Yes, my friend, and to those of many otherauthors. But is not the art of disputation, in a word,

a trainedability 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 ourduller sight.

THEAET. What do you mean and just what do yourefer to ? I do not yet understand your question.

STR. I ask whether it is possible for a man to

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. Qvoafjitos.

HE. Tt TTOT* ovv ave'irj

TOrrjs aofiicrTiKrjs Svva

0EAI. Tovor]

B HE. Ka$* ov Tiva rpoTrov TTOTE Swarol rot?

sects' Soâv irapaaKevaêiv, co? elal rrdvra

avrol ao(f)a)TaroL. SfjAov 'yap cos1

et

fjirJTe/cetVots

1

eâtVovro, (f)om>6fjLvoLre cl

av ^LtaAAov eSoKovv 8ta r^v a/x^tcr^r^crtv

etvat(frpovijjioi,

TO aov 1

817 TOVTO, oxoAfj TTOT* av

TIS xPÎJLaTa OLOOVS tfOeXev av TOVTOJV

? yiyveaOai.

0EAI. ^X ^?? M 6̂ ' <*i>.

EE. Nuv 8e y eOe

0EAI. KatfJLaX

C HE. AOKOUCTI yap, olfjidiy 77/06? raura C

ailTOL

EAI. Dais' yap oy;

EE. Apcocrt Se ye TOVTO Trpos aTravTa, (f>a{j,ev;

0EAI. Nat.

EE. riaVra apa CTCK/KH rot? fJiadrjTals (f>aivovTai.

0EAI. TtjLt^v;

SE. Ov/c oVre? ye* aovvaTOV yap TOVTO ye (f)dvrj.

EAI. Ha)? yap ou/c dSwarov;

21. EE. AoaaTLKr)V apa TLVCL Tfepl TrdvTO)v

6cro(f)iaTr)s ^]^lv, aAA* OVK dXij

1 TOcrop]

Ttoov BTW.324



THE SOPHIST

THEAET. He cannot at all.

STR. Then what in the world can the magical

powerof the

sophisticalart 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 thataccount, nobody, to quote from you,

1 would care to

pay them money to become their pupil in these

subjects.


STR. But now people do care to do so ?

THEAET. Very much.

STR. Yes, for they are supposed, I fancy, to haveknowledge themselves of the things about which

they dispute.

THEAET. Of course.

STR. And they do that about all things, do

they not ?

THEAET. Yes.

STR. Then they appear to their pupils to be wisein all things.

THEAET. To be sure.

STR. Though they are not;for that was shown

to be impossible.

THEAET. Of course it is impossible.

STR. 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.

1Cf. 232 D.

325



PLATO

J) EAI. HavTOLTTaai/JLCV ovv, /cat KivSvvzvei

ye.

TO vvv elpr/fjievov opBoTCLTa TTtpi avTQjv elprjadaL.

EE. Adf3a)iiV TOIVVV 0a<f)(JTp6v n 77apd8ety/za

7Tpl TOVTCOV.

EAI. To TTolov

EE. TdSe. /Cat[JLOt, 7TlpOJ TTpO(76Xa>V TOV VOVV V

EAI. To

SE. Ei' TLS cf)airj [j,rj XeyewaAAa TroiLV KOI Spav /xta Tj(yr)

oQcLL 77-yoay/xara.

E EAI. YltJJS 7TOLVTCL etTTe?/T1 \ > \ <>

/) / / 9 t

EE. IT)V ctpx7)1^ TOU PT~IVVTOS ov y

ra yap ^v/jLTravra, <Ls eot/caj, ou

EAI. Ou yapEE. Aeyto TOIVVV ere /<m

e//,eTCUI^ Travrcov

Trpos rnjilvraAAa a>a feat SeVSpa.

EAI. nco? Aeyetsv

EE. Et n? e/xe /cat o~e /cat raAAa ^>Lra TrdVra

EAI. TtVaSr) Aeycov TT^V Trofycnv;

ovyd/3

234 yewpyov ye epet? rtva* /cat yap t,a)a>v CLVTOV

EE. ^t, /catTT-po? ye âAarr^s

1

/cat y^s2

/cat

ovpavov /cat êcov /cat TCOV d'AAcoy ^v^TTavro^v /cat

TOIVVV Kal raû Tronjcras avTtov e/cacrra

ap,LKpov vofjtiafjLaTOs aTroSiSorat.

EAI. IlaiStdv Ae'yet? rtvd.

EE. Tt 3e'; TT)V rou Ae'yovros1 ort Trdvra otSe /cat

W; iroirjcriv BT. 8

/coi 7^5 W ; om. BT.

326



THE SOPHIST

THEAET. Certainly ;and I shouldn't be surprised

if that were the most accurate statement we have

made about him so far.

STR. Let us then take a clearer example to explainthis,

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 thingsTHEAET. What do you mean by all things ?

STR. You fail to grasp the very beginning of what

I said;

for apparently you do not understand the

word "all."

THEAET. No, I do not.

STR. I mean you and me among the "all," and

the other animals besides, and the trees.


STR. If one should say that he would make youand me and all other created beings.

THEAET. What would he mean by"making

"?

Evidently you will not say that he means a husband-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.

STR. Yes ? And when a man says that he knows

all things and can teach them to another for a small

327



PLATO

ravra erepov av $iodeiev oAi'you /cat ev oXiya)

Xpovco, IJLO)Vov Tracoidv vofJLicrreov ;

EAI. TldvTois TTOV.

B EE. IlatSta? Se eêt? TJrt reî't/caJTepov ?}

/cat

%apl<JTpOV etSoS"T)

TOfJiifJL^TiKOV ;

EAI. Oi)Sa/za>s" TrdarroXv yap e'iprjKa? efSo?

etV eV Travra ûAAa^wv /cat aêSov 77Ot/ctAc6rarov.

22. EE. Ow/cow TOV y' vma-)(yov^vov SVVCLTOV

elvai[JUG, re^vr)

TTOLVTCL Troielvyty^tucr/co/zeV

TTOU

TOVTO, OTLfjufji^/jLara

/cat o/zaVu/za ra>v oVrcuv

aTrepyaôfJievos rfj ypafiiKrj T^XV1]SuvaTo? ecrrat

rous" aVo^rou? ra>v i/ecov TTCLL&OJV, iroppuiQev ra

yeypa/z//,eVa eTrtSet/cvus1

,\avOdveiv co? ornrep av

(3ovXr)9fj 8pav, TOVTO t/cavajraro?

C EAI. Hois' yap oy;TI/^\O/ t X \/ f >

EE. It oe017; Trept TOU? Aoyou? ap ou Trpocr-

elvai Tiva aXXrjv Tiyyr}v, fjav SvvaTOV ov

*TOVS veovs /cat ert Troppa) TOJV TrpayfJiaTCOv

rrjs dXrjdeias aêcrra)ra? Sta TOJV OJTWV rots' AoyotS"

yo^reuetv, Set/cvwras* et'ScoAa Aeyo/xeâ Trept TTOLVTCOV,

<jjo~T 7TOL6LV dXr)6rj So/cew Aeyeaât /cat TOP' Aeyovra817 aro(f)a)TaTov TTOLVTCDV aVavr' elvai;Drp / \ i\ / w \ \

EAI. It yap OVK avirj aAArj Ti$

EE. Tous" TroAAoys" ovv, co eaiTrjT, TO>V rore

a/couoVrtoi' ap' OVK avdyKi] ^povov re CTreXOovTOs

iKavov /catTrpo'Lovor)s rjXiKLas rots* re ovon

eyyvOev /cat Sta. TraOrjiJLaTCov dvay/ca-

evapyojs e^driTeaBai TCOV OVTCOV,

^ aC Svvarbv 8i> Tvyx&vei Burnet; ^ (?? T) oy

Swarbv aS T^xdi'ei Madvig.

328



THE SOPHIST

price in a little time, must we not consider that

a joke ?

THEAET.Surely

we must.

STR. And is there any more artistic or charmingkind 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

expression is very comprehensive.STR. And so we recognize that he who professes

tobe able by virtue of a single art to make all things

will be able by virtue of the painter's art, to makeimitations 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 youngchildren 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

exhibiting to them spoken images of all things, so as

to make it 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 ?

STR. Now most of the hearers, Theaetetus, when

they have lived longer and grown older, will per-force come closer to realities and will be forced by

sad experience 1 openly to lay hold on realities ; they

1

Apparently a reference to a proverbial expression. Of.

Hesiod, Works, 216 tyvu traQuv ; Herodotus, i. 207 TO.

fj.a0rjfj.aTa.

329



PLATO

/3a'AAetv Ta? Tore yevo/xeVas1

Soâs, cocrre oyxi/cpd

fjiev </>atVe<70atra /xeydAa, âAe-mi, Se ra pa8ta, /cat

E TTOLVTCL Trdvrr) dva,TTpd<f)6aL rd lv TOis Adyoisrd)i> eV rat? Trpdêaiv epyatv

0EAI. 'Q? yow e^tot rÂt/caiSe 6Wt Kplvai. ot/xat

8e /cat e/xe TO>V ert TroppajOev dêcrr^/corcDV elvai.

EE. Totyapow rêls oe otSe rrdvres TreipacrofjizOa

/cat vw ireLpcofjieOa to? eyyvrara dVeu rcDv Tra^/xdrcov

Trpoadyeiv. rrepi8' ot^ row

cro(f>icrTOVrdSe /xot

235 Aeye* irorepov 17817rovro oa<f)s, OTL TOJV yor)ra>v

eari rt?, /xt/x^TT]?cov raJi^ OVTOJV, r) Stcrrdô/xev ert

T) Trept oaatvirep avriXeyew So/cet SyvaTOS1

etvat,

TOCTOVTOJV /cat rd? eVtCTT^/xas1

0EAI. Kat 77OJS1

dV, cu ev; dAAd crêSdv 77817

crakes' e/c raiv etp^/LteVcov, ort raw r^9 TratStas1

/xer-

e'crrt rt? et?.1

HE. rd77ra /xey 817/cat

/xt/x^TT^v d'pa Oereov

avrov riva.

0EAI. nd)? yap ou Oereov;

23. HE.

"Aye 817,

vwrjfJLerepov epyov 17877

roi>

B ^pa /XT7/ceV dVetrar aêSov yap avrdvTieptetAi^-

<f)ap,evev

djjL(f)Lf3Xr)crTpiKa>TWI T&V eV rot? Adyots*

Trept TO, roLavra opydvajv, cuare ou/ceV2

e/cêuêrai

rdSe ye.

0EAI. To 3TTolov;

1rts efs Heusde

;rts ê/>cD^ e/s BT (giving efr to the stranger) ;

rts fj.epu>vels W.

2OUK^T' W ; oiJif ^rt B ; ou/c T.

3rd W

; ora. BT.

330



THE SOPHIST

will have to change the opinions which they had

at first accepted, so that what was great will appear

smalland what was easy, difficult, and

all

the apparenttruths in arguments will be turned topsy-turvy by

the facts that have come upon them in real life. Is

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

are still standing at a distance.

STR. 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

about the sophist : Is this now clear, that he is a

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 enter-

tainment.

STR. That is to say, he must be classed as a jugglerand imitator.

THEAET. Of course he must.

STR. Look 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

we employin

argumentsabout such

subjects,so that

he will not now escape the next thing.

THEAET. What next thing ?

331



PLATO

HE. Tofirj

ov rov yevovs elvai rov ra>v Qavuaro-

TTOICOV ris els-

EAI. Kd/zoi rovro ye ovraj rrepl avrov vvooKei.EE. AeSoKTCU x roivvv on raîcrra oiaipelv rrjv

eloajXoTTOUK'rjv re^vr^v, Kal /carajSavras1

t? avTrjV,

eav {lev rjfjids i>9vs 6 aoîar^ VTTOfJLeivr), ovâfieiv

avrov Kara ra e7reara\î4va VTTO rov jSacrtAt/cou

C Aoyou, KaKLVO) irapaoovras a7TO(f)fjvai rrjv aypaveav 8' apa Kara

fJLeprj rrjs /zc/x^rt/c^s' ovrjrai rrrj,

ovOe'iv avra) ^Laipovvras aet rr\vv

avrov fjiolpav, ccuarrep avXrj(f)6fj.

ovre ovros ovre aAAo yeVo? ovoev(JLTJ

rrorz K(j)vy6v

7Tvr]rai rrp ra>v ovrco Swauevaiv /êrteVat KaO*

e/cacrra re KOI errl rravra [leOooov.

EAI. Aeyet? V, /cat ravra ravrr) rroLTjreov.

EE. Kara 817 rov Trap\rjXv66ra rporrov rfjs

DStatpecrecos

1

eycuye (JLOLKal vvv (âivoâi ovo

Kaflopdv et'Si] rrj$ fALfjLrjriKrjs' ryv 8e^rjrovjJLevrjv

loeav, ev orrorepa) rro6*rj/mlv

ovaa rvy^dvei, /cara-

(JLaOelv ovoeTTO)IJLOL

ooKtJo vvv ovvaros eivai.

0EAI. ST) 8' dAA' ecVe 7Tpo>rov Kal SteAe r]îv,

rive ra) ovo Aeyet?.

EE. Mi'av[JL6V rrjv eLKaariKrjv 6pa>v ev avrfj

Te^v^v. eari 8' avrt] jLcaAtcrra, orrorav Kara ra?

rov rrapaoeiyfiaros ovuuerpias ris ev uTJKeiKal

TrXdret Kal fidOei, Kal rrpos rovrois eri %pa)fjiara

E aTrooLOOVs rd rrpoai/JKOvra eKaarois? rrjvrov

fjiLfJi^fjiaros yeveaiv aTrepya^rat.

EAI. Tt 8'; ov rrdvres oi û/zou/xez-'oi rt TOUT'

erfiêipovai opdv;1

8e8oKTai] S^detKrai BT;dedeiKTai W.

2e/cdarots Stobaeus, W ; e/cdcrrats BT.

332



THE SOPHIST

STR. The conclusion that he belongs to the class

of conjurers.

THEAET. I agree to that opinion of him, too.

STR. It is decided, then, that we will as quicklyas possible divide the image-making art and godown 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 kingand display his capture. But if he tries to take

cover in

anyof 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

us what two classes you mean.STR. I 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 all imitators try to dothis?

333



PLATO

HE. QVKOVV oaoi ye TOJV /zeydAcov TTOV TL rrXaTTOV-

criv epytov 7} ypd(f>ovcriv. el yap 0,7708180levrr^v TWV

KaXajvdXrjOwrjv crvmieTpiav,

oiad* 6Vt(jfjUKporepa

236jLtev

rov Se'ovTO? ra dVco, jU,eia> 8e ra. Kara)MO\\\\ / r\ ^fc>>av ota TO ra /xev Troppaiuev, ra o e

6pdcr9ai.

0EAI. flaw /xev

EE.T

Ap' ovv ov -%aipeiv TO dXrjOes cdaavres ol

i vvv ov TO,? ovaas crvfi/jLerpia?, aAAd TO,?

elvou /caAd? Tot? et'ScuAot? eVaTrepyaôvTat;

0EAI. Ilavu /xev ow.2

EE. To/zei' a/aa erepov ov BLKCUOV, et/co? ye 6V,

EAI. Nat.

B EE. Katrrjs ye /xt/x^TtAC^? TO e?rt TOVTCO

KXyreov, OTTp L7TOfJLV ev TO) TrpoaOev, ei

EAI. KA^TeW.EE. Tt oe; TO

(fraivo/Jievov fjiev 8td rrjv OVK e/c

fcaAou Beav eot/ceVat TO) /caAai, 8wa/ztv Se t Tts"

Aa/3ot TO, TÂtâuTa t/cavcD? opdv, /.tTyS' etVo? a;

eoiKevai, ri KaXov^Lev ; dp* OVK, eVetVe/)

fJiev,eoLKe 8e oy,

EAI. Tt fti^;

SE. Ou/cow Trdp,7ToXv /cat

C rovro TO pepos IOTI /cat /caTa vfJLiracravTT C-> "

EAI. 11 co? o ou;

SE. T^v 817 (f)dvTacrjJia3dAA' oi)/c etVova drrepya-

dp* ou <j)avTaaTiKr)v opdoTOLT* av

Ci' T, Stobaeus; om. B.

BT;

Tra.vro.Tro.al ye \V.3

(pdi>Ta<r/j,a \V; (pavTdfffj.a.Ta. BT.

334



THE SOPHIST

STR. Not those who produce some large work of

sculpture or painting. For if they reproduced the

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 mayfairly call a likeness, may we not ?

THEAET. Yes.

STR. And the part of imitation which is concerned

with suchthings,

is to becalled,

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

position, to be like the beautiful, but which would

not even be likely to resemble that which it claims

tobe like,

if aperson were

able to see suchlarge

works adequately ? Shall we not call it, since it

appears, but is not like, an appearance ?

THEAET. Certainly.

STR. And this is very common in painting and

in all imitation ?

THEAET. Of course.

STR. And to the art which produces appearance,but not likeness, the most correct name we could

give would be "fantastic art," would it not ?

335



PLATO

EAI. IIoAt; ye.

EE. TOVTOJ TOLVVV TOJ ovo eAeyov e'ior) rfjsetSo>Ao-

TrouKrjs, LKacrTiKr]v

Kai(ftavTaaTLKr^v

.

EAI. *Qp6a)S.

EE. *0 Se ye /cat TOT rjfJL(f>eyvoovv ,ev l

TroTepa2

TOV aoîarr^v Oereov, ouSe vvv TTOJ Svvafjicn,Oedaa-

D oOat, craôj?, cxAA* oWco? Oavâaros dvrjp3

/cat

rayâAeTros1

,77et Kat vvv ^LtaAa

eu /cat

et? aTTOpov etSos" SiepevvTJcraaOaiKara-

EAI. "Eot/cev.

EE.T

Ap* ow at5TO yiyvd)(JKa)v ^vfjifiys, TJere

OtOV/3W/XT7 Tt9 U7TO TOV AoyOU aVVL6i(7[JLVOV GVV7T-

4

irpos TO

EAI. ITaJS" /cat77/DO?

Tt5 TOVTO

et/)7]/ca?;

24. EE, "OyTCo?, t5 fj.OLKa.pie, ecrfjiev evE Ttaai

xaAeTrfj cr/cej/ret.TO yap <âtWa$at TOVTO /cat

TO 8o/cetv, etvat 8e ^17,/cat TO Ae'yetv ^Ltev CLTTCL,

dXrj9fj oefjir^y

TcdvTa TavTO. ecrTt jueaTa drropias aet

ev TO) TrpoaSev xpovco /cat vw. oVco? yap etVoWa

^ ifjevorj Ae'yetv T)Soaeti> oVrco? etvat, /cat TOVTO

IvavTioXoyiq,

237 -

to eat^Te,EAI. Tt

877;

SE. TeToA/xT]/cev o Aoyo? OVTOS vrroOecrOai TO

ov eivai-i/feuSo? yap ou/c aV aAAco? eytyveTO ov.

Se o /xe'ya?, c5 77at, iraiaivrjfj.lv

OVVLV

1

^ add. Bessarionisliber.

2Trortpa B ; irorepa TW.

3

ctfT/p Bekker ; di'Tjp BT.4

<Tive7re(r7rci(raTo W ;rOy ^TrecrTrdcraro BT.

6 T/ W;

6Vi BT.

336



THE SOPHIST


STR. These, then, are the two forms of the image-

making art that I meant, the likeness-making andthe fantastic.

THEAKT. You are right.

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

andvery

difficult to

keepin

sight,

for oncemore,

in

the very cleverest manner he has withdrawn into a

baffling classification where it is hard to track him.


STR. Do you assent because you recognize the

fact, or did the force of habit hurry you along to a

speedy assent ?

THEAET. What do you mean, and why did you say

that ?

STR. We are really, my dear friend, engaged in

a very difficult investigation ;for the matter of

appearing and seeming, but not being, and of saying

things, but not true ones all this is now and

always has been very perplexing. You see,

Theaetetus, it is extremely difficult to understand

how a man is to say or think that falsehood really

exists and in saying this not be involved in

contradiction.

THEAET. Why ?

STR. This statement involves the bold assumptionthat not-being exists, for otherwise falsehood could

not come into existence. But the great Parmenides,

my boy, from the time when we were children to

337



PLATO

T KOI Std reXovs rovro

7re,fjre a>Se e/cdoroTe Xeycov /cat jLtera

01) yap /z?7TTOTe rovro

ap,f},1

âiv, elvai/XT)

eovra'

dAAd (Ti) rrjoo* a<f>

y

6Sov St^/zevos2

etpye vo

B Trap*e/cetVou re ovv /xaprupetrat, /cat /xaAtcrra ye

^ rrdvrajv 6 Aoyo? auro?3

aV8-Âtocrete /xerpta

rovro ovv avro rrpwrov

et/ATI

rt act8ta<êpet.rp

\\J\W O'^ '/I <^>0EAI. lo /lev e/zoi' 07T27 pofAet rtc/eao, TOV oe

Aoyov T^ jSe'Artcrra Ste'fetcrt CTKOTTOJV avros re Wi

/cd/xe/caret ravrj]v rrjv oSov aye.

25. EE. *AAAd ^p^ Spav ravra. /cat ôt Ae'ye1

TOjit^SajLtais'

oV roAyu-ai/xeV TTOU ^ê'yyeaât;

0EAI. no!? yap ou;

EE. M?) roivvv eptSos1

eW/ca jU-i^Se TratSta?, aAA'

C et o-TTOVof)4

Se'ot CTUwo^cravra rtva aTro/cptVacrât

d/cpoara>v Trot ^pi) rowo/x* e77t^>epetv rovro TO

,-^6V Tt

5ooKOVfJiev dv et? Tt /cat eVt rrolov avrov

re KaraxprjoacrOcu /cat TOJ TrvvOavofjLeva) Set/cvwat;

0EAI. XaAeTTovo^'poy

/cat o-êSov etVetv ota> ye

e/zot 7Tavrd7TCL0LV drropov.EE. 'AAA' ow TOUTO ye SÂov, OTt TOJV ovraiv

77t Tt TO XT ov oi>/c oiareov .

EAI. Dais' yap dV;/-\> / 5 \ \ V >0>\ \

HE. (JVKOVV erreiTrepOVK em TO ov, ovo em TO

Tt (frepcov 6p6a>s dv Tt? </>epot.

1

roOro 6aû.y Simplicius; roCr' ovSa^rj BT.2

Stêvoj BTW (Stâ-to? 258 D).3 auros W ;

OUTOS BT.4 d\X' et cnrovdfi Bekker ; fiXX^s TroO ST? B ; dXXTj o-7rou5 T.

5rt] ort TW. 6

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 is ;

But keep your mind from this way of investigation.

So that is his testimony, and a reasonable examina-

tion of the statement itself would make it most

absolutely clear. Let us then consider this matter

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 is the designation'

not-being'

to be applied ?

"

how do we think he would reply to his questioner,

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 me it is unanswerable.

STR. But this is clear, anyhow, that the term"

not-being

"cannot be

applied

to

any being.THEAET. Of course not.

STR. And if not to being, then it could not

properly be applied to something, either.

339



PLATO

T-r A f\ f

EAI.

D EE. Kat TOVTOr)/jiLV

TTOV(fravepov, a)$ /cat TO

"TL TOVTO fJLa 7T OVTL

\OjLVKOLO'TOT6'

[JLOVOV yap auro Ae'yetv, axjTrep yv^vov /cat a

fjicvov aTTO TOJV OVTUL>V aTTavTUJv, aovvcLTOV'rj yap;

0EAI. 'ASwarov.

HE. *Apa Trjoe CTKOTTCJVvfjL<f)r)s

co? avayKt] TOV TL

Aeyovra eV ye rt Aeyetv;

EAI. Oura)?.

<T7'^ x ?^ ' * J ' ~HE. iLvo? yap OT) TO ye TL Berets' o"f][JL6LOV9 \ <\ (( \ ? O t O \ ,( \ N\ ^

iVO.L, TO O6 TIV6 OVOIV, TO O6 TLVS TTOAAWV.

EAI. riajs* yap ov;

E HE. Tov oeST) /x^ rt Aeyovra dyayAcatorarov,

c&s1

eot/ce, TTavTa.7Ta.cni^rjoev Aeyetv.

EAI. 'Ayay/catorarov /.tep'ow.

HE.

T

Ap* ouv ovSe TOVTO crvyxaiprjTeov, TO TOVTOLOVTOV Ae'yeiv /aeV,

1Aeyeiv /xeVrot y.r^lv, dAA'

ôx'x/ / / / i\> ^> >'*_//)/oi;oe Aeyetv <pareov, o? y av

eTrtêtp^ JUT)ov cpuey-

yecrBai ;

EAI. TeAo? yow av aTropias 6 Aoyo? eôt.

238 26. HE. MT^TTCO jLtey* etV^s" ert yap, a)

ecrrt, /cat rawra ye rcov

aTropi&vr)

/catTrpcoTfj. Tcepi yap avTr^v avTOV

TJ]V ap-^-qv ovaa

EAI. Hois' </>T7?; Ae'ye /cat

HE. To; /xev 6Vrt TTOU TrpocryeVotr' ctV rt

OVTOJV

EAI. co? yap ou;

EE. MT^ 6Vrt Se' TL2

TOJV OVTOJV apa TrpoayiyveaOai

1 ^v TI BT ; TL om. Schleiermacher.2

fort &? TI] dv dtnB; fart dt T.

340



THE SOPHIST

THEAET. HOW COllld it ?

STR. And this is plain to us, that we always use

the word"something"

of somebeing,

for to

speakof "something" in the abstract, naked, as it were,

and disconnected from all beings is impossible, is it

not ?

THEAET. Yes, it is.

STR. You assent because you recognize that he

who says something must say some one thing ?

THEAET. Yes.STR. And you will agree that "

something"

or

"some" in the singular is the sign of one, in the

dual of two, and in the plural of many.THEAET. Of course.

STR. And he who says not something, must

quite necessarily say absolutely nothing.

THEAET. Quite necessarily.STR. Then we cannot even concede that such a

person speaks, but says nothing? We must even

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,

my friend, the first and greatest of perplexities. It

affects the very beginning of the matter.

THEAET. What do you mean ? Do not hesitate

to speak.STR. To that which is may be added or attributed

some other thing which is ?

THEAET. Of course.

STR. But shall we assert that to that which is

not anything which is can be attributed ?

341



PLATO

0EAI. Kat 7760?;

EE. 'ApiOfjiov Sr)rov ^VfJiTravra rtov ovrwv

Tt'$e/zei>.

B 0EAI.

EtVep yeKOI d'AAo Tt Bereov a>? 6V.

HE. Mr) TOLVVV fU)S' eVtêtpto/zei' dpi9fjiov

TO IV77/00?

TOpr)

6

EAI. OVKOVV aV opOaJs ye, cu? eoiKev,

pot/xev, a!? (frrjaiv6 Aoyo?.

HE. rico? ow av?}

Sta rou arojLtaro?

aV rt?T)

/catrr^

Siavoi'a TO Trapdrrav Xd/3ot,ra

6Vra r^ TO ju.r)6V ^CU/H? apiOfJiov;

EAI. Aeye Trry;

EE. Mi] 6VTa /xev eVetSav Aeycoftey, apa ou

7Tixeipovfjiv dpidôv TTpocmQeva.1 ;

EAI. Ttfti]v;TVTVÔ/T > *rt T

EE. Mr) ov oe, apa ou TO ev au;

EAI. SaêcrTaTa ye.SE. Kat

/xr)vouVe StVatoy ye ouVe opOov6Tt

EAI. Aeyet? d

SE. Swvoet? ow cu? oi>Ve <f)0y>acr0at, ovvarov

s OUT* ei77eu> ouVe oiavorjOrjvai TO/xr)

6V auTO

^' auTo, aAA' cmv aStavor^Tov T /cat apprjTov

l a<j>9eyKTov /cat aAoyov;

EAI. ITavTdVaat /zev ouv.T) T A -P / / " \/ /

SE. Ap ovvej/feuo-a/zrp apTt Aeycov Tr)y jLteyt-

ryv aTTOpiav epeiv avrov rrepi;

EAI . Toi> Se-1eVt

i^.it,(jjnvd Ae'yetv d'AA^v eô/z-ev;

SE. Tt Se',2

to davfjidaie; OVK eVôet? auTot? Tot?

^ in marg. T;r65e BT

;TO 5e W ;

ri 5 in marg. al. ;

rb 8k (ri 5^) ... ^x ^" attributed to the Stranger byWinckelmann and others.

2ri 5^ B

;ri dal T

;nVa dr/ Winckelmann and others.

342



THE SOPHIST


STR. Now we assume that all number is amongthe 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-

being.

THEAET. We should, apparently, not be right in

undertaking that, as our argument shows.

STR. How then could a man either utter in

speechor 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 we

not attribute plurality to them ?

THEAET.Certainly.

STR. And in saying "a thing which is not/' do

we not 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 rightlyto utter or to say or to think of not-being without

any attribute, but it is a thing inconceivable, inex-

pressible, unspeakable, irrational ?

THEAET. Absolutely.STR. Then was I mistaken just now in saying that

the difficultyI was going to speak of was the greatest

in our subject ?

THEAET. But is there a still greater one that wecan mention ?

STR. Why, my dear fellow, don't you see, by the

343



PLATO

on /cat rov eAeyô^ra ei? OLTTOpiav KaOi-

OTT]CrtTO

fJLr)6V OVTCOS, O)OT, OTTOTCLV OLVTO 7n%l.pfj

Tt? eAeyêty, cvavria avrov aura) Trept e/ceu>o

aVay/caecr#at Ae'yeti';

0EAI. IlaJs1

>s" eiVe ert

EE. OuSev Set TO oa^tarepov cv e/ôt

E eyai jLtev yap VTroOepêvos ovre eV6? ouVe

TOfJLrj

6V detV /zeTeêtv, apTt Te /cat

OUTCO? eV atrro etp^/ca* TO jit17 6V yap

Tot;

EAI. Nat.

EE. KatfjLrjv

av /cat aîKpov fjL7rpoa9ev a^

KTOV Te auTo /cat apprjTOV /cat a'Aoyov e^v etrat.

0EAI. Ewe77O//.at . TTO)? yap

SE. Ou/cow TO ye etVat 7rpocra77Tetv

239 eVavTta Tot? TrpoaOev e'Aeyov;

0EAI. OatVet.

EE. Tt Se'; TOVTO TrpoadiTTajv ofy co? evt SteAe-

0EAI. Nat.

SE. Kat/>t?^v a'Aoyov Te Aeycov /cat apprjTOV /cat

OeyKTOV a>s ye Trpos1 ev TOV Aoyov eTroiovfjirjv.

0EAI. Ilaj? 8* ou;

EE. Oa/zev Se' ye Seti^, etVep opdo)$ ris Ae'êt,

co? eV/xT^Te co? TroAAa Stop/êtv auTO, /x^8e TO

Trapdrrav avro /caAetv evo? yap et'Set /cat /cara

av rrjv Trpoaprjcnv TrpoaayopeuotTO.

EAI. avTaTracrt ye.

344



THE SOPHIST

very arguments we have used, that not-being reduces

him who would refute it to such difficulties that

when he attempts to refute it he is forced to

contradict himself?

THEAET. What do you mean ? Speak still more

clearly.

STR. You must not look for more clearness in me;

for although I maintained that not-being could have

nothing to do with either the singular or the plural

number,I

spokeof it

just now,and am still

speakingof it, as one; for I say "that which is not." You

understand surely ?

THEAET. Yes.

STR. And again a little while ago I said it was

inexpressible, unspeakable, irrational. Do youfollow me ?

THEAET.Yes,

of course.

STR Then when I undertook to attach the verb

"to be" to not-being I was contradicting what I

said before.

THEAET. Evidently.

STR. Well, then;when I attached this verb to it,

did I not address it in the singular ?

THEAET. Yes.STR. And when I called it irrational, inexpressible,

and unspeakable, I addressed my speech to it as

singular.

THEAET. Of course you did.

STR. 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 bythis manner of referring to it one would be giving

it the form of the singular.

THEAET. Certainly.

M 345



PLATO

27. HE. T6v /J,V Toivvve/ze y* eVt ri rt?

1

oV Ae'yot;/cat yap TraAat /cat TO, vw ^TT^/xeVov aV

eupot Trept roy rov /z^ 6Vro? e'Aeyôv. tocrre ev

e/zotye Aeyovrt, Kadarrep ecVroi', fir] O7co77(%tei> rrjvn \ / > < \*/ 'iVfas* s \

opuoAoyiav Trepi TO/XT) ot', aAA eta

*

or)vvv zv crot,

EAI.

HE. "10 Lrjfjilv

V KOL ye^yatco?, are êo? aiv, ort

/zaAtcrra Swacrat cruyretVa? 7TLpdd'r)Ti, fjitjreovcriav

TO V ,rT6 Trros aiJiov TroaTies TO>

OVTL, KCLTOL TO opOov3

(ÔeyâaOaL TL rrepl aurou

C 0EAI. FIoAA^ jLteVr'dV

/xe /cat OLTOTTOS eôt

L CT

auro? eVtêtpot^v.

EE. *AAA' et 8o/<ret, ae /xe^ /cat e/ze âtpetv e'cu/xev

ecu? S* aV Tti^t Suva/xeVa) 3pav TOVTO evTvy^dvcofiev,

T VTOV Aeycojite^ to? Trayros" /xaAAov Travovpytos

(LTTOpOV 6O~Orf)lO~Trj$

TOTTOV KCLTaO6OVKV.

0EAI. KatjLtaAa S^ âtVerat.

HE. Totyapow et rtra</>7]cro/xey

aurov e

D TacrriKrjV Te^vr^v, paoicos e'/c Taurus'

rtovAoycDV avrtAa/x/Sayo/xeyos

1

rjfjiutvetV TOVVCLVTIOV

oL7TOO~TpiJjL4TOU? Aoyous", oray etSojAoTTOtov

dvepujTaJv TL Trore TO rcapdrrav

ovv, >

TOJ veavta Trpo? TO epcoTtofJievov

0EAI. AÂoV OTl(f)-)jaO^V TO, T .V

/cat /caTOTTTpot? ct'StoAa, eVt /cat TO, yeypa/x/xeva

/cat TO. TTV7TO}fJL,pa /cat TaAAa 6'cra TTOU TOtauT* ecr^'

7' I'rt ri TIS] ^^ re ri r/s B ; e/i^ 76 Irt rts T; ^^ ?ri T/

TIS W. 2eta Bessarion's copy ;

a BT.

346'



THE SOPHIST

STR. But poor me, what can anyone say of me

any longer ? 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. But come now, let

us look to you for it.


STR. Come, I beg of you, make a sturdy effort,

young man as you are, and try with might and main

to say something correctly about not-being, withoutattributing to 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 youand me

;but until we find someone who can

accomplish this, let us confess that the sophist hasin most rascally fashion hidden himself in a placewe 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 advantageof our poverty of terms to make a counter attack,

twisting our words to the opposite meaning ; whenwe call him an image-maker, he will ask us what

we mean by "image," exactly. So, Theaetetus, wemust see what reply is to be made to the youngman'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 B ; rbv 6p6bv \byov T.

'ei corr. T; airorpfyei. BTW.

34-7



PLATO

E 28. EE. Oavepo?, c5 0eatVi]Te, eicro(f)i.<JTr]v

0EAI. Tt817;

EE. Ad^et o-ot{Jiveiv 77

TravraTraaiv OVK e

EAI.

EE. T^y arroKpiaiv orav OVTOJS avra> StSaj? eav

ej^ KCiTOTTTpois T] TrAacT/xacrt AeyT]? rt, KarayeAaaerat

crou ra>v Adyojv, orar oj? jSAeVovrt Aeyr^? aura),

240 TTpoarroLoviJLevos oure KaroTrrpa ovre v3ara yiyvai-

(JKIV OVT6 TO TTapdlTOiV OlftlV,TO 8' /<T TtOV Ad

epCDTTjaeioe

(JLOVOV.

EAI. Ilotov;

EE. To Sta Tfdi>TO)v TOVTOJV a TroAAa

xras evi TrpoaeiTrelv OVO^CLTI (frQey^dnevos et'

em Tracriv co? eV 6V. Ae'ye ow /cat a^ivvovOV ai'opa.

EAI. TtOTJTOL,

co ev, et'ScoAov av ^>at^tev efvat

TrA^r ye TOTrpos* raA^^trop' d^co/xotco/zeVov e

TOIOUTOV;

SE. "Erepov 8e Ae'yet? TOLOVTOV d

B TtVi TO TOIOUTOV etTT-e?;

EAI. O^Sa/xcu? dA^^tvdv ye, dAA* eoiKos /LteV.

EE.T

Apa TO aXrfQivov oVrcus1 6V Ae'ycu^;

EAI. OuTCOS".

EE. Tt Se'; TO/x,

1

)) dA7]^tv'6v dp* evavriov aXrjOovs;

EAI. Tt/Ltryv;

EE. Oi5r OVTCOS1 6V

2

d'pa Ae'yet? TO e'ot/cds, et

ye /XT) dA^^tvov e'pet?.

W;

ftvruv B; om. T.

2ov T ;

OVKQV B; OVK '6v W.

348



THE SOPHIST

STR. It is evident, Theaetetus, that you never

saw a sophist.

THEAET.

Why?

STR. He will make you think his eyes are shut

or he has none at all.

THEAET. HOW SO ?

STR. When you give this answer, if you speak of

something in mirrors or works of art, he will laughat your words, when you talk to him as if he

could see. He will feign ignorance of mirrorsand water and of sight altogether, and will question

you only about that which is deduced from yourwords.


STR. That which exists throughout all these thingswhich you say are many but which you saw fit to

call by one name, when you said

"

image

"

of themall, as if they were all one thing. So speakand defend yourself.

Do not give way to the manat all.

THEAET. Why, Stranger, what can we say an

image is, 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 onlyone like the true.

STR. And by the true you mean that which

really is ?

THEAET. Exactly.

STR. And the not true is the opposite of the true ?

THEAET. Of course.

STR. That which is like, then, you say does not

really exist, if you say it is not true.

349



PLATO

0EAI. 'AAA* eort ye IJLTJV77-60? -

1

SE. QVKOVV 2

dXr)9cos ye, </>i7?.

EAI. Ou yap ow* 77A^v y'et/C6oi>

cn>T60?./"v > ix 3 v d " \ v c\ \ /

EE. (JVK ov "

apa*OVTOJS ecrrtv OVTCJS rjv

Ae

CLKOVO. ;

C EAI. Ktv8weuet TOiavrriv riva

TrXoKrjV TOpr)

ov TO) 6Vrt, KCU p,dXa aronov.

SE. 110)? ya/D ov AC OLTOTTOV; opqs yovv cm /cat

StaTT^? eVaAAaêw? ravrrjs 6 7ToXvK6<f)aXos

TOfjir)

ov ov% KovTa$

evai

EAI.'

0/>a> /cat

Tn/o\o' ^ / >rE. 1 1 oe

or); TT)^ Te^vr^v avTOV TLVCL

crvfJL(f)a)i>ivOLOL re ecro/xeâ;

EAI. /cat TO TTOLOV rt (oovevos OVTCO

Ae'yet?;

D SE. "OravTre/ot

TO (âvTaafJia CLVTOV

/cat T^V r^y^v elvat TLVCL dTraTrjTLKrjv CLVTOV,

TOT 7TOTpOV lfjVof) So^d^LV TrjV lfjV)(T]V rjfJLOJV

<f)TJO~OfJtVV7TO

Tf]S 6KELVOV T)(y7)S, ^ Tt 7TOT' 6pOVfJLV ;

0EAI. TOUTO' Tt yap dv dXXo etTrat/zer;

EE.

^YevSrjs

S' av Soâ ecrTat Tava^Tta Tot? ouat

Sofaôucra, r) TTCOS;

EAI. Tdvaima.

SE. Ae'yet? apa TO,/zr)

ovTa 8ofaêtv TT)V

âv;

EAI.

E SE. IloTeov x etvat Ta oi/Ta

TTCOS" etvat TO, /z^Sa/xco? OVTOL;

Hermann; TTWJ; BT (the previous words being given

to the stranger).2

oijKovv W;OVKOVV T

;otf/co/' 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 notreally existing, really does exist ?

THEAET. Not-being does seem to have got into

some such entanglement with being, and it is very

absurd.

SIR. Of course it is absurd. You see, at any rate,

how by this interchange of words the many-headed

sophist has once more forced us against our will toadmit that not-being exists in a way.

THEAET. Yes, I see that very well.

STR. Well then, how can we define his art without

contradicting ourselves ?

THEAET. Why do you say that ? What are youafraid of?

STR. When, in talking about appearance, we say

that he deceives and that his art is an art of decep-

tion, shall we say that our mind is misled by his

art to hold a false opinion, or what shall we say ?

THEAET. We shall say that. What else could we

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 ?


STR. Does it think that things which are not, are

not, or that things which are not at all, in some

sense are ?

3oflK 8z>] OVKOV B J

OVK OVV T.

4&pa Badham ; apa OVK BT.

351



PLATO

EAI. EtWu mo? rdfir)

ovra Set ye, etVep /eu-

rat Trore rt's rt /cat /card fipaxv.

HE. TtS';

ou /catfjirjoafjitos

etvat rd rcdvrajs ovra

0EAI. Nat.

HE. Kat rovroor)

0EAI. Kat rovro.

HE. Kat Aoyo?, ot/xat, i/feuS^? OUTO) /cara raura

241 vofjiicr9ri<Jr(urd re 6Vra Ae'ycov ^,17

eti/at /<rat ra

6Vra efvat.

0EAI. Ila)? yap av d'AAaj?2rotouro? yeVotro;

HE. SêSov ouSa^Lta)?' aAAa ravra 6ao(f)t,crrr}$

ov(f)ijcrL. Tj

ris jLtiâv^ cruyâjpetv rtva raiv ev

(frpovovvraiv ,orav a^êy/cra /<rat apprjra /cat d'Aoya

/cat aStavo^ra TrpoStco^toAoyr^/xeVa3

^ ra77/30

TOUTCUV o/zoAoyT]êVra; âvddvofjiev, d) eatr^re,c\ \ / 4a Aeyet*;

0EAI. ITajs1

yap 01; /zai'^dVo/zei' ort rdyavrta

(frrjacL Aeyetv 7]/i,a? rot? pw Sry, i/jevorj roXfJLijcravras

L7Tiv ct>? <JTiv ev Soâi? re /cat /card Aoyou?; ro)

B ydp /ar)6Vrt rd 6V Trpoaarrreiv ^/xa? TroAAd/ct?

a.vay/caeo-$at, Sto/zoAoyrô-a/xeVoys' vw 8^ TTOU rovro

elvai Trdvrajv dovvarwrarov .

29. HE. 'OpOtos dTrefjLvrjfjLovevaas.dAA* cupa

5

817 fiovXevcracrOai6rt ^17 Spav ro> ooîarov Trepi'

rd? ydp dvriXrjtpeis/cat aTropta?, e'd^ avrdv Ste-

eV r^ rcuv tfjevoovpyajv /catyo7]rcoi> T^XVV

, opas ws evrropoi /cat TroAAat.

1 rai/ra Stobaeus ;ravra ravra B ;

raOra T ; Tai)rd ravra W.2 AXXwy W, Stobaeus ; #XAos BT.3

TrpoSn>}fj.o\oyr)/n^vaT

; irpoa8iwiJ.o\oyr]^va B ;

&8iai>&r)Ta om. Madvig, Schanz, Burnet.

352



THE SOPHIST

THEAET. It must think that things which are not

in 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 which

certainly are, are not at all ?

THEAET. Yes.

STR. And this too is falsehood ?

THEAET. Yes, it is.

STR. And therefore a statement will likewise be

considered false, if it declares that

things

which are,

are not, or that things which are not, are.

THEAET. In what other way could a statement be

made false ?

STR. Virtually in no other way ;but the sophist

will not assent to this. Or how can any reasonable

man assent to it, when the expressions we just agreed

uponwere

previously agreedto be

inexpressible,unspeakable, irrational, and inconceivable? Do weunderstand his meaning, Theaetetus ?

THEAET. Of course we understand that he will saywe are contradicting our recent statements, since wedare to say that falsehood exists in opinions and

words;

for he will say that we are thus forced

repeatedlyto attribute

being to not-being, althoughwe agreed a while ago that nothing could be more

impossible than that.

STR. You are quite right to remind me. But I

think it is 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 guildof false-workers and jugglers.

4Ae'7] \eyeis BT. 6

&pa] Spa BT.6

I3ov\evffa.ffdai T ; f3ov\eue<r0cu B ; om. Burnet.

M 2 353



PLATO

EAI. Kat /xaAa.

HE. Mt/cpov /xe'po? roivvv GLVTOJV

ovaajv to? 7ros elrrelv aTrepavrajv.>AO/ / V I f I/ V \

EAI. AOVVGLTOV y av, eu? eot/cei>, et?7TOP

r^y eAety, et raura ovrco?

HE. Tt ow; o.7TOorT7]<j6fJiOavvv

EAI. QVKOVV iyayye (frrj/ju, Setv, et /cat /card o/u-

otot T* eTnXaljfEaOairrrj ravSpos ecr/xev.

HE. "Eêt? ovv avyyva)fjir]v/cat

KaOaTrepvvv

etW?ayaTTT^crets

1 eav7717

/cat /card^S/jaî) TrapacrTracrco/xeâ

OVTOJS L(T)(vpov Aoyou;

EAI. II a>? yd/o ou^; e^co;

D HE. ToSe roivvv ert /zaAAov Trapatrou^tat ere.

EAI. To 770 toy;

HE. M^ /xe otov TrarpaXoiav VTroXd^rjs ytyve-

crât rtva.

EAI. Tt817;

HE. Tdv rou Trarpos TlapfieviSov Aoyov aVay-Katov

rjfj.lv dpvvofjLVOis ecrrat fiaoavi^tiv ,/cat

TO re fna 6V co? eart /caret rt /cat TO 6

av rrdXiv cos OVK eariTTY).

EAI. OatVerat TO roiovrov 8tajLta^Teov ev rols

Aoyot?.

HE. Heos" yap ou <âtVeTat /cat TO

Sr)TOVTO rv(f)Xa>; TOVTOJV yap

Efjir^re ofJioXoyrjOevraiv crôA^ TTOTC Tt? oto? Te earou

Trept Aoyeov ifsevScov Xeywv TJ S6r]s, etVe et'StoAajv

etVe eLKovcov etrefJLLfjirjfjidra>v

etVe (f)avTacrfjLdra)v

avrwv, r)/cat Trept Te^ra;^ TCO^ 6'crat Trept ravra

fjLrj /caTayeAacrTO? eivcu rd evavrua d

avra> Aeyetv.1

7' fi^ Burnet; 7dp BT ; dp' W ; âp d^ al.

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 wordsimply, 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.


STR. Do not assume that I am becoming a sort

of parricide.


STR. In defending myself I shall have to test the

theory of my father Parmenides, and contend forciblythat 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.

STR. Yes, plain even to a blind man, as they say ;

for unless these 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.

355



PLATO

EAI .

'

AXrjOearaTa .

242 HE - Ata TOLVTCL fievTOi ToX[JirjTov

TO) TrarpLKO) Aoyoj vvv, 7} TO TrapaTrav eareov, et

TOVTO TLS etpyet opdv OKVOS.

EAI. 'AAA'rjjJias

TOVTO ye

HE. TpiTOV roivvv ert ere o~{iu<p6v rt

crojLtat.

0EAI. AeyeEE. Et770J^ 77OU VVV

O7) Ae'yCOV

CO?77/90?

TOV7T6pl

raur* eAeyôv det re aTreiprjKajs e'yto ryyâvcu /<:at

ST)/cat ra vuv.

EAI. EtTie?.

HE. Oo/3ouyit,at ST^TO,

et/o^fteVa, JU,T]Trore Sta raura

crot jJLOLViKoseivai $6aj irapa. 77080,

B /jiavTov aVco /cat /carco.cri]v yap 17 X LPiV e'Ae'

O^ Aoyov .TfiOrâ6i.ieQcL y eavirep eAey^co/xev.

EAI. 'O? roivvv efjioiye /jirjSaiJifj So^cov

,aV eVt rov e'Aeyôv TOUTOP' /cat

tT]?, OappaJv WL TOVTOV ye eVe/ca.

30. EE. Oepe 817,rtVa a/o^^ Tts

1 av ap

irapaKivovvevTiKov Xoyov; So/cai /xev yap T7]^8 , a>

Trat, T^VoSop'

aây/catOTari]^ 7]//,tvetvat

EAI. OotavST^;

EE. Ta So/cowra vuv eVapya)? eêtv

C TrpajTov, fir) Trrj rera/oay/xeVot /Ltev c5ftev

raura, paoia>$ S' dAAÂots* oftoAoyco/xev to? ev

EAI. Ae'ye aaêaTepov o

EE. Eu/coAa)? ftot So/cet Hap/j,VLOr)s rjfJLLVStet-

/cat vra? ocrrts1

TrcuTrore e?7t Kpiaiv

1/U^P w /

aei' W; fj^vufMfv BT.

356



<*

THE SOPHIST

^THEAET. Very true.

STR. And so we must take courage and attack our

father's theory here and now, or else, if any scruples

prevent us from doing this, we must give the whole

thing up.

THEAET. But nothing in the world must prevent us.

STR. Then I have a third little request to makeof you.

THEAET. You have only to utter it.

STR. I said a while ago that I always have beentoo faint-hearted for the refutation of this theory,

and 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

reversed my position. You see it is for your sake

that I am going to undertake the refutation, if I

succeed in it.

THEAET. I certainly shall not think you are doing

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

perilous argument ? Ah, my boy, I believe the waywe 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 con-

fusion about them and may therefore carelessly agreewith one another, thinking that we are judging

correctly.

THEAET. Express your meaning moreclearly.

STR. It seems to me that Parmenides and all who

ever undertook a critical definition of the number

3.57



PLATO

rov TO, ovra. Stopicracr$at Trocra re KCLL TTOIOL

eoriv.

EAI. IT^;

EE. Mvdov TWO, e'/caoTO? (j>aivTat (JLOL St^yetcrflat

TTCLLVW a>? ovacvr)p<iv,

6 /zey a>s rpia rd ovra,

TToAe/Zet Se dAAÂot? VLOT CLVTOJV CtTTttTTrj ,

TOT6

D Kol(fjiXa yiyvo^fvo. ya/zous

1 re KO! TOKOVS KOI

rpo(f)as ra>v eKyovaiv TT-apeêrat* $vo Se erepo?

CLTTtov, vypov KOL rjpov rj Qepjjiov/cat i^v^po

IY >\ ^'o'C1 ^c>ôt/ctêt re aura /cat e/cotoa>crr TO oe Trap

EAeart/cov 6vos, aVo êvoâvovs re /cat ert

dp^dfjievov, a>? evo? OVTOS TOJV

OVTCU Steêpêrat rots' [ivOois.

Se /cat St/ceAat' rtve?

varepov

Mouaatvvvor)crav

2

E ort avfjLTT\Kiv doâXearcLTov d/xôrepa /cat

' \\ \\/ \r/5 >'/1 O\ <

cos* TO ov 7TO/\Aa T /cat ev eCTTtv, e^c/pa oe /cat

crweêTat. Staêpo/xeôv yap det ^v/jLêperai, <f)aaiv

at ovvTovwTpai ra>v M.ov(ja>v at Se jitaAa/ccoTepat

TO p:ev det ravra OVTCDS eêtv e^dXacrav, evjLtepet

Se

TOTep:ei^

e^ etvatâcrt

TO Trav /cat (>i\ov viS'A<^po-

243 StV^s", TOTe Se TroAAd /cat TroAe/xtor auTO avra) Std

yet/cos Tt. ravra Se Trdvra et :ev dA7^cD? Tt?

TOUTCO^ etp^/ce, âAe?7ov /catTT-A^^/êAe?

OUTCO

dXa /cAetvot? /cat TraAatot? dvSpdawe/cetvo Se dv7Ti<f>Qovov d7T

0EAI. To TTOLOV;

EE. "OTt AtW TCOV 7roAAah>

al. Eusebius ; r//xcDi' BTW.2

j-vvvb't}<ja.v T, Eusebius, Simplicius ; %vvvevor)Ka.<riv B.

358



THE SOPHIST

and nature of realities have talked to us rather

carelessly.

THEAET. HOW SO ?

STR. Every one of them seems to tell us a story,

as if we were children. One says there are three

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

togetherand unites

in marriage.1 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

one. 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

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

reason of some sort of strife. Now whether any ofthem spoke the truth in all this, or not, it is harsh

and improper to impute to famous men of old such

a great wrong as falsehood. But one assertion can

be made without offence.


STR. That they paid too little attention and con-

1 This refers apparently to Pherecydes and the early

lonians.2 Heracleitus and his followers.

3Empedocles and his disciples.

359



PLATO

ovoev yap (f)povri<javTS etr*

aKoXovOovfJiev avTols Xeyovcriv etVe a77oAei77o/ze#a,

B Trepaivovcri TO aêrepov avTwv e/caorot,

EAI. Hois' Xeyeis;

E. "Orav Tt? avTaJv (f)9eyr)Tai Xeycav a>? ecmv/ / \ \ \ i\

5\/ \

1] yeyovev i] yiyverai TToAAa77

evi] ovo, /cat

au ifjvxpa) ovyKepavvvfjievov, aXXoOi7777

/cat avyKpioeis vrroriOeis, TOVTOJV, a) 0eatT7^re,

e/cacrrore au rt Trpos Oecov ^vvirjs 6 TL \eyovcriv ; eyaj

fjiev yap ore /xev 17^ vecorepo?, TOVTO re TO vw

GLTTOpOVfJieVOVO77OT6 Tt? CtTTOt, TO

JU-T^ 6V, d/CptÔJ?

a)[j,r)Vvvievai. vvv Be opas Iv eaêv avrov

wept,

rfjs

0EAI.

EE. Taâ roivvv tcrcos" ow^; rJTrov Kara TO ov

ravrov TOVTO rrddos zlXrjfioTes evTTJ ^XT) ^^P^

fjievTOVTO evTTOpeiv <f)ajjiv

/cat[jiai'Odveiv oiroTav TIS

avTO (frOey^TaL, rrepl Se Odrtpov ov, rrpos d

EAI.

EE. Kat rrepl TOJV aXXtovSrj

TOJV

TavTOV TOVTO

EAI. Tldvv ye.

31. EE. Ta>vIJLZV

TOIVVV TroXXajvTrepi /cat

D jLteTaTOVTO

CTKeifjo/jLeO* ,av

&6gr), rrepl 8e TOU

T /cat dp^riyov rrpcoTOV vvv ovce77Te.

EAI. TtVos* $r) Aeyet?; 77 SÂov 6Vt TO 6V

ocw Stepeuy^cracjât Tt TfoQ* ol

O SrjXovv

360



THE SOPHIST

sideration 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.


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

things ? I used to think, when I was younger, that

I understood perfectly whenever anyone used this

term "not-being," which now perplexes us. But

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 not-

being, 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, doyou mean that we must first investigate the term

"being," and see what those who use it think it

signifies ?

361



PLATO

HE. Kara irooa1

ye, c5 eair^re,

Ae'ya> yap Srj ravrrj oelv 7roteto-#at

rjfjids, olov avTO)v Trapovraiv dva7TVv9avofJLevovsc58e*

<f>pc,oTroaoL 0p/j,ov /cat i/jv^pov TJ

rive Suo

TOLOVTOJ TO, TTOLVT* elvac <f)ar, rt 77ore apa TOVT

E a/xôtv (frOeyyeaOe, Xeyovres ap>(f>a)Kal eKa

eivaL; ri TO etvat rovro VTroXafiajfJiev u/itaJv; irorepov

Tpirov Trapa ra Svo e/cetva, /cat rpta TO Trap aAAa,

eVt A<ra^'vjjids riOwfjiev ; ov yap rrov rov ye

8volv KoXovvTts Oarepov ov afJLôTepa o/xotaj? elvai

A/< \ \i\5i'/ tr '\\>>O/

eycTe* aêoov yap av a[A(poT6pa>s ev, aA/\ ov ovo" 2

eiT-^vr

EAI. 'AXrjdfj Aeyet?.

EE. 'AAA' apa TO, a/zô) fiovXeoOe KaXelv ov;

0EAI. "Icrtos".

244 HE. 'AAA', c5 <f>iXoi, <f>r)o~o[.iV, Kav OVTOJ ra Svo\ ' * 3 w J ' "

AeyotT av ffaipearara ev.

0EAI. 'QpOoraraHE. Tret- ToLvvv

^/zets" rjTTOpTJKafiev, vfiels avra

LKavaJs TL TTOTC fiovXeoOe

onorav ov (frOeyyTjoOe. orjXov yap cos

ravra vraAatytyytocr/ceTe, rjfJieis

Se77p6

TOU

coo/jueOa, vvv 8* ^7rop^KafJiv. StSacr/ceTe ouv

TOVT' avTO ^/xa?, tva/x^ oo^d^cop.ev âvQdveiv fj,v

TOL Xey6fJLva Trap* vfjiojv,TO Se TOVTOV yiyvr^Tai TTO.V

B TOvvavTLOV. TavTaSrj 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 (emend.) W; Tro\\d B pr. T.2

ei'r^ W ;d TV BT.

3Xôir'] XôtTo B ; X^yere T ; X<?yer' W.

362



THE SOPHIST

STR. You have caught ray meaning at once,

Theaetetus. For I certainly do mean that this is

the bestmethod

for us touse, by questioning

them

directly, as if they were present in person ;so here

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 shallwe 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 themtogether 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. You are perfectly right.

STR. Then since we are in perplexity, do you tell

us plainly what you wish to designate when you say

"being." For it is clear that you have known this

all along, whereas we formerly thought we knew,but are now perplexed. So first give us this informa-

tion, 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 all who say that the universe is more than

one, shall we, my boy, be doing anything improper ?

1 " In both cases," i.e. whether you say that one only is

or that both are, they would both be one, namely being.

363



PLATO

EAI. ''UKLard ye.

32. HE. Tt oe; rrapa TWV ev TO TTOV AeyoV-

TCJV a/)' ov TTevcrTeov el? SuVa/Atv Tt TTOTC Xeyovcn TOV

ov;

EAI. ITco? yap ou;

HE. ToSe TOLVVV aTTOKpiveoQtov}- ev TTOV (f>aT

IJLOVOV etvat; (fxzjjiev yap, ôovaiv. rj yap;EAI. Nat.

EE. Tt 5e; 6V KaXelre TI;

EAI. Nat.

C HE. HoTpOV O7Tp V,

77t TO) aUTOJ

ovoiv ovofjiaaiv, r) TTOJS;

EAI. Tts1 ow aurots" ^ jLtera, TOUT', c5

EE. AÂov, a> OeatV^Te, OTt TO) Tavrrjv Trjv vrro-

Oecriv VTTodefJLeva) Trpos TO vvv epajTrjOev KOLI rrpos

aAAo oe OTLOVV ov TrdvTOJv pacrTOV aTTOKpivaadcLi.

EAI. rico?;

SE. To Te SuoOVO/JLCLTCL ofjioXoyclv etvat firjoev

depevov TrXrjveV KaTayeXaaTov TTOV.

EAI. Da)? 8' ou;

SE. Kat TOTTapdTTav ye arrooexeaOai

TOV z

D XeyovTos ws eaTiv ovofnd Tt, Aoyov OVK av eôv.

EAI. 11^;

HE. Ttêt? T TOVVO^CL TOVTTpdyfJLCLTOS TpOV

Aeyet 7701) Ttiê.

EAI. Nat.

EE. KatfjLrjv

av TavTov ye avTO)TiOfj

Simplicius ; a-n-oKpLvfodwo-av BTW.2 TOU Hermann

;TOV BT.

364



THE SOPHIST

THEAET. Not in the least.

STR. Well then, must we not, so far as we can,

tryto learn from those who

say

that the universe is

one l what they mean when they say"being

"?

THEAET. Of course we must.

STR. Then let them answer this question : Do

you say that one only is ? We do, they will say ;

will they not ?

THEAET. Yes.

STR.Well then,

doyou give

the name ofbeing

to anything ?

THEAET. Yes.

STR. Is it what you call"one," using two names

for the same thing, or how is this ?

THEAET. What is their next answer, Stranger ?

STR. It is plain, Theaetetus, that he who maintains

their theory will not find it the easiest thingin

the world to reply to our present question or to anyother.

THEAET. Why not ?

STR. It is rather ridiculous to assert that two

names exist when you assert that nothing exists but

unity.

THEAET. Of course it is.

STR. And in general there would be no sense

in accepting the statement that a name has any

existence.

THEAET. Why ?

STR. Because he who asserts that the name is

other than the thing, says that there are two

entities.

THEAET. Yes.

STR. And further, if he asserts that the name is

1 The Eleatic Zeno and his school.

365



PLATO

7} jj,r]$v6$ ovofjia dvayKacrOâeTaL Aeyea>, el 8e TWOS

avTO(f)TJaL, ovfjifiijaeTai.

TO 6Vo/za oVo/xaTO? 6Vo/za/ " \ \ O v o > *f

[Jiovov,

aAAov oe ovozvos ov.

0EAI.T7- \\W f \ V * 1 ^ ^

HE. Kat TO ev ye, evos* ovo/xa 01^J

/cat TOU/ T > Q J/

OVOfJLOLTOS av TO V OV.

0EAI.'

rp / o / > /\ W ^ V \ MHE. It oe; TO oAov erepov rov ovro? evo? 19

rau-

rov(f>7JaovaL TOVTCO;

E EAI. IlaJ? yap 01)^>7^croucrt re /<rat

HE. Et Toivvv o\ov e'crrtV, cocrTrepfeat

Ae'yet,

VKVK\OVcrcfxiiprjs

4z

taoTraAes1

Trdvrrj'TO yap ovre rt

our TI

jSatorepovTieAeVat

xpeoveart

r/y ^

TOIOVTOV ye TOfjieorov TC /cat eoâTa

TauTa Se e'ôf Trdaa avay/ci) ju,t-p^ eêtv 77TT

EAI. OUTO)?.

245 EE. 'AAAajLt7)v

TO ye ^te/êptor/xeVov TrdOos

TOU evo? ^'xe/-v ^7T' rots' /xe'pecrt

TTO.GIV ov

veL, /cat TCLVTTT) ST) Tiav Te 6V /cat 6'Aov eV etvat.T1 ' C*5 *'

0EAI . 1 1 o ou ;

EE. To 8e 7TTTOvBoS TaVTOL OLD* OVK aOVVCLTOV

ye TO ev auTo etât;

EAI.

^

Apelt;

? fly /x6'oi' B ; 8v ^6^0^ T.2

rot) BW ;roOro T.

3 a5 TO Schleiermacher ; airrd BTW.4

ff(f>alpr]s Siraplicius ; ff(patpa$ BT.

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


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 cer-

tainly 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 ?

1 In other words, "one," considered as a word, will be

the name ofunity,

but considered as areality,

it will be the

unity of which the word " one "is the name. The sentence

is made somewhat difficult of comprehension, doubtless for

the purpose of indicating the confusion caused by the identi-

fication of the name with the thing.

367



PLATO

EE. 'A{jLpes OTJTTOV Set TravrcXajs TO ye aXr]Oa)S

v Kara TOV opBov \6yov elprjaOai.

EAI. Aet yap ovv.

HE. To Se ye TOLOVTOV e/c TroXXcov fJL^pojv ov ou

ov{JL(j)a>VTJcrLTO* Aoyo).

1

EAI . MavOdva) .

TT / 0\ //) / < xsf< f/

EE. llorepov OT) TTCLUOS e^oy TO oi> rou evo? ou-

TCO? eV re earai KCLL o\ov, rjTTavraTraai

fj.rj> j/ o

TO ov *

EAI. aeTT TrpoerjKas aipecnv.

EE. 'AA^^ecrTaTa yLteWot Aeyet?. rr7rov96? re yapTO 6V IV etvat TTOJ?, ow TawTov 6V TO) eVt

3

/cat irXeovaSrj

ra rravra evos earai.

EAI. Nat.TT" \\/ \1\-5> \ W\ ON ^

SE. J\at/ZT)V

eav ye TO ovrj /_tr)

oAoi^ ota TO

Cn/ \ f > > /

//jT <j > * x w\

TTtTTOi'uevai TO U77 e/cetp'ou rrauo?, rj oe avro TO oAov,

TO 6V eavTOV

EAI. avu ye.

SE. Kat AcaTa TOUTOVorj

TOV \6yov eavTOV

fjievovOVK 6V eCTTat TO 6V.

EAI. QvTOJS.

EE.

Kat eVd? ye avTiAetco TO,

TfdvTa yiyveTai, TOVT OVTOS /<:at TOW 6'Aou %ajpis iSiav eKasrepov (j)vaiv

EAI. Nat.

SE. MT^ OVTOS oe ye TO rrapaTrav TOV 6'Aou,

T TavTa VTrpxei TO> OVTI /cat77/369

TO)JUT)

efvat

D /u-^S'aV yeveadai TTOT 6V.

1ra> X67y Simplicius (codd. EF) ; ry 6Xy \6yy B

; ry6A<> T, Simpl. (cod. D).

2&> Schleierraacher

;6'Xo^ BT.

3(fraveirai 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.

STR. That is very true;

for being, having in a

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. Tt17;

HE. To yevofJLevov aet yeyovev oXov t5crre ovr

ovaiav ovre yeveaiv ajs ovcrav Set Trpocrayopeueo'

TO oXov 1 eV rots' oucrtfj,r)

riOevra.

EAI. TlavTaTTaoiv eot/ce ravO* ourco? eêtv.

HE. Kat[J,r}v

owS* OTTOCTOVOVV rt Set TOJU-T)

6'Aov

TTOCTOV Tt yap 6V, oTroaov avT)>

TOCTOVTOV o\ov

avro 2eivai.

EAI. o/xt ye.

HE. Kat roivvv aAAa fjLVpia aVepdWous1

E eKaarovetAT]<ôs

>

âretTat TO> TO 6V etVe Suo

etVe ev [j,6vov elvai \eyovri.

0EAI. AÂot o-êSot'A<rat TO, vw VTr

yap erepov e aXXov, /êt^co /cat

<j>epov rrepl rcov efJLTrpocrOevaet

33- EE. Tou? /xev roivvv

OVTOS re TTepi KG!firj TrdvTCis

3jLtev

ou

ofjiois Se iKava>s eêVw TOU? Se aAAco? Xeyovra?

av Oeareov, lv CK TTOLVTOJV et'8a>/xev 6Vt TO 6V TOU

246 OVTOS ovoev evrropcorepov etVetv o Tt TTOT' eo-riv.

EAI. OUKOW TTOpeveaOai %pr) /cat eVt

HE. Kat jLt^ 6OLK6 ye eV auTot? otov

jua^t'a Tt? etvat StaTT)V dft^tcr/^TTycrtv Trept

ovaias Trpos dXXtjXovs.

EAI.

1 r6 6\oi> Bekker ; r6 ^*)r6 6'Xoi/ BT.

2 auro W, Simplicius; om. BT.8 Travras Eusebius ; Trd/'u BT.,

370



THE SOPHIST


STR. That which comes into existence always

comes into existence as a whole. Therefore no onewho 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

involving infinite difficulties, will confront him

who says that being is, whether it be two or

only one.

THEAET. The problems now in sight make that

pretty clear ; for each leads up to another which

brings greater and more grievous wandering in

connexion with whatever has previously been said.

STH. Now we have not discussed all those whotreat 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 knowfrom all sources that it is no easier to define the

nature of being than that of not-being.THEAET. Very well, then, we must proceed towards

those others also.

STR. And indeed there seems to be a battle like

that of the gods and the giants going on amongthem, because of their

disagreement

about existence.

THEAET. HOW SO ?

1 The Ionic philosophers, the Eleatics, Heracleitus, Era-

pedocles, the Megarians, Gorgias, Protagoras, and Anti-

sthenes all discussed the problem of being and not-being.

371



PLATO

HE. 01fjii> els yr\v

e ovpavov /cat rov aopdrov

irdvra e'A/coucrt, rat? "êpalv are^co? rrerpa? /cat

7repiAa/Lt/3dVovTes' . ra>v yap roiovrajv e</>a7rro-

rrdvrO>V SttCTÛpt'ÔVTat rOVrO elvCLl fJLOVOV O

7rpocrf3oAr)V/cat eVa^Tyv rtva, TOLVTOV cra/xa

B\ >/ f^/ '^s^^ v^^ >// /-i

/cat ovoiav optô/.terot, TOJV oe aAAcov et rt? rt1

</>T]<7et

2

jLti) craj/.ta eôv etrat, Kara^povovvres TO

Trapd-rrav /cat ouSev eêAovre? a'AAo aKOveiv.

0EAI.TH Setvous' etp^/ca? aVSpas" 17817 yap /cat

o TOUTCOV av^voXs

EE. Totyapow ot Trpo? aurou?

Xa evXafiais dvcudev e^ aopdrov iroQev d

vorjrd arra /cat dawâra e'iorj f3ia,6fjL6Voi

ovaiav eivai' rd Se eKeivaiv aaJ^tara /cat

VTT avrajv d\TJ0Lav Kara afjuKpd

oiaOpavovres ev rot? Aoyot? yeVecrtv avr' oucrta?

<f>epo[JiVY]Vnvd ITpoo-ayopevovaw. ev

fJLecra)Se 77ept

ravra aTrAero? dôrepajv /Lta^r^ rts", c5 Qeairrjre, del

EAI.

HE. Ila/)' dfJL(f)olvroivvv rolv ycvolv Kara ficpos

Aa/3a>/zev Aoyov i5rre/3 T^?ridevrai

rfjs ovaias.

EAI. ITccI? ow 817 Xinfjo^JieOa;

EE.Ilapa /xev

TOJV eV et8eatv

avrty1

TI al.;om. BT.

2077<m B, Eusebius ; ^wt T.

372



THE SOPHIST

STR. Some of them 1

drag down everything fromheaven and the invisible to earth, actually graspingrocks 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 ofwhom you speak.

I myself have met with many of them.

STR. Therefore those who contend against themdefend themselves very cautiously with weaponsderived from the invisible world above, maintaining

forcibly that real existence consists of certain ideas

which are only conceived by the mind and have nobody. But the bodies of their opponents, and that

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 tremendousbattle 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 theyregard as being.

THEAET. How shall we get it ?

STR. It is comparatively easy to get it from those

The atomists (Leucippus, Democritus, and their fol-

lowers), who taught that nothing exists except atoms andthe void. Possibly there is a covert reference to Aristippuswho was, like Plato, a pupil of Socrates.

378



PLATO

paov rj[jipa)Tpoi yap' Trapd 8e TOJV el?

D TrdvTa eXifovrajv fiiq âAemoTepov, ICTCD? 8e /cat

dSuvaroi/. aAA' aJoe yuot Sea> So/cet

EAI.

HE. MaAtcrraJJLZV,

eiTrrj

&UVCLTOVrjv, pyu> /8eA-

TLOVS OLVTOVS TTOICLV i TOVTO{JLTj ey^CO/066,

Aoya) 7TOia>iJLi>, VTTOTLdejJievoi voîifJLCJTepov avrovs

r)vvv edeXovras av aTTOKpLvaaOai. TO yap o/xoAo-

ev Trapa fieXriovaiv TTOV Kvpiwrepov r)TO Trapa

ou TOVTOJV (f>povriôfjLVtdAAa

es77TO 7x6v.

E EAI. 'Qpdorara.

34- HE. KeAeue 877 TOU? fieXrcovsi aot, /cat TO \e\0ev Trap* avrcijv dfiep-

0EAI.

EE. AeyovTcoy 87) Qvr\Tov ,a>ov et <j>aaivzlvai TL.

EAI. ria)? 8' ou;

EE. TOUTO Se ou crtDjLta e/z^fuôy ojJLoXoyovcrw ;

EAI. Ildj'i; yc.

EE. TtêVTes" rt TCOV OVTOJV

247 EAI. Nat.

EE. Tt Se; ifrvxrjvov rrjv [Jiev oiKaiav, rr/v S<?

O.SLKOV (f>acnv efi/at, /cat TTJV fjiev (j>p6vifjLOV t rrjv 8e

a<f>pova;

EAI. Ttju-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-ful folk

;but from those who violently drag down

everythinginto

matter,it is more

difficult, perhapseven 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

better, if it were in any way possible ;but if this

cannot be done, let us pretend that they are better,

by assuming that they would be willing to answermore in accordance with the rules of dialectic than

they actually are. For the acknowledgement of

anything by better men is more valid than if made

by worse men. But it is not these men that we

care about;we merely seek the truth.

THEAET. Quite right.

STR. Now tell them, assuming that they havebecome 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 asoul in it, do they not ?

THEAET. Certainly.

STR. Giving to soul a place among things which

exist ?

THEAET. Yes.

STR. Well then, do they not say that one soul is

just and another unjust, one wise and another foolish ?

THEAET. Of course.

STR. And do they not say that each soul becomes

just by the possession and presence of justice, and

375



PLATO

avrr^v avrtov eKaarrjv yiyvzaOai, /cat roji' cvavricuv

rrjr zvavriav ;

0EAI. Nat, KCL\ ravrav[L(f>acriv.

HE. 'AAAa[JLrjv

TO ye Svvarov rco1

rrapayiyveudai

/cat arroyiyveadaL rravrcos efvat rt<f>ijaovcnv.

EAI. Oaatfj..v

ovv.

B EE. OucrTys"ovv SiKOLLoavvrjs /cat (f>povrjaU)s

/cat

rrjs d'AA^? dperrjs /cat raw lvavrLa)v y /cat817

/cat

evfj

ravra zyyiyverai, rrorepov oparov /cat

V eivai (f>aoi rt aurcov r) rravra aoparaÊAI. SêSov ouSev rovra)v ye oparov.

EE. Tt Se TOJV roiovrcov; (JLOJV crcDyaa ri Xeyovcnv

EAI. Tovro OVKCTL Kara ravra 2

drroKpivovrai

aVy aAAa r^v ^Ltev i/JV^v avrrjv So/cetv cr^tcrt oaj/Jid

rt

KKrf}<j9ai, (frpovrjCTiv

oe /cat ra)v a'AAcov e/cacrrov

(oy rjptorrjKas, alcr^vvovrai TO roXfJidv ^ fJLrjoevrtov

C ovro)v avra o/xoAoyetv ^ rtavr* elvai

SE. Saô)? yap r}[JLWtc5 eatV^Te,

/ TO 9 \ / ^ >' W

yeyovacrtv avopes errzi rovraiv ovo av i

"eiev ot ye avra>v vrraproi r /cat auTO-

:, aAAa StaretVot^T' av rrdv o ftr) SuvaTOt Tat?

Tte'êtv etcrtV, ai? apa rovro ovoev TO Trapa-

?rav ecrTtV.

EAI. SêSov ota biavoovvrai Ae'yet?.

EE. ITaAtv roivvv dvepwrtofjiev avrovs' t yap/cat a^JLLKpov eOeXovai ra>v 6vra>v avyxatpelv daa)-

1 TV] rep BT ;TO W.

2

rai)ra] rd ai;rd W;raOra BT.

3

d^Spes Bekker; fij/Spej BT.

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, orthat they are all invisible ?

THEAET. That none of them is visible, or pretty

nearly that.

STR. Now here are some other questions. Dothey say they possess any body ?

THEAET. They no longer answer the whole of that

question in the same way. They say they believethe 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

teethl

among them would not shrink from any suchutterance

; they would maintain that nothing which

they cannot squeeze with their hands has any exist-

ence at all.

THEAET. That is pretty nearly what they believe.

STR. Then let us question them further;

for if

they are willing to admit that any existence, no

1 This refers to the story of Cadmus, who killed a dragonand then sowed its teeth, from which sprang fierce warriors

to be his companions. Born of the dragon's teeth and of

earth, they would naturally be of the earth, earthy.

N 377



PLATO

D [LOLTOV, âpK6L. TO ya/D 6771 T TOVTOL? ttUtt /Cat

eV cKeivoLS ocra e'êt cr%ta û/xûes* yeyoô'?, et$- o

pAeTTOvres a/xôrepa etyat Aeyoucrt, TOVTO avrols

priTeov. TO.^ ovv LGOJS ay dTiopotey ecS?y

rt

roLovrov TreirovQaai, cr/coTvet, Trporeu-'O/xeVcuv

apy

eOeXoiev av Seêcrât /cat o/xoAoyetv

TO 6i;.

EAI. To TTolov oij; Aeye, KCU raâ ela6fJL0a.

EE. Aeyco ST) ro /cat OTTOLCWQVV riva KKrr]/jtevov

Suva/xtv etr' ets1 1 TO TTOICIV erepov OTLOVV

E etV ei? TO TraOeiv /cat cr/xt/cpoTaroi-'VTTO TOU

AOTCITOU, /cav et [LOVOV els aVaf .,Tray TOVTO

klva.i' T/$e/xat yap opov optêty Ta ovTa, co? eariv

OUK aAAo Tt TT-A^v ovvafjLis.

EAI. 'AAA' eTietTiep avToi ye ou/c eôvaLV ev ra>

TTapovri TQVTOV fi4\Tiov Aeyetf , oeôvTaL TOVTO.

HE. KaAa)?' tcrcDS yap ay et? vaTepov TUJLLVre

/cat TOVTOLS eVepoy ay<f>avirj. Trpos fjiev

ovv TOVTOVS

248 TOVTO7]/xty

eWau#a ^teyeVcu Î'yo/.toAoy^ê'y.

EAI. MeVet.

35. HE. ITpo? S'*)TOL>? eVe'pou? tcoêy, TOU?

et8o)y (f>iAov$'orv S'

7)//-ty/cat TO, Trapa

EAI. TOUT' e'cmu.

HE. Fe'yecrty, T?)ySe ovaiav ^copt? TTOU SteAd/xeyot

Afe'yeTe

>* "^ yc^P*1

el'r' efc W ;er rts BT.

1i.., between the process of coming into existence and

existence itself. It is difficult to determine exactly who the

idealists are whose doctrines are here discussed. Possibly

378



THE SOPHIST

matter how small, is incorporeal, that is enough.

They will then have to tell 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

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 changein anything of any nature or to be affected even in

the least degree by the slightest cause, though it

be

only

on one occasion, has real existence. For I

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 own to offer, they acceptthis.

STR. Good;for perhaps later something else may

occur both to them and to us. As between them

and us, then, let us assume that this is for the present

agreed upon and settled.

THEAET. It is settled.

STR. Then let us go to the others, the friends of

ideas;and do you interpret for us their doctrines

also.

THEAET. I will.

STR. You distinguish in your speech between

generation and being, do you not ?l

Plato is restating or amending some of his own earlier

beliefs.

379



PLATO

EAI. Nat.

HE. Kat crwfjiaTi ftef rjfjids yeveaei 81* al<j9r)GO)S

Koivaivtlv, Std Aoytoyzou 8e $vxfl ^po? TTJV ovrwsovaiav, fjv

aet Kara ravra tbaaiiTcos ^X iv are >

yevzuw Se d'AAore aXXcus-

B 0EAI. Oa/>tev yap ovv.

HE. To SeS?) KOLvajveiv, a> TTOLVTCOV cLpiaroi, ri

*

VfJLa?eV

dfjufioiv \iiyeiv (frajfjiev; ap' ov TO vvv5f

?ra/)0EAI. To

HE. YldO'ijfxa r) Trot^/xa er SiW/zetas1

rtvo?

raivTrpos" aAAÂa ^vviovrcov yiyvo^vov. rdx* ovv,

co Seairrjre, avrajv rrjv Trpos raura aTTOKpiaiv ov

fjiev ov KaraKoveLS, eyoj O tcrco? 8ta ovvr^Qeiav.

EAI. TtV ovv8^7 \eyovo~i \6yov;

C EE. Oi) avyxajpovaiv T^LIV TO vvv 817 prjdev TTQOS

TOVS yr]yevels ovaias Tre'pt.

EAI. To Tfolov;

HE. 'I/cavov eOe/Jiev opov TTOV TOJV OVTCJV, OTCLV TCO

Trapfj r)TOV Tracrêtv r) Bpdv /cat

Trpos"TO

0EAI. Nat.HE. Upos or)

raura ro8e \lyovo~iv, OTI yzveoei

fJLTOTL TOVTfO-OyjElV

KCL\ 7TOL6LV OVvd{JLCOS, TTpOS

8e oucrtW TOVTOJV ovSeTepov TJ\V $VVCL}JLW ap/xdrretv

EAI. QVKOVV Xeyov&i TL;

HE. IT/DOS' o ye XCKTGOVTJ/JLLV

ort Sed^Lteâ Trap'

D aura>v ert TrvBeoOai aa<f>OTpov el Trpoao/jioXo

yovai T-TJV /JLCV ifjv)(r)v yiyvaiaKeiv, TTJV 8' ovcriav

380



THE SOPHIST

THEAET. Yes, we do.

STR. And you say that with the body, by means

of perception, we participate in generation, and withthe soul, by means of thought, we participate in

real being, which last is always unchanged and the

same, whereas generation is different at different

times.

THEAET. Yes, that is what wesay.

STR. But, most excellent men, how shall we define

this participation which you attribute to both ? Is

it not that of which we were just speaking ?


STR. A passive or active condition arising out of

some 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. What is it, then, that they say ?

STR. They do not concede to us what we said justnow to the aboriginal giants about being.

THEAET. What was it ?

STR. We set up as a satisfactory sort of definition

of being, the

presence

of the

power

to act or be

acted upon in even the slightest degree.THEAET. Yes.

STR. It is in reply to this that they say generation

participates in the power of acting and of beingacted upon, but that neither power is connected with

being.

THEAET. And is there notsomething

in that ?

STR. Yes, 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.

381



PLATO

0EAI. Oa<7t[Jirjv

TOVTO ye.

HE. Tt Se; TO yiyvt*HJKW rjro

<f>a.T TTOLrjfjia r)rrdOos

rj dufiorepov; T) TO fj,ev

TrdOrjfjLa,TO Se Odrepov; TJ

TravrdfTaaiv ovSerepov

ovêrepov rovrcuv {JLeraXafjipdvew ;

0EAI. AÂoi' ai? ouSeVepoi' ovSerepov

yap av TOI? efjirrpocrdev Aeyoiev.1

HE. Mai>0avar ro8e ye,2

c6? TO

E L7rep eWat rroielv Tt, TO ytyvtocr/co/êt'ov dvayKalovav ûpfiaivei Trao-êtv. TT)V

ovatav S^ /caTa

rovrovytyvcocrACOû-eVryv

UTTO T^S*

oorov ytyvtoovceTcu, /caTa roaovrov

Sta TO 7rdax LV) o ^ <j>a<H-V

OVK dv yevevQai

TO rjpfJLOVV.

0EAI.

HE. Tt 8e TT/JO? Ato?; to? aA^^cDs1

Kivf]<JivKal

^wrjv Kal ifjv)(r)VKal

<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) êVe, Aoyoy

fJiV.

HE. 'AAAa ya

0EAI. Kat 770)?;

HE. 'AAAa ravra juev dfi(f)6rpa evovr* avrw

Ae'yojitev,ou /x^ eV ^v^f] ye (f>ijao/jiV

avro ^

avrd;

EAI. Kat TtV aV eVepov e'ôt rpoTrov;

/catE. 'AAAa 8^Ta yow jLtei'/cat

. . . \ty<nev first attributed to Theaetetus byHeindorf.

2 r65e 7e] r6 5^ 7e T;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.

STR. I understand;

this at least is true, that if

to know is active, to be known must in turn be

passive.Now being, since it is, according to this

theory, known by the intelligence, in so far as it

is known, is moved, since it is acted upon, which

we say cannot be the case with that which is in a

state of rest.

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

shockingadmission to

make, Stranger.

STR. But shall we say that it has mind, but

not life ?

THEAET. How can we ?

STR. 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 how else can it possess them ?

STR. Then shall we say that it has mind and

383



PLATO

,

l

OLKLVrjTOV fJLVTOi TO TTapOLTTaV fJufiV)(OVOV

eCTToVat;

EAI. Hdvra e/xotye d'Aoya ravr* etvat 4>aiverai.

EE. Kat TO KLVovfjievov or)/cat

KIVTJCTIV auy^tup^-/ c

Teov cos ovra.

EAI. Do)? 8* ov;

SE. Eu/^atWt 8* ovv, Jj 0eatV^Te, aKivrJTWV TC

OVTCOV vovv/X7]8e^t rrepi jjirjoevos

eivai

0EAI.

HE. KatJU,T)V

eav av </>epo/zeva /cat

/cat rovra) ra> Aoya

rovro e'/c ra>^ ovra>v

0EAI.

HE. To /card raurd /cat ajcravrcos /cat Trept TO

So/cet o*ot^aj/ots

1

CTTacreco? yevecrOai, rror* av;

EAI. Oi58a/xas'.

HE. Tt 8'; dVeu TOUTCOV vow Kadopas ovra.rj

vo^vov av /cat OTTOVOVV;

0EAI. "H/CtCTTa.

HE. Katfjirjv rrpos ye rovrov rravrl Aoya>

av eVtCTTTu.T <)6vr(nv T vovv

icr%vpir)Tai rrepi rivos orrrjovv.

0EAI. lL(f)6opa ye.

EE. To) 8^ ^>tAocro^>a) /cat ravra fJiaXiara

Tracra, cus

1

COLKCV, avdyKt]Std ravra

fjLijrercuv

ev

rj/cat Ta TroAAd

e't'Sry AeyovTCOV TO nav iarr\KOs

oiTTOoexecrOai, rwv re av Travra^f] TO ov KLVOVVTOJV1

tx l" add. Schleiermacher.

384



THE SOPHIST

life and soul, but, although endowed with soul, is

absolutely immovable ?

THEAET. All those things seem to me absurd.STR. And it must be conceded that motion and that

which is moved exist.

THEAET. Of course.

STR. Then the result is, Theaetetus, that if there

is no motion, there is no mind in anyone about

anything anywhere.

THEAET. Exactly.STR. And on the other hand, if we admit that all

things are in flux and motion, we shall remove minditself 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 ?

THEAET. By no means.

STR. And yet we certainly must contend by every

argument against him who does away with knowledgeor reason or mind and then makes any dogmaticassertion about anything.

THEAET.Certainly.

STR. Then the philosopher, who pays the highesthonour 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 unityor in many forms, and must also refuse utterly to

listen to those who say that being is universal

N 2 385



PLATO

6 TO rfapdnav aKovew, aXXa Kara TTJVTOJV

TTGLLoaiv ev^^v, oaa aKivr^ra /cat /ce/ctKxy/xeVa,TO 6v

re /cat TO TraV ^vvafKJiOTepa Aeyetv.

EAI. 'AA^êCTrara.

36. EE. Tt ovv ; ap' OVK 7niKaJs TJor)

fJLe9a Trepii\r}<l)VCLiTOJ Aoyaj ro 6V;

EAI. Hdw }JLV OVV.

HE. Ba/?at jiteW av apa, a> 0eatT?]Te, cos"

8oKovjjLv vvv CLVTOV yvaxjeoOai Trepl Trjv aTropiav

T7S

E 0EAI. Ha)? au /cat rt TOUT'

EE.Tn /â/capte, oi)/c ivvoels 6Vt

dyvota TT] TfXeiarr^ 7Tpl O.VTOV, (j>aLv6fjLe9aSe Tt

Aeyetv ^/xtt' avTOt?;0EAI. 'E/xot yovv oirr)

S' au XeXrjdafJLev OVTOJS

ov rrdvv

EE. 2/C07761ST) aa(f>6(JTpOV, L TCLVTCL VVV

250 ofJioXoyovvTes Stfcatcos" av eTrepcuT^êt/iev

a?;TOt TOTe r]pajTa)[jLV TOVS XeyovTas ivat, TO TTO.V

OepfJiov /cat ifjv%p6v.

EAI. Ilota; VTrofj^vrjcrov fji.

EE. riavu/>tev

ouv /cat Tretpaao/ât ye Spav

TOVTO, IptoTujv ere /caâvrep e/cetVou? ToVe, tâ

Tt /Cat

EAI.

SE. Etev 8^, KIVTI<JIV/cat aTacriv ap* oi)/c evav-

TtcoTaTa Aeyet? a

EAI. IIcD? yap ou;

386



THE SOPHIST

motion;he must quote the children's prayer,

1 "all

things immovable and in motion/' and must say that

beingand the universe consist of both.

THEAET. Very true.

STR. Do we not, then, seem to have attained at

last a pretty good definition of being ?

THEAET. Certainly.

STR. But dear me, Theaetetus ! I think we are

now going to discover the difficulty of the inquiry

aboutbeing.

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

THEAET. What questions ? Remind me.

STR. Certainly ;and I will try to do this by

questioning you, as we questioned them at the time. 1

hope we shall at the same time make a little progress.THEAET. That is right.

STR. Very well, then; you say that motion and

rest are most directly opposed to each other, do

you not ?

THEAET. Of course.

1

Nothingfurther 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 el'?;,

"may all unmoved

things be moved."2

Of. 242 D above.

387



PLATO

HE. Katfirjv

elvai ye 6p,oia)s <f>f]S dfJLôrepa aura

/cat KaTpov;

B EAI. Oi7/ut yap ovv.

HE.T

Apa KivelaOai Ae'yeov d/xôrepa /cat e/cdVepoi',

orav etvat <jvy%a)pr}s ;

EAI. OvSajLtcus".

HE. 'AAA' ecrraât cr^jLtatVets1

Aeya>v aura d/

re/oa etvat;

EAI. KatTTO)S;

HE. Tpirov apa n Trapa ravra TO ov cvrfl

, co? iW e/cetVouTrî/

re crracrtv /cat

, CFV\Xaf3a>v /cat aVtStuy avrwv npos rr\v

rrjs ovaias KOivwviav, OVTOJS etvat TrpocreiTres

C EAI. t^Syvewo/êv cos1

dA^âjs1

rplrov O.TTO-

[j,avTvecrOaL TI TO ov, OTO.V /ctVâtv /cat crrdatv etiât

HE. Ou/cct/oa /ctVrycrtS'

/cat crrdcrts' ecrrt

aôTepov TO ov, dAA' erepov ST^rt TOifrtuv.

EAI. "Eot/cev.

HE. Kara r^v CLVTOV(fivaiv apa TO ov oz/re

OVT

EAI.

HE. Hot817 ^PT) TT]v

Stdvotar ert rpeVetv

f3ovX6fj,Vov evapyeV ri ?7ept aurou Trap' eaurco

EAI. Dot yap;HE. Ot)u.at jLtev ovSa/jLoore Irt paoiov. el yap TL

D 7T6U? OU^ 6(TT^/CV; TO

ecrros" Trtos- ov/c au /ctvetrat; TO 6V

^TCO^dfj,(f>oTpa)V ava7T(f)avTai. y SvvaTOV ovv

rovTo ;

388



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 youmean 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, youconsider to be

somethingelse 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. Eh ?

THEAET. We really do seem to have a vague vision

ofbeing

as

somethird

thing, when we saythat

motion and rest are.

STR. Then being is not motion and rest in com-

bination, but something else, different from them.

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 ?

STR. There is nothing left, I think, to which he

can turn easily. 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

being has emerged outside of both these classes. Is

that possible, then ?

389



o

PLATO

EAI. Ildvrcov Liev ovv dovvarwrarov .

HE. ToSf rolvvv Livrjadrjvai OIKOLIOV CTTL rourot?.

EAI. T6 TTOloV;

HE. "On rovLir)

ovros epairrjOevres Tovvofta e</'

Tt TTore Set (frepeiv, Trdar) avveaôêda

EAI. ITa;? yap ov;

HE. Ma>v ovv eV eAarrovt rtvt vuvecr/zev anropia

E\\ V

Trept

TO ov;

EAI. 'Ejitot jtteV,to êW, et Sfvarov etVetv, ev

TrAetoi-'t (fxiLvoiieOa.

HE. Touro /zev roLvvv evrav9a KeiadatSirjTTOpir)-

/ 0.\C;\>>>/ / 1\ \\\1\5fJLVOV 776t07]

OG ^ ICTOU TO T6 OI-' /Cat TOjUT)

O/^ ttTTO -

ptas" jueTetAâTOi', yw eATrt? 7]S^ /ca^' arrep av

auTcop ddrepov ctVe dfAvftpoTepov etrc crafiecrTepov

dvoL(j)a,Lvr)Tai, KCLL ddrepov ovrtos dvoKpaLveaOaL' KOI

251 eav au fjirjêrepovt'Setv SvvwjjieOa, rov yovv \oyov

oTrrjTrepdv oloi re d)fjiv ^VTTp^TTearara. Stcocrojueâ

OUTOJS1

d[JL(j)OiV afJLCL.

EAI. KaAcD?.

HE. Aeyto/zey 81]/ca^' ovnvd TTOTC rpoTrov TroAAot?

ovojitacrtTauTov TOVTO CKaarore

Trpoaayopevoêv.EAI. Otov S^ Tt; -rra/oaSety/xa etVe.

37 HE. Aeyo/xev dvdpuiTTOV OTJTTOV 77oAA' aTTa

eTTOVOfJidôvres, rd re xpcbfjiara 7n(f)povrs aura)

KCLI TO, or^/jLara KCLLfAeyetfr}

/cat /ca/cta? /cat dperds,

B ev ot? 7rao"t /cat erepoL? [J.vp{ois ov iôvov dvBpcoirov>\ f f t '^^ x <'/i< \ /

avrov eivai (pajjiev,aAAa KCLI ayauov /cat ercpa

a7Tipa, /cat TciAAa 817 /caTa TOV ayToV Aoyoi' ovrco?

ev eKaarov UTrofle^tei'ot TraAtv 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. What is it ?

STR. That when we were asked to what the

appellation of not-being should be applied, we were

in the greatest perplexity. Do you remember ?

THEAET. Of course I do.

STR. Well, then, are we now in any less perplexity

about being ?

THEAET. It seems to me, stranger, that we are, if

possible,in even greater.

STR. This point, then, let us put down definitely

as one of complete perplexity. But since being and

not-being participate equally in the perplexity, there

is now at last some hope that as either of them

emerges more dimly or more clearly, so also will theother emerge. If, however, we are able to see

neither of them, we will at any rate push our discussion

through between both of them at once as creditably

as we can.

THEAET. Good.

STR. Let us, then, explain how we come to be

constantly calling this same thing by many names.THEAET. What, for instance ? Please give an

example.STR. We speak of man, you know, and give him

many additional designations ;we attribute to him

colours and forms and sixes and vices and virtues,

and in all these cases and countless others we say

not only that he is man, but we say he is good andnumberless 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. 'AXr)9rj Ae'yet?.

HE. "QQev ye, oljj.a.1, Tot9 re veois /cat rcuv yepov-

ra>v rot? oi/rtfta$ecrt Qo'ivr\v TrapecrKevaKa/jiev evOvs

yap aVTtAa/3ea#at Travri Trpoxetpov to? dSvvaTOV ra

re 77oAAa eV /cat TO ev TroAAa eTvat, /cat877

TTOU

XaLpovcriv OVK eVovTe.? ayaôt' Aeyetv av9pa>7rov}

C aAAa TO /zev dyaôy 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 ra roiavra rcdav/jiaKocn, /cat

TI /cat 7rdcrcro(f)ov oto/xeVot? TOVTO avro dvqvprjKevai.

0EAI. Ilavi;jitev

ow.

EE. "Iva TOLWV Trpos aTravra? iû.ti'o Aoyo? ^

Tous1

7TO)7TOT rrpl oucrta? /cat oTiovv StaAeêVTa?,

D COTOJ /catTT/OOS" TOUTOU? /cat

77/309 TOW? aAAov?,

ocrot? efJLTrpocrdev StetAey/xeâ, Ta ^w a*? ej^ e

0EAI. Ta TTOta

HE. IloTepov ju/j^Te T-^V ovcriav/cti^cret

/cat

aAAo aAAaj xSey jLSevt dAA'

cu? jJLLKra ovra /cat

Acov ovrcos avrd ev Tot? Trap' 77/xtv Aoyot?

^ Trdvra ets1 Ta^Toy vvdyo){JiV a)$ Sward eT

vajvelv dXXrjXois; ^ rdfJiev,

rd 8efjiifj ; rovrwv, cS

392



THE SOPHIST

THEAET. True.

STR. And it is in this way, I fancy, that we have

provided a fine feast for youngsters and for old menwhose 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 pleasurein 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

questions.

THEAET. What are the arguments ?

STII. Shall 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

1 Those are here satirized who deny the possibility of all

except identical predication. Such were Antisthenes,

Euthydemus, and Dionysodorus. The two last are prob-

ably those referred to as old men whose learning came late

in life.

393



PLATO

E eaiTr)T, TI TTOT' aV avrovs 77poatpetcr$at (f)ij

EAI. 'EtO Zl> 757763 CLVTCOV OV<!)V IO) 7TOO?

TGLvra

HE. Tt ow ou /ca$' eV aVo/c/otyo/zei'o? e</>'eKacrrov

ra

EAI.

HE. Kaf.TtîOjiteV ye OLVTOVS Aeyetv, et fiov\i,

et? /x^SeV. oi)/cowKivvjcrls

re ACCU crracris

rov ovcrias;

252 EAI. Ou yap oir.

HE. Tt 8e'; ecrrat irorepov avrajv ovaia.? ftry rrpoa-

KOLVOJVOVV3;

EAI. Ot)/< ecrrat.

HE. Tcrî) 17 ravrrj ye TT^ crup-o/xoAoyta TTOLVTCL

avdarara yiyovzv, a>? .oiKV, afjia re rcuv TO Trai^

KIVOVVTOJV /cat rcov a>? eV icrTOLvrajv /cat ocrot /car'

TO, 6Wa /cara rai'ra cbcravrtjos eôvra etvat

aer TTOVTCS yap OVTOL TO ye efmt Tvpocr-

, olfjii' ovTcos /ctyetcrât Ae'yo^res', ot Se

EAI. Ko//,t3^ jLtev

B HE. Kat/xi]v

/cat ocrot rore /ze^ ^WTiBeaari ra

Trdvra, rore Se Statpouatv, etre et? ev /cat e' evo?

a,7TLpa etre et? Tre'pa? eôvra aroiêta 8tatpoi;aevoi

/cat eV rovrajv avvriQzvres, o/xota9 /xev e'ctv evjLte'pet

TOUTO ndaxji yiyv6[i.vov, o/zotco? Se /cat eay act,

1Tt otiv . . . ftricei/'w; attributed to the Stranger by

Badham.2/caXws \tyeis attributed to Theaetetus by Badham.

3irpoffKOivuvovv W ; TrpoffKOLvuvdv BT.

394



THE SOPHIST

alternatives, Theaetetus, should we say is their

choice ?

THEAET. I cannot answer these questions for them.

STR. Then why did you not answer each separately

and see wrhat the result was in each case ?

THEAET. A good suggestion.

STR. And let us, if you please, assume that they

say first that nothing has any power to combine with

anything else. Then motion and rest will have noshare 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 all existing things are distributed into

invariable and everlasting kinds. For all of these

make use of

beingas an attribute. One

party saysthat the universe "

is"in motion, another that it

"is"

at rest.

THEAET. Exactly.

STR. And further, all who teach that things com-

bine at one time and separate at another, whether

infinite elements combine in unity and are derived

from unity or finite elements separate and then

unite, regardless of whether they say that these

changes take place successively or without interrup-

395



PLATO

Kara iravra ravra Xeyoizv av ovSev, etWpcart

0EAI.

HE. "En TOLVVV av avrol Trdvrtov /caTayeAacrro-

rara ^rioiev* rov Aoyov oi

firjêv etovres KOLVOJVLO.

Tra^yLtaro? erepov Odrepov Trpocrayopevcw.

C @EAI. Da)?;

HE. Ta> re"elvai

"TTOL' 77ep6 Travra avay/caôvrat

> ^ c< x " * - ct ~Kat TOJ cot? /cat rco rav

TO)tc

A<ra^' ai'ro'

/cat fivpiois Tpot,st

ovres c'ipyeaQai /cat/r?]

crvvaTTTeiv eV rot?

Aoyot? OZ'AC aAAcov Seo^rat ro)v eêAeyôvrcui', aAAa

TO Aeyo/xevov oiKoOev ror 77oAe/

u,to^ /cat e

cro/xeiôv eôvTe?, euros' VTrofiOeyyofJLevov cjcnrep rov

aronov FjVpvi<Aca Trepifiepovres det

D EAI. KojLtt7J! Aeyet? OJJLOIOV re KOI dEE. Tt S', aV Trdvra aAAÂot? e'cD/zev

S

0EAI. Touro /zev otos1 re /cdyco StaAuetv.

EE. Ila)?;

0EAI. "OrtActV^crts

1 re 3aT^rii)

77-avraTracrtv to-ratr*

/cat crrdcns av TrdXivavrr) KWOITO, eiTrep eVtyt-eV

EE. 'AAAa ^v TOUTO ye TTOU rat? jLteytcrratS" aVdy-

/ctV^crtV re loraaBai /cat ardcriv

EAI. Hois' yap ow;

EE. To rpirov $r) JJLOVOV XOLTTOV.

EAI. Nat.

1

ûer/otez'] fJierioLêv BTW.2

TWJ/ fiXXw^ B;#\Xwj> T.

8re] 7e BTW.

396



THE SOPHIST

tion, would be talking nonsense in all these doctrines,

if there is no intermingling.


STR. Then, too, the very men who forbid us to

call anything by another name because it partici-

pates 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-

thing to use the expressions " to be/' " apart/'"from

the rest/' "by itself/' and countless others; they

are powerless to keep away from them or avoid

working them into their discourse;and therefore

there is no need of others to refute them, but, as

the saying goes, their enemy and future opponentis 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.

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

impossible, that motion be at rest and rest be in

motion ?

THEAET. Of course.

STR. Then only the third possibility is left.

THEAET. Yes.

1

Eurycles was a ventriloquist and soothsayer of the

fifth century, cf. Aristophanes, Wasps, 1019.

397



PLATO

E 38. HE. Kat prjr eV ye'rt TOVTWV avay-

rrdvrar) /zrjSev ?}

rd /tev eWAety, rd, Se

0EAI. eus yap oi>;

EE. Katjar)v

ra ye St'o a8uvarov evpeOrj.

EAI. Nat. 1

HE. Has- a/aa o flovXoêvos opO&s a

TO XoiTTCV TO)V TplOJl'

EAI. Ko/xtS^ ftev

HE. "Ore Si) ra /xev eWAet TOWTO Spat', ra'

ov,

253 O"Xe^^y ofov ra ypa/^^tara TrcrrovOor avirj.

KO.L

yap Kiva)v rat

aev avap/jLOGTcl TTOV TTpos a'AAÂa,

TO, Se ûrap/torret.

EAI. Tla)? S' ou;

HE. Ta Se ye ^covê^ra Staêpovra)? TO>^ aAAwv

otov Secr/xo? Sta Travrcoi-' K'eâ/3i7/<:ev, ojcrre ctVeu rivo?t' apfjiorreiv KCLI TOJV aAAcov erepov

EAI. Kat /xaAa ye.

HE. ITa? ovv otSet^ oTrota oTrotot? Sward KOLVOJ-

vc.lv} 7} rexvrjs Set ra) [jLcXXovri Spa^ LKCLVOJS aura;

EAI. Texi'^S".

HE. IIota.9;

EAI. Try? ypOLfJifJLCLTlK'YJS.

HE. Tt Se; Trept rou? rdiv oetov KOL

B (f>96yyov$ ap' ou^ OVTOJS; 6 êv rovs

[Jievovs re /cat/>tr) re^vr^v e

o Se/XT) ûrtet? CL/JLOVOOS:

EAI. Oura)?.

Heindorf; evpeOijvai BT ; fvpeOfyai'

398



THE SOPHIST

STR. And certainly one of these three must be

true;either all things will mingle with one another,

or none will do so, or some will and others willnot.

THEAET. Of course.

STR. 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.

STR. Now since some things will commingle and

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. Of course.

STR. And the vowels, 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

join with which others ? Or does he who is to join

them properly have need of art ?

THEAET. He has need of art.

STR. What art ?

THEAET. The art of grammar.STR. And is 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 un-

musical ?

THEAET. Yes.

399



PLATO

HE. Kat Kara ra>v dXXajvBr) rzyy&v Kal

roiavra evptjao/jiev erepa.TT <?> "

0EAI.11

a;?o

ov ;rp / o. > > o. \ \ \ / * " i ~\ "i

v

HE. 1 t o ; CTTZib-rj/cat ra yevr] rrpos aAArjAa Kara

ravra ftiêtos eêtv ca/zoAoyr)/<:a/x^, a/j'ou /zer

TCMOJ avayKalov Sta ra)v Aoycov Tropzve-

rov 6p9a>s /XffAAovra Setêtv m>ta TTOLOIS

vel TOJV j'va)i> Kal TTola aAAÂa ou Seêrat;\ O \ \ O \ / > / V >

'

f 9 1

C KCCI01)

-^ctt ota TTCLVTOIV et avv.)(ovT arr avr

e&TLV, ware uvîyvvoQcLi Svvara eivai, Kal TraXiv

cv rat? Statpecrecrtv, el (H* 6'Acov erepa TTJS' 3tatpe-

crectJS' atrta;

0EAI. Hco? yap OUK eVto-TT]/^^? Set, /cat crêSov

yc tcrco? r^s" fteytcrr?]?;

39. HE. TtV ouv au 7rpo(Tpov[jLV, aj 0eat-

rr)T, ravr^v; r) TTpos Ato? eXaBofiev et? TT^V TCOVv e/^Trecrcrres eTTLGTTJfJLrjV,

Kal KLvSvvevouev

TTporepov aviqvpriKevcLirov

EAI.

D HE. To /card yeVry 8iatpetcrât /cat ft^Te raurov

efSo? erepov rjyijaaaOai. ^re erepov ov ravrov fjLo>v

ovrfjs SiaXeKTLKrjs (frtjcrofjiev eTncrr'rju'r]? etât;

EAI. Nat, (f)tj(JOfJLV.

HE. QVKOVV 6 ye rovro Sui/aro? Spav fjîavtoeav

Std TioAAcuF, evo? t<darov KCIUCVOV ^coptV, rravrrj

Starera/zeV^v t'/cavco? Stataâverat, /cat TroAAd?

erepa? aAAÂcov ^770 ftta? ea)6ev TrepiexuiJLevas,

/cat jittW au Si' 6'Aojv 77oAAa>i' ev eVt ^W7]/i/>tn7^, /cat

'

Wagner ; (rvj>tx l'Ta TCLVT' BTW.

400



THE SOPHIST

STR. And we shall find similar conditions, then,

in all the other arts and processes which are devoid

of art ?

THEAET. Of course.

STR. Now 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 possesssome science and proceed by the processes of reason

who is to show correctly which of the classes

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.

STR. Then, Theaetetus, what name shall we giveto this science ? Or, by Zeus, have we unwittinglystumbled upon the science that belongs to free menand perhaps found the philosopher while we were

looking for the sophist ?


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, belongsto 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 many401



PLATO

E TToXXas ^copt? Trdvrr} StojpioyzeVas" TOUTO S* eartv,

re Koivcovelv e/cacrra Swarat /cat07777 [Atj,

Kara yevos IrrioraaBai.

0EAI. YlaVTCLTTaOl fJLV OVV .

HE. 'AAAdfjirjv

TO ye OLaXeKTiKOV OVK aXXco Sa>-

rjvra> Kadapaj$ re KO.L St/catco?

EAI. TIco?

yapav aAAa)

SOIT^ rt?;EE. Tov

jLtet* 7} <{)iX6cro(f)OVev TOLOVTOJ nvl TOTTOJ

/cat vvv /cat eVetradvi>pri<jo[jLi>,

cav

254 /êv âAevrov eVapytD? /cat rovrov, erepov

rjr rov cro^torou âXeTrorrjs r\

re TOUTOU.

EAI. Ha;?;

EE. '0 ftev aVoSiSpacr/ctoi' et? TT)V rou /XT) ovros

cr/coretFOT^ra, Tpi-flf} irpoaaTTTOfjievos avrrjs, Sid TO

cr/coretro/'' ro> TOTTOU Karavofjcrcn, âAeTros"

EAI. "Eot/cev.

EE. '0 Se ye <^>tAo<7O<ôs>

, rr]row ovros aet

Trpocr/cetyLteôs' t'Sea, Sid TO XafjiTrpov av rrjs

V7Trrjs o&OrjvaL' TO. yap

B TroAAojv fax?)? o'/ûaTa /capTepeiv vrpo? TO

opcovTa dSwaTa.

EAI. Kat ravra ei/co? 02)^ rjTrov e/ceiVay ovrcos

EE. Ou/cowTrepi /zev

rovrov /cat

Taâ eVia/cei/ro

a aaêWepov, dv ert /ôuAo/zeVois1

7]

Se TO o-o<>tcrTou 7701; SrAov co? ou/c

402

O.VTOV



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 oneanother.

THEAET. Certainly it is.

STR. But you surely, I suppose, will not grant the

art of dialectic to any but the man who pursues

philosophy in purity and righteousness.

THEAET. How could it be granted to anyone else ?

STR. Then it is in some region like this that weshall 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

case and that of the sophist.

THEAET. How do they differ?

STR. The 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

the place.Don't you think so ?

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 investiga-

tions 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 satis-

factory view of him.

1

By practice, i.e., by empirical knowledge as opposed to

reason.

403



PLATO

9EAI. KaAoj? 1776? .

40. EE. "Or* ovv$r)

ra/zei> i),uti>

ra)v

AovT^rat Koivajvelv eOeXew dAAÂot?, TO, 8e ^77, /cat\

'

\ >*/ \o>\ \ "\' ^^^ * ^

ra /ze^ err oAtyov, ra o errt TroAAa, ra oe /cat ota

C TT&VTOJV OV^kv ACOjAueil' TOt? 7TaCT6 KKOlVa)Vr)KVai,

TO817 /zero, TOITO vve77L(J7Tco/.JLda

TO) Aoya> r;^Se

(TKO7TOVVT6S , JJLr) TTpl TTOVTUiV TOJV et'ScOJ', tVttjJ,rj

a Iv TroAAct?, dAAa77/30eAo/xei'ot

Aeyo/zeVa>v arra, TTpaJrov /zef

e/cacrra ecrrtv, eVecra Koivtovias aXAtjXajv TTCOS"

tâ TO re 6V /cat ti 6V et

8vvdfJLe9a Aa^Set^, aAA' ouv Aoyou ye

6'croi/ 6"

apaD irapeLxdQr)

1 TOfjir)

6V Aeyoucrtv c6? GOTIV oVrco?

6V aOtoois aTraAAarretv.EAI. Ou/cow XP7

?-

HE. Meytcrra jLt^Prcov yevajv, a p'Ov

Sry

TO T 6V awTO /cat CTTacrt? /cat

EAI. IloAu ye.

HE. Kat ja^v Tea ye 8uo â/xep1 CLVTOLV

OL/JLLKTCD

77/36? dAAÂo).0EAI. 2</>o8pa ye.

HE. To Se' ye 6V [JLLKTOV dfjL<f>OLVIGTOV yap

7TOV.f-f ~ C>> V

0EAI. Ha)? o ou;

HE. Tpta ST; ytyveTat TavTa.

EAI. Ttftr^v;

EE. Ow/cow avTcop e/cacrToy TOtv /aev 8uoa' Tpov,avTo 8' eauTai TatVoV.

1

TrapeiKadrj Boeckh; TrapetKaffdfj BT.

404



THE SOPHIST


STR. Since, therefore, we are agreed that some of

the classes will mingle with one another, and otherswill 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 amongso many, but some only, selecting them from those

that are considered the most important ; let us first

consider their several natures, then what their powerof 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. Let us in this way see whether it is,

after all, permitted us to say that not-being really

is, although not being, and yet come off unscathed.

THEAET. Yes;that is the proper thing for us

to do.

STR. The most important, surely, of the classes or

genera are those which we just mentioned; being

itself and rest and motion.

THEAET. Yes, by far.

STR. And further, two of them, we say, cannot

mingle with each other.

THEAET. Decidedly not.

STR. But being can mingle with both of them,for they both are.

THEAET. Of course.

STR. Then these prove to be three.

THEAET. To be sure.

STR. Each of them is, then, other than the remain-

ing two, but the same as itself.

405



PLATO

E 0EAI. QvTCDS.

HE. Tt 77or' av vvv OVTCOS etpr^/ca/zev TO re TavTov

/cat Odrcpov ; Trorepa ovo yevr) rive avTO),1

TCOV uev

rpiujv aXXco, ^vfJiULyvvueva) \^v CKCWOLS e dvdyKt]<s

aet, KOI Trepl Trevre aAA' ovrrepl rpicov 0*9 OVTOJV

avT&v cr/ceTrreor, r)TO re TavToi' TOVTO KOL Oarcpov

255 co? eKeivajv TL Trpoaayopevoi'T'Es Aa

CLVTOVS;

0EAI. "Icrco?.

>A\\>/\ / / \ / tint

HE. AAA ou TL jLrv/ctvâts

1

ye /cat crraCTts" oucr

OVT TOLVTOV

EAI.

HE. "OrtTrep avKOivfl 7rpocret77a>/.Aev /ctV^CTtv

/cat

,TOVTO ovoeTepov avTolv olov re elvai.

0EAI. Tt

HE. KtV)](TtV re crr^CTerat /cat crracri? aucrerat'

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.

HE.

Mereêrov /z^v ap-fitoTOLVTOU /cat

OaTcpov.EAI. Nat.

HE. M/} TOIVVV Ae'yco/xev /ctVâtV y' etvat ra^Tov

17 6a.Tpov, ftTyS'av crracrtv.

EAI. MT] yap.JAN-VJT < \\ >\ t tt &

aE. AAA apa ro ov /cat TO TCLVTOV cos ev rt ota-

0EAI.

HE. 'AAA' et TO oV /cat TO TauTov /z/^Sev Staf/>opov

crr)fjiaiVTov, Kivrjo-iv av TrdXiv /cat

1

awrw] auroO B;ayroO T.

40b'



THE SOPHIST

THEAET. YeS.

STR. But what do we mean by these words, "the

same" and "other/

1

which we have just used?Are they two newr

classes, different from the other

three, but always of necessity mingled with them,and must we conduct our inquiry on the assumptionthat there are five classes, not three, or are we un-

consciously speaking of one of those three when we

say" the same

"or

" other"

?

THEAET. Perhaps.STR. But certainly motion and rest are neither

other nor the same.

THEAET. How SO ?

STR. Whatever term we apply to rest and motion

in common cannot 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 which-

ever of the two became "other" would force the

other to change its nature into that of its opposite,

since it would participate in its opposite.

THEAET. Exactly so.

STR. Both certainly partake of the same and the

other. 1

THEAET. Yes.

STR. Then we must not say that motion, or rest

either, is the same or other.

THEAET. No.

STR. But should we conceive of "being

"and " the

same"

as one ?

THEAET. Perhaps.

STR. But if"being

"and " the same

"have no

difference of meaning, then when we go on and say1

i.e., sameness and difference can be predicated of both.

4-07



PLATO

clvai XeyovTes d/xôrepa OVTOJS aura TCLVTOV cos

C OVTCL TTpOCrepOV/jieV.

0EAI. 'AAAd fjirjv TOVTO ye O&VVCLTOV .

EE. 'ASwaTOV apa TCLVTOV /cat TO 6V ev efvat.

0EAI. S^fSdV.EE. Teraprov Srj rrpos rot? rpiuiv 6tSecrt

1 TO

raurov

EAI. ITavu

SE. Ti 8e; TO

Odrepovapa

?y//tv

XeKreov TT^JLTTTOV;* s

\1\fC>/V >/ 5/>f\17TOVTO KCLL TO Ol' CDS OV aTTtt OVO^lCLTa (f)

VL

OiavoeLcrOai oei;/ 5 >/

0EAI.

EE. 'AAA' otaat cr crwyxtopelv TOJV OVTOJV TO,'

CLVTOL, TOL Se vrpos1

ct'AAa2aei Aeyeaât.

T/o>> >/

to ou;

EE. To 3' f.Tepov del 77/>o? 6Tpov ^ yap ;

0EAI. OyTCO?./-\ > >/ >/ \ ->\ \ >

/}/

SE. UJJK ap', et ye TO ov KO.L TO uarepovO.AA' GL7Tp OciTCpOV

Totv elooiv a)O"rrepTO 6v, r\v

av '/TOTC TL KCLL

TO)V TpO)V TpOV OV TTpOS .TpOV VVV Sc ClTe^CU?

r/fJili't OTLTrepav

crepov fj, crvj.if3J3r)i<i' e^ a.vdyKi]sT<OOV TOVTO O7Tp lo'TU' civOLl.

EAI. Aeyets* KaOdrrcp eêt.

EE. [Te)u,77TOf or} T^V OaTepov (frvaivXZKTCOV ev

E TOI? etSeo-tv ovcrav, ev ols TrpoaipovfJieOa.

EAI. Na6.

EE. Kat Sta rrdvTCov ye avTrjv CLVTUJV(f)TJo~o[jLV

SieXrjXvdvLav ev eKacrTOV yap eTepov eivai,

1et'5e<rt BT

;e'ioecnv eldos W.

TW ; 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 for one class ?

THEAET. May be.

STR. But I fancy you admit that among the

entities some are always conceived as absolute, and

some as relative.

THEAET. Of course.

STR. 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. The facts are as you say.

STR. Then we must place the nature of "the

other"

as a fifth

amongthe classes in which we

select our examples.THEAET. Yes.

STR. And we shall say that it permeates them all;

for each of them is other than the rest, not by reason

o 409



PLATO

/* w\\ > ^ * ' ~ J ' *\\ ^SJ

r *

ra>v aAAojv ov otarrjv

avrov (pvoiv, aAAa ota TO

fjL6TXiv rrjs iSe'a? rfjs Oarcpov.

EAI.l\ojJiLofl yLte^

out*.

41. HE.rHe

S-)] Aeyto/zev e'm rwv TreVre

eV avaAa/ i

EAI. I

HE. npalro^ (

aevKIVYJCTIV, ws ecrrt Travrdrracriv

Tpov (jTaaeojs.77

TT^? Xeyw^v ;

0EAI. OvTOJS.

/^/ V 5 1 f

HE. Uu crracrts1

ap ecrrtv.

EAI. OuSa/âj?.

256 HE. "Ecrrt 8e ye Std TO êreêiv rov 6vro$.

EAI. "Eo-Ttv.

HE. Avdis ST)TTaXiv

rj /ctVryat? erepov ravrov ecrriv.

EAI. LêSoi1

.

HE. OuTauToi-'

apaecrriv.

EAI. Oi) yap5A\\\\ <7 J ? > \ V \

HE. AAAafjirjv avrrj y TJV

ravrov ota TO

auToi7.

EAI. Kat

HE. T^v Kivf]csiv ST)TawTot' Te etvat :at

fj,r)ravrov

Acat ou Svorêpavreov. ov yap 6Vav

L7TO)fLV CLVTrjV TGLVTOV KOLfJLT) TaVTOV, OfJLOLO)?

, dAA' OTTOTOV êv ravrov, oiarrjv

B TavTOu 77-po? eavrrjv OVTOJAeyojLtev,

1 orav oe

ravrov, 8td rrjvKoivojviav av 6arpoi>, St'

rjv

ravrov yeyovev OVK e/cetvo dAA'

op6a)? av Ae'yeTat rrdXiv ov ravrov.

EAI. FldVu yaev ow.HE. Ou/couv /cdV et

7777 fJicreXdijLâvev avrrj1\yofj.V W ; \yb}[j.ev BT.

410



THE SOPHIST

of its own nature, but because it partakes of the idea

of the other.

THEAET. Exactly.

STR. Let us now state our conclusions, taking upthe five classes one at a time.

THEAET. HOW ?

STR. Take motion first;we say that it is entirely

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, it exists.

STR. Now 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 things partake of the same.

THEAET. Certainly.

STR. Then we must admit that motion is the same

and is not the same, and we must not be disturbed

thereby ;for when we say it is the same and not

the same, we do not use the words alike. Whenwe 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.


STR. Then even if absolute motion partook in

411



PLATO

av O.TOTTOVr\v crrdcnfjiov

avrrjv Trpoaayopeveiv;

0EAI. 'QpOorard ye, e'tVep ru)v yevtov cruy;\;a>-

p77cjoue#a rafj.ev dAAÂot? eOeXeiv fjiiyvvaQai, ra

SeIJLTJ.

C HE. Katfj,r)v

em ye TT^V rouroy -nporepov osno-

8etftv T)raiv vw a</>uco/ze#a, e'Aeyô^re? cos" eart

/cara<f>vaiv ravrrj.

0EAI. nco?

yapov;

EE. AeyajLiev Sr)TraXiv

rj KLVIJCTLSecrnv crepov

rov erepov, KadaTrep ravrov rer^v

a'AAo /cat

crracrecos';

0EAI.

EE. Oux erepov ap* ecm7717

/cat erepov /cara

817 Aoyoi-'.

EAI. 'A A?? #77.TI/TO\ * " ?'?1*SE. It ou^

077TO /xera rovro; ap ai>

ATOJI/

erepov avTrjv ^Tyao/zet' efât, rou Se rerdprou

, o/.ioAoy^cravres' avra etvat TreVre, Trept

D OJV /cat ev ot? Trpouê/.teâ OKOTrelv ;

EAI. KatTTto?; dSbWroy yap cnjy^copeu' eAarrco

rovapiOf-iov

rov vvvSrj (fravevros.

SE. 'ASeal? apa r^v Kivrâiv erepov etrai rou

EAI. 'ASee'crrara /zev ow.

HE. Oy/cou^897 craâj? ^7 KLVYJCTIS ovrcos OVK ov

cart /cat 6V, eTretVep rou oVro? juereêt;

EAI. Saêcrrara ye.

HE. "Ecrrtv apa e' dvdyKf]? TO p,^ 6V em Te /ctVT^-

creaj? efyat /cat AcaTa TTO.VTCL rayt'vr).

Kara. Trdvra

yap 77 dcLTepov <f)vois eVepov a77epyaô/teVry1o5 Heindorf

;ot) BT.

412



THE SOPHIST

any way of rest, it would not be absurd to say it was

at rest ?

THEAET. It would be perfectly right, if we areto admit that some of the classes will mingle with

one another, and others will not.

STR. And surely we demonstrated that before wetook up our present points ;

we proved that it was

according to nature. 1

THEAET. Yes, of course.

STR. Then let us recapitulate:

Motion is otherthan 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 wesay next that motion is other than the three, but not

other than the fourth, that is, if we have agreedthat the classes about which and within which weundertook 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 fearlessly persist in contendingthat motion is other than being ?

THEAET. Yes, mostfearlessly.

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, and1 See 251 E ff.

413



PLATO

OVTOS KCL(JTOV OVK 6V 77Ot6t, KO.I v{.l7T(LVTa Or)KCLTO.

vra OVTCOS OVK o

jLteTeêt TOV oVro0EAI. KtvSuveuet.

TCLvra OVTCOS OVK ovra. op6a>s epovpcv, /cat

on jLteTeêt TOV oVro?, clvai re /cat ovra,.

HE. Tlepl e/CaCTTOV &pCL TOJV 6t8o)V TToAl) jUeV CTTt

<>/ v' o\ '\'/5 < \ vTO ov, a.TTipov be

TrArjuei,TO prj ov.

0EAI. "Eot/cev.

257 HE. OVKOW /cat TO 6V auro rwv aXXaji' erepov

elvai

0EAI.TT \ \ Wf> W / 5 \V\\

HE. Ivat TO ov ap 17/4 tv, ocrarrcp ecrri TO, aAAa,

Kara rocravra OVK ccrrw 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

Koivajviav dAAÂot? r)ra>v yev&v <f)vais.

t

Tt? ravrafj,r) avy^copet, Tretaa? r)fjia>v

r

Aoyo^s1 ovra) TreiOerco ra fiera ravra.

0EAI. At/catoTaTa

B HE. "ISaêyx

S?)/cat

0EAI. To TTOIOV ;

HE. *077OTa^ TOjLtT^

6V Aeyco/xev, cu? eot/cev, oi)/c

tvavTiov Tt Aeyo/xev TOU ovros, aAA' zrepov (JLOVOV.

EAI. ricos;

W; el8u>/j.i' B ; ei'5w/ie^ T.

1

Being is many, for each and every thing in all theclasses is ; but not-being is infinite, for not only is it true

that every thing in each of the classes is not, but not-beingextends also to all conceptions which do not and cannot

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 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.


STR. When we say not-being, we speak, I think,

not of something that is the opposite of being, but

only of something different.


2i.e., if he will not accept our proof that being is not,

etc. , he must disprove our arguments respecting the partici-

pation of ideas in one another, and then proceed to drawhis inference.

415



PLATO

HE. Ofov orav etVojfieV TIjLf)) [leya, rore

ju

rt crot </>atvojU,e0aTO aîKpov 77

TO taov SÂow TOJ

0EAI. Kat

HE. OUK a/o'>zvavriov orav a77o</>ao-t?

t (jvyxa)Prl cr ljL Oa

>TOVOVTOV Se povov, on

a'AAtot' TI[jir)vvcL

TOfjirj

/cat TO ou 7TpoTiQ4p,tva

CTTLOVTOJV ovofiOLTOJV, fJidXXoi'3e TO>J^ Trpa-y^d-

7T6pl arr* av Kf]rai TO. eVtêyyojuei'a vvrepov

rfjs a7Torf)d<Jco<; oô/âTa.

0EAI. YlaVTaLTTaOL fJLVOVV .

42. HE. TdSe Se Stavo^â>/zev, 6 KXU o-ot

So/cet.

0EAI. To TTolov;

HE. 'H Oarepov /zoi <f)i'<Jis âtVeTai /c

Ka6a7Tpe

EAI.

HE. Mia zeV eo-Tt TTOU Kat e/ceiVq,1 TO 8' eVt

yiyv[ivov jj,pos avrrjs eKaarov aôpiaSkv e

D vvîav lax^ TWO. eavrrjs L&LCLV 8to vroAAac Te

T* etCT62

0EAI. Flav?.' /xevow.

HE. OUKOW rat Ta T^? do.rcpov fivcrecjs ftopta

jLtta? ovarjs TCLVTOV KfTrovOe TOVTO.

EAI. Tax' <"'* "^' o77?? ^^

3 ^ Va)iLtV -

HE. "Eo-Tt TO> /caAai TI 6ciTpov fjbopiovavr

0EAI.

HE. TOUT' ovv dva)WfJiov epovfjicv TJ T''

^T? W ; ^/cet'^ BT. 2r^ <ri W ;

Tc/ai T ;TUHV B.

3 dXX' ^TTTy 5rjW ;

fi\X6 7T3 T ;a\Xo TT^ 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

expressionwhat is small

anymore than what is of

middle size ?

THEAET. No, of COUrSC not.

STR. Then when we are told that the negative

signifies the opposite, we shall not admit it;we shall

admit only that the particle "not" l indicates some-

thing different from the words to which it is prefixed,

or rather from the things denoted by the words thatfollow the negative.

THEAET. Certainly.

STR. Let us consider another point and see if you

agree with me.


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.


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 it comes about.

STR. Is there a part of the other which is opposedto the beautiful ?

THEAET. There is.

STR. Shall we say that this is nameless or that it

has a name ?

1 The two particles ov andfj.rj

in Greek.

o 2 417



PLATO

0EAI. "Fjôv o yap pf)KaXov e/cctcrrore <j>Qey-

eOoij TOVTO OVK dXXov TWOS irepov ecmvr) rrjs

TOV KaXov<f)V<JO)S.

HE. "Wi vvv roSejitot Aeye.

E 0EAI. To 770 10V;

HE. "AAAo TL TOJV OVTCOV TWOS vo$ y<ivov$l

dfkopicrOei'Kal rrpos TL T(OV OVTOIV av rraXiv cwTireQev

OVTCH)vj.i/3e(:)-r]KV

elvai2 TO

p,r)KaXov ;

0EAI. QvTQJS./~\ & \ < i\ 3 > in t ' >

HE. (JVTOS 07] rrpos ov avTLvecris, cos eot/c ,

clvai TLS4

crvfjifialvei TOp,rj

KaXov.

0EAI. 'OpôraTa.HE. Tt ovv ; KaTa TOVTOV TOV Xoyov apa fiaXXov

fJLV TO KaXoVrjfJLLV

O~Tl TOJV OVTCDV} TjTTOV O6 TOjLtTJ

KaXov;

0EAI. QvOV.258 HE. 'O/xotco? apa TO

firj ficya Kal TO jjieyaavTO

eivai

0EAI.

HE. OVKOVV Kal TOfjirj

OLKaiov TO) oiKaia)

ravTa 0Tov Trpos TO/^t^SeV

TL fiaXXov elvaL OaTepov

darepov ;

EAI. Tt nrjv ;

HE. Kat rdAAa 8^ TavTr) XeôtJiev, eneLTrep 77

da/rcpov (f)vo~i$ <f)dvr)TOJV OVTOJV ovaa, CKCLVTJS oe

dvdyKrj or)Kal ra fj,6pia avTrjs [JLtjoevos rj

oVra

0EAI. fla>? yap ov;

B HE. OvKOVV, WS OIKV, T! TTJS OaTpOV [LOpLOV(f)vo-ea)s Kal

TTJS TOV OVTOS Trpos aXXrjXa dvTi-

1ei>6s 7^0115 T ; 7^01^5 B.

2%v/ui,l3tf3r]Kf]>

dvai Stephanas ; v/j,/3fpr)Kti>aiBT.

418



THE SOPHIST

THEAET. That it has one;for that which in each

case we call not-beautiful is surely the other of the

nature of the beautiful and ofnothing

else.

STR. Now, then, tell me something more.

THEAET. What ?

STR. Does it not result from this that the not-

beautiful is a distinct part of some one class of beingand also, again, opposed to some class of being ?

THEAET. Yes.

STR. Then, apparently, it follows that the not-beautiful is a contrast of being with being.


STR. Can we, then, in that case, say that the

beautiful is more and the not-beautiful less a partof being ?

THEAET. Not at all.

STR. Hence the not-great must be said to be noless 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

possess real being ;and if it has being, we must

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, when they are opposed to one another, is no

8 to D;

to BT. TIS Apelt ;n 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. Saêcrrara ye.

HE. TtV ovv avrrjv rrpoaeiWo/zei';

0EAI. A-jyAov OTL TOfjur) 6V, o Std rov

}avro ecrrt TOVTO.

HE. oTCpOV OW, fjLHJTTCp et7T?, COTW

Dv aAAajv ovaias eXAeLTro/jievov, /cat Set OappovvraVP. \/ w

>^ÔD' )\\ f/7)077 Aeyetv ort TO/xr/

of pepaiojs eart TT]Vavrov

riv côv, ojVTrep TO /xe'ya T^V ^tteya /cat TO

/caAov /cat TO/XT) /xe'ya /XT) /te'ya

x/cat TO

/XT)

) /caAoV,2OVTO> 8e /cat TO

/xr)6V /caTa TauTO

/cat eWt/XT) 6V, eVapt$/xoi> TCOV TroAAcDv OVTCOV

eV; 77Ttva eVt 77POS

1

aiVro, c5 0eatT7jT, d-

0EAI.

43- HE. Ofcr$' ow 6Vt

EAI. TtST^;

EE. IlAetov77

'/cetvoj aVetTre a/co7retv, Ty

TO

TrpoaOcv

eVt

EAI. ricos;

D HE. "OTt OjLteV

77OU(f)r](JW,

ov yap fiTJTTOTS TOVTO oaufj,

3etvat

JU,T) eoi/Ta,4

JNXN \ /so>/jfo>**<i'V/ e ? /

aAAa o~v TTTCTOa^>

ooowoiL.rjO'iOS etpye voT^/xa.

EAI. Ae'yet ya/o ow OUTCOS".

add. Boeckh.2

^77 Ka\6v add. Boeckh.8 rouro oa/AT; Simplicius ; TOUT' ovda.fj.fj BT.

4<?6j>Ta Aristot.

;6^Ta BT.

5Stfjjatos BT(cf. 23TA).

420



THE SOPHIST

less truly existence than is being itself, if it is not

wrong for me to say so, for it signifies not the

oppositeof

being,but

only theother of

being, andnothing more.

THEAET. That is perfectly clear.

STR. Then what shall we call this ?

THEAET. Evidently this is precisely not-being,

which we were looking for because of the sophist.

STR. And is this, as you were saying, as fully

endowed with being as anything else, and shall wehenceforth 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 remainingdistrust about the matter ?

THEAET. None whatever.

STR. Do you observe, then, that we have gonefarther in our distrust of Parmenides than the limit

set by his prohibition ?

THEAET. What do you mean?STR. We have proceeded farther in our investiga-

tion and have shown him more than that which lie

forbade us to examine.

THEAET. HOW SO ?

STR. Because he says somewhere l:

Never shall this

thought prevail,

that

not-being

is;

Nay, keep your mind from this path of investigation.

THEAET. Yes, that is what he says.

1Parmenides, 52 f., ed. Mullach.

421



PLATO

HE. 'Hjitets1 8e ye ov /idVor ajs efori TO.

fir;6Vra

d-7reSetajuei>,dXXd /cat TO et8o? o Tuy^dVet 6V rod

OVTOS dVc^ra/zefla

*

TJ\V yap Oarepou <j>vo*iv

ovcrdv re /cat

E eVt 77avra ra 6Vra77-/OO9 a'AArÂa, TO Trpo? TO 6V

x

fj.opiov avrrj? d

L7Tlv CU? aUTO TOVTO (3Til> OVTOJS TOjLtT^

OV.

0EAI. Kcu TravroLTraai ye, c5 êVe, dXrjdearard

HE. Mo) TOIVVVrjfJLds L7Tr)

Tt? OTl TOUVaVTtOV TOU

O/

VTO? TO/XT)

6V a,7To</atvo/zevot ToA/zcDjuev Aeyetv co?

ecrTtv. r)[J,L$ yap Trepi \j,zvIvavriov TWOS avrw

âtpetv 77-aAat Aeyo/zev, etV eWtv etVe /i^, Aoyov

259 eôv -^/cat TravTaTracm' aAoyoy o Se vw et/o^/ca/zev

efvat TO/AT) 6V, ?}

7TL<jdrcL> Tt? co? 02) /caA<iu? Xeyo/Jiev

eXeyâs, TJ p.^pi7Tp av dBwarfj, XCKTCOV KCLL e/cetVoj

KaOdirep rjfJLcls Xeyopev, OTL avfJLfJLiywrai TC dAAr;-

Aots" Ta yeVry /cat TO T 6V /cat OaTepov 8ta

/cat St* aAAÂcov SteAÂwôTa TO ftev eVepov fteTa

TOO 6'vTO? CTTt jLteVStO, TaVTTjV TTjV [JLfOe^LV,

OV

Kivo ye ou u.eT(Jxev aAA* erepov, eTepov TO

OVTOS 6V eWt aaêCTTaTa e' avay/cr]? etvat

B TO 8e ov au daTepov jLteTetATiô? erepov TOJV aAAcov

aV t^ yevcov, tTtpov 8' e/cetVcov drrdvTOiV ov OVK

<rTiv e/cacrTOV auToiv owSe vu,7ravTa TO. aAAa7rAr)

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



PLATO

HE. Kat TCLVTOLIS 8^ Tat? evavTiwo'cariv eire dVi-

crret TLS, a/ce-Trreoj' avra) /cat XGKTCOV /je'Artoy rt rah'

C vuv elprjfievajr' etVe a'j? rt âAeTTO

ât'petrore

jiteyeVt OaTCpa rore 8' eVt Odrepa

Aoyous" eA/ccov, ou/c aîa TioAA^? cr77ou87]?e

ot vOi^ Aoyot <â.ai.rovro p,ev yap ovre TL

ovre âAeTrov vpii' JK6ivo 8'

r}'8^/cat

aûa /cat /caAov.

0EAI. To TTolov;

HE. *0 /cat TrpocrQev etp^rat, TO TCLVTCL eaaavTa

cos" SwaTO, xTot? Aeyo/xeVot? ofov T* ett'at /ca$'

cKaarov eAeyôp'Ta cTraKoXovOelv, orav re TI?

erepov ov TryTOLVTOV eiVat

^>?]/cat OTav TauTov 6v

D zrepov, cKeivr) /cat /caT5

e/ceti'o o^>7]crt

TOUTCOV

evcLi TTorepov. TO oe ravrov erepov

ye 7717 /ca' T(^ Odrepov TCLVTOV /cat TO jLteya

/cat TO ofjioiov avoîoiov, /cat âipeiv ovrco

TOLVaVTLCL d-t TTpoficpOl'TCL.V TOt? AoyOt?, OWT6 Tt?

OUTO? dAr^^tt'os' a/)Tt TC TO)I> OVTCDV TWOS

0EAI. K.OfJLLofj fjL6VOVV.

44-HE. Kat

yap, ajyaOe,

TO

ye77av a?7O

os1

7nîpeLV aTTO^Mpiîv ccAAcu? T ou/c

E /cat877

/cat TTavTOLTrao-LV ayiovaov TWOS /cat a(/>tAo-

croôu.

0EAI. Tt817;

EE. TeAecoTaTT^ TTOLVTUJV Xoycov IOTIV

TO StaAuetv e/caCTToy avro TTOLVTCDV' 8ta yap

BTW;

8waT&Ta.Ta. Schanz ; dviywra Badham ;

Svvarbv /jLaXicrra Campbell ;Stov avra ? Apelt. ;

dvvara. is cer-

tainly wrong. Possibly OVK 8i>Ta or OVK ata (the interpreta-tion adopted in the translation).

424



THE SOPHIST

STR. And if any man has doubts about these

oppositions, he must make investigations and advance

better doctrines than these of ours ; or if he finds

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 atten-

tion;

for this process is neither clever nor difficult,

whereas here now is something both difficult andbeautiful.


STR. What I have spoken of before the ability

to let 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 pre-

supposes for either of these conditions. But to show

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

offspring of some brain that has just begun to lay

hold upon the problem of realities.

THEAET. Exactly so.

STR. 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 elocovcrvfjLTrXoKTjv

6 Aoyo? ycyovev

EAi.

260 EE. S/coTret TOLVVV cos ev Kaipoj vvvorj rot?

TOIOVTOIS oLfj,ax6n0a /catTT-pocrrây/caôîtei'

e'dV

krepov eVe'paj fjiiyvvcrOai.

0EAI. Ilpo? Si) rt;

HE. 1130? TO TOV J AoOV 7AtV TO)V OVTOJV V TL

eiWu. rovrov yap crrep^êVres1

, TO

; <j)iXoao(f)ias av ar^pr^delêv, eri 8' ev TO>

Trapovri Set Aoyov 7]/xa? Sto/xoAoyô-ao-ât rt TTOT*

ecrriv, et Se d(f)r)p6r][jiV avro fti]S'efvat TO TrapaTrav,

oz)Sei> av eVt TTOU Aeyetv otot T'rjfjLev d<f)r)pe6r]fjLV

B 8' oV, t avvexojpriv&H'ZV ^tr^Se^ttav etvat

EAI.y

Qp6a>$ TOVTO ye* Aoyov Se St' o Tt r

OVK'A^^'" ^ / ~ > //)

aE. AAA 10x09 TTÔ e7TOf.ivos paar av/.tafots".

0EAI.II77;

T<\ \ \ \ f/ ^. \\sE. lo

jLtev OT) fjirjov

rjfJLLVV Tt TOJV aAAaiv

yeVo? oV dvefidvr) , /caTa Trdvra ra

EAI.

HE. Ou/COW TOjLteTO,

TOVTO GKCTTTeOV L o6r] T

KO.L Xoyco

EAI. Tt

W; om. BT.

1 The denial, that is to say, of all interrelations of ideas

leads to purely negative results. Examples of this are the

exclusive antithesis of being and not-being and the mutual

exclusion of rest and motion. The difficulty is solved at

426



THE SOPHIST

For our power of discourse is derived from the inter-

weaving of the classes or ideas with one another. 1

THEAET. True.

STR. Observe, then, that we have now been justin time in carrying our point against the supportersof such doctrine, and in forcing them to admit that

one thing mingles with another.

THEAET. What was our object ?

STR. Our object was to establish discourse as oneof

our classes of being. For if we were deprived ofthis, we should be deprived of philosophy, which wouldbe 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 byits absolute non-existence, we could no longer dis-

course; and we should be robbed of it if we

agreed that there is no mixture of anything withanything.

THEAET. That is true enough ;but I do not under-

stand why we must come to an agreement about

discourse just now.

STR. Perhaps the easiest way for you to understand

is by following this line of argument.

THEAET. What line ?

STR. We found that not-being was one of the

classes ofbeing, permeating all being.

THEAET. Yes.

STR. So the next thing is to inquire whether it

mingles with opinion and speechTHEAET. 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 oppositeof the positive, but only different from it.

427



PLATO

HE.M.rf /Jiiyvvfjievov fjiev

avrov TOVTOIS dvay-

C KalovaXr]9rj

Trdvr' eu'at, jittyvu/xeVou Se Soa re

yiyvera.L /cat Aoyos" TO yap ra [Jir) OVTCL

r) Ae'yety, TOUT' eort m>u TO ifsevSos eV

Siavoia r /cat Aoyois* yiyvo^vov.0EAI. QvTCOS.

HE. "OvTO? Se ye 0euSou? tarivOLTTOLTTJ.

0EAI. Nat.

HE. Kat /A^V dTrdrrjs OU'O-^T ei'Sc<jAajv Te /cat et/co-

i>a>vTjS^

/cat (fravTaaLCLs Trdvra dVay/ci) ^LtecrTaefvat.

0EAI. rTa)? yap ou;

HE. Tov Se yex

oo(f)iaTr)v e^>a/xev ev rovra) TTOV

D TO) TO77O) /caTa77e</>euyeVat fteV, eâpvov Se yeyove-

i>at TO TTapaTrav /u,7]8'etvat i/feuSo?' TO yap /Lt^

6V ouVe Stavoeto-ât Ttva ot>Ve Ae'yetv ovoias yap

ou8e^ ovSa/jifj TO />n) 6V fj,Te%LV.0EAI. ^Hv ravra.

HE. Nw Se' ye rovro [lev <f>dvr) \LZ~iyov TOV

ovros, a)crre ravrr) êv tcrco? ou/c aV /zaôtTO erf

Taâ 8' av</>at77

TOJV etScov TO,jite^ fteTeêtv TOI>

/XT]v

'

Ô> " *\' ^> *<J' //fa ?

OTTOS', TO o ov, /cat Aoyov or)/cat ooâi' etvat

ou/xeTeô^TCov,

cocrTe

TT^V et8coAo77ott/ci7V

/cat

EracTTtACTyv,

evT) â/zev auTov elvai, Sta/zaôt

TrdXiv cu? Tra^TaTraatv ou/c CCTTIV, eVetS^ Soâ /cat

Aoyo? ou Koivojvel TOVfjirj

6Wo?' iffevSos ydp TO/ 5 -P / \ /

TTapCLTTCLV OVK CtVat TttUTT]? ^Lt7) OWtO'TajU.ei'T]?

KQivan'lcLS* 8td ravr* ovv Aoyov Trpcorov /cat

/cat (fravTaolav ^Lepevvr]reov o ri TTOT' eariv, Iva.

1 dt ye W ;5^ BT.

1 The English word "fancy," though etymologically

identical with the Greek <pa.vTaaia, has lost the close con-

428



THE SOPHIST

STR. If it does not mingle with them, the necessaryresult is that all things are true, but if it does, then

falseopinion and false discourse come

intobeing

;

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 refugein 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

ofbeing, 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 whichwe placed

him, hasabsolutely no existence, since opinion and

speech have no participation in not-being ;for false-

hood cannot possibly exist unless such participationtakes place. For this reason we must first inquire into

the nature of speech and opinion and fancy,1 in order

that when they are made clear we may perceive

nexion with "seeming

"(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 D ff.

429



PLATO

avVTO)V Kal TTV /coivtovta> avr&v rcofjurj

OVTI

261 KaTiOCDllZV, KO,TL$6VTS 8e TO IJJ6VOOS6V

2co eW eot/cev aArOss etvat

Se rovcroc/>tcr77}i>

els avTo*

etWp eVo^d? eartv, 77Kal

eV aXXa) yeVet îq

0EAI. Ko/xt?y ye, co

TO 77/OtTOP'

OCXJJlCTTrjVKCLT* OLpX^-S \^QcV }

OTi

pevrov Lr)TO yeVo?. âtVeTat yap

ye/xetv, cuv eTretSav Tt Trpo^dXr], TOVTO Trporepov

avayKcilov Sta/^cxêcrât 77ptv eV auTOV eKelvov

a(f>iK<icr6ai.vvv yap /xoyt? ftei/

TO /z^6V co? our

B e'crri TrpofiAriOev 8ie77epao-a/êv, crepov Se Trpofie-

/8A?^Tat,/cat Set

ST] ifievSos cu? ecrTt /cat?re/ot Aoyov

/cat Tiept Sdâ^ a.77o8etât, /cat fieTa, TOVTO tacu?

/cat eV aAAoJU-CT'

e/cetvo' /cat Trepas, a)S

OLKV, ouSev âv^creTat TTOTC.EE. Qappelv, to GeatV^Te, XP9

?

TI SiWj

utvoi' tV TO TrpooOev aL Trpoievcu,.Tt yap o

y' aOv}.ia)V ev TOVTOLS Spaaeiev av ev aAAot?, -^ [JLTjSev

ev e'/cetVot? avvTOJV7}

/cat miAtv et? TOvmaSev OJTT-

cocrêi?; ayotfl 7TOV>ro KaTa Tr^v vrapot/ztav Aeyo-

IJLZVOV,o ye TOIOUTOS' aV TTOTe e'Aot 77oAty. vw 8'

cuyaê', TOVTO o Aeyeis SiaTTeTrepavTai, TO TOL

fjiyio~Tov rjfiXv Tetô? r\p~f]îvovav

CLT),TO. 8' aAAa

paco /cat

EAI. KaAtu? etT/e?.

45- HE. Adyov 817 TrpaJTOV /cat 8dfav,

vvv T, a/oj/zey, tva eapyecrrepov3

TroTepov auToiv a77TTat TO ft?) 6V

1oiJri W ;

atfrdi' BT.27e TW

;5<? 7e B.

8&7ro\oyi.crufj.eOa Heindorf ; d7ro\o7?/crcj/x6â BT.

430



THE SOPHIST

that they participate in not-being, and when we have

perceived that, may prove the existence of falsehood,

andafter

proving that, may imprison the sophisttherein, if he can be held on that charge, and if not,

may 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

conditions, what would he do under others if he

did not get ahead at all or were even pressed back ?

It would be a long time, as the saying is, beforesuch 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

1Perhaps a sort of pun is intended, for 7rp6^\-rj/j.a was

already beginning to have the meaning of"problem."

4-31



PLATO

\ii\>lanv aôrepa ravra

^ * $ ' ' Q1 '

O6 OVO67TOT OVOTpOV.0EAI. 'OpfloJ?.

D HE. Oepe Srj, KaOoLTrep Trepi rwv elfttov KOI TOJV

ypa/z/zara>v eAeyojitev, rrepl TOJV ovofjidrcDV TrdAiv

e'mov<:ei/fa>/ze#a. âtverat ycxp 7797 ravrr]

TO VVV

0EAI. To 7TOLOV OVVSr) 7Tpl TO)V oVo/iaTCO^ VTT -

EE. Eire TTaivra dAAÂot? ^vvapjji6rTL 1 etreO / " ^ * *Q f\ * Q \ '

[Jirjoev,LT ra fiev efeAet, ra oe

/U,T),

0EAI. ATlAoV TOUTO V, OTl TO,/ACt'

0\Lt

TO.

Syu

OV.rp < '^N' " " ^ ^>*>x*

EE. 1 o TOIOVOZ Aeyet? tcra>?, on ra/Ltej^ ecpcgrjs

E Aeyo/zeva /cat SÂowra rt ^vvapiiorrei, ra Se r^

EAI. ajs rt TOUT' et776?;

EE. "O^re/o wtjOrjv VTroXafôvra ere TTpocrofJLoXoyeli'.

eart yap T^/ÎVTTOU raiv

r?y (frcovfj rrepl rr^v ovcriav

SryAco/zarcov StrroV yeVo?.

0EAI. ITa)?;

262 SE. Toftei^ ovoâra, TO Se p^ftara KXrjOev.

EAI. EtVe cKarepov.

EE. To/zet'

77t rats' Trpdêaiv oV 8Âw/,ta prjfjid

TTOV Xeyofjitv.

EAI. Nat.

1^vvap/aoTTfi W ; ^vvap/j-OTTeiv BT.

1 The science of language, in all its branches, was youngin the time of Plato. Words of general meaning were

necessarily used in a technical sense. So here 5vofj.a and

prjfj-a are used as parts of grammatical terminology in the

432



THE SOPHIST

them, or they are both entirely true, and neither is

ever false.

THEAET.

Verywell.

STR. Then let us now investigate names, just as

we spoke a while ago about ideas and letters;for in

that direction the object of our present search is

coming in sight.

THEAET. What do we need to understand about

names ?

STR. Whetherthey

all unite with oneanother,

or

none of them, or some will and some will not.

THEAET. Evidently the last;some will and some

will not.

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 I supposed you had in mind when youassented

;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.

sense of "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 importantPlato's part was in the development of linguistic study can

no longer be accurately determined.

433



PLATO

HE. To 8e y* 77' avrois rots'*e/cetva TTpdrrovcn

(jr]fjLiov rrjs (fjcovrjseTTiredev 6Vo/u,a.

0EAI.

KojU(S?7/LteV

OUt'.

HE. QVKOVV e ovofjidrcuv jjLev fJiovcov

Aeyo/zeVa>i' ou/c ecrrt TTOTG Aoyo?, ouS' au prjud

OVO/JLOLTCOV Ae

0EAI. Taur' ou/c e

B HE. AÂov yap a>? 77/009 erepov rt jSAeVcov aprt

^yvco/j-oAoyet? eVet TOUT' auTO e/3ouAo/x7yv etTretv,

OTI cruêâj? c5Se Aeyo/xeva ravra OVK eon Aoyo?.

EAI. Ha)?;

HE. Ofov "jSaSi'W "Tê'xei,""

icaû'Sci,"

Krat TaAAa ocra TTpdêis <jr][JLaivi pr/fâra,KO.V

Tt? efie^rjs auT*/L7rrj } Aoyov ovBev TL jitaAAoi-

1

EAI.

Ha)? yap;HE. OUACOUV Acat TraAiv 6Vav Aey^Tat

"

>/\ i <t ? </ > /

eAa9O9, LOTTOS, ocra re ovoâra ra>v

au TTparrovTO^v wvofJidaOrj, KO.I Kara.

ravTrjv $r) rrjv avveîav ouSet? TTCO ^vvearrf Aoyos"

ov$[J(,lav yap ovre OVTOJS OUT' IKCLVCDS Trpdîv ouS'5 >/ 'o\ > / ' ^ ^ \v ^^'' x

arrpagiav ouoe ouatap' OVTOS* ouoeju.-^

OVTOS" oÂot Ta

TTpv dv TLS TOLS ovo/zacrt TO,

Kepdarj TOTt S' ripôaev re KOI Aoyo? eye

evdvsr) 7Tpa>Tr) av/JLTrXoKr), crêSov rwv \6ya)v 6

x-> / \ OT /cat

*

EAI. IIcD? a/a'cSSe Aeyetj;

HE. "OTay etVrj Tts""dvQpanros pavOdveiS

Adyoj/ eivai ^TJ? rovrov eXd^Lorrov T /cat Trpcorov;EAI. "Eyajye.

1aurois ro?5 B, Stobaeus

;auTo?s T.

Ere frai W, Stobaeus

;ei /cat T

;Kal B.

434



THE SOPHIST

STR. And the vocal sign applied to those who

perform the actions iii question we call a noun.

THEAET. Exactly.STR. Hence discourse is never composed of nouns

alone 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

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.

STR. And again, when "lion," "stag," "horse,"

and all 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 existenceof anything that exists or does not exist, until the

verbs are mingled with the nouns;then the words

fit, and their first combination is a sentence, about

the first and shortest form of discourse.

THEAET. What do you mean by that ?

STR. When onesays

"a manlearns," you agree

that this is the least and first of sentences, do

you not ?

THEAET. Yes.

435



PLATO

HE. AÂot vdp rfSr? TTOV rore rreplrcov ovrajv

T)

/ ->\ f M \ \ / *

yt,yvo[JLva)V 77 yeyovoraiv rj ÂAovrcjv ,/cat OVK

ovo/jid^L [JLOVOV,

dXXd rt TrepatVet, avjJLTrXeKtov ra

prj/jLaTa rot? ovojjiacn.Sto Aeyctv re auroy dAA' ov

IJLOVOV ovo/jidîv etTroae^,1

/cat817

/cat TO) TrXey/JLari

TOVTCO TO ovofjia. ecfiOey^dfJieda Xoyov.

0EAI. 'QpOcoS-

46. HE. Ot'rct) ST) KaOoiTrep ra Trpdypara2 ra

/>tev dAAiÂots1

7]piJLOTT,TO, 8' ot>', /cat Trept ra TT^S

<f>covfjs av (jrfiJLela ra /zev ou^; ap^toTret, ra Se

E dpfjiorrovra avrcov Xoyov aTreipydoaro.

0EAI. HayTa-TracTi /zet'ow.

HE. "Enor] afiLKpov rooe.

0EAI. To rcolov;

HE. Aoyov avay/catov, oravrrep f},rivos ctvai Ad-

yov, /UT7

Se rtvo? dSwarov.

EAI. Qvrajs.

HE. Oi5/cow /cat rroiov nva avrov etVat Set;

n-N<> V

to? o ou;

HE. Ilpoo-e^cofiev 817rov vovv

r^Jilv aurot?.

0EAI. Aet yovv.

HE. Aeâ> roivvv aoi Xoyov avvdtis repaypa rrpd-

et 8t* d^d/zaro? /cat pharos' orov 8' dv d Aoyo?

n. cru uot (bpdttiv.> rrrV C ? v X 2 '

263 0EAI. 1 avr eorat /cara ovvaîv.

HE. 0eatT7yTO? KaOrjrai. IJLOJV fir) fjiaKpos 6

Adyo?;EAI. Ov/c, aAAa jLterpto?.

EE. Hov epyov Srj (frpdtew rreplov r e'crrt /cat

OTOV.

0EAI. AÂov drt Trept e'/zoure /cat e/zd?.

1erTTOAief Stobaeus ; diroiêv 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 hereaches 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, musthave a subject; without a subject it is impossible.

THEAET. True.STR. And it must also be of some

quality, mustit 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 combinedby 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, it isfairly short.

STR. Now it is for you to say what it is about andwhat its subject is.

THEAET. Clearly it is about me, and I am its subject.2

irpdyfj-ara BTW ; ypd/j,/ji.aTa, letters, Bury (cf. 253).

437



PLATO

T'' <^ > w^> TEE. It oe oo av;

0EAI. IToto?;

HE. Oeatr^ros", a) vw> eya> SfaAe'yo/zat, Tre'rerai.

0EAI. Kat rovrov ouS' av et? a'AAco? etVot TrA^v

c/zoV re /cat Trept efiov.

HE. ITotov 8e ye rtva(f>a{JLV ava.yKO.lov e/caorov

eu/at rcDv Aoycov.

B EAI. Nat.

HE. TOWTCOV Si) 770 toy rtva KaTpov <f)aTov etvat;

EAI. Tov /xer (/feuS?y 77OU, TOV Se dXrjOrj.\ / ^\ >/^ * \ s ^/^^ \ */ f

HE. Aeyet oe avrwv ofjiev aArjurjs TOL ovra cos

ecrrt vreH croy.

EAI. Tt

HE. '0 Se17 ijjev$r]s erepa raiv OVTOJV.

EAI. Nat.rp \ \ v >r r u \ /

HE. laJUT)

ovr apa co? ovra Aeyet.

EAI. SêSov.

HE. "Ovrcov1Se ye 6Vra erepa Trept crou. TroAAa

yap eâ/xev 6Vra 77ept eKaarov etvat TTOU, TroAAaO \ > Voe OVK ovra.

EAI. Ko/xi87y jLtevouv.

C HE. *Qv varepov 817 Aoyov etp^/ca ?7ept aov,

7rpo)TOV jU,eV, e'^ cov tt>ptcra/.ie#art vror' ecrrt Aoyo?,

avay/catorarov avrov eva rc5v ^Spaûrarcuv etVat.

EAI. Nw817 yow ravrrj

HE. "ETretra 8e ye rtvo?.

EAI. Oura;?.

HE. Et SefJLr)

ecrrt cro?, OVK ct'AAou ye1OVTUV Cornarius ; S^rwj BT.

438



THE SOPHIST

STR. And how about this sentence ?

THEAET. What one ?

STR."Theaetetus, with whom I am now talking,

flies."

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

respectto

everythingthere are many things that are and many that are not.

THEAET. To be sure.

STR. Now the second of my sentences about youis 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.STR. And secondly it has a subject.

THEAET. Yes.

STR. And if you are not the subject, there is none.

439



PLATO

EAI. Ylajs yap;\ir v. \ <Z \ \ * ^<1 i\ \ f H \ /

HE. Môeyo? be 1cov ouo cu> Aoyo? zn] TO rrapa-

TTCLV' a.7T(f)ini>>afjiV yap on TOJV aSwdVcov r^v

6Vra/jLrjSevos

etvat Aoyoi^.

OEAI. 'QpOoTara.

HE. Ilept 817crou Aeyoêva,

Bdrepa a? ra avra /<at/XT]

6Vra a*? ovra, nuvra-

Tracnv eoLKev3

^ TOiavTTj crvvdeais K re pi

yiyvo[i4.vr\

/cat

ovoârajvoWcos

1 T /cat

yiyveoOai Aoyo?0EAI. 'AA^

47- HE. Tt Se 8^; Stai'ota r /cat 8ofa /cat

LVTaoia, n&v OVKrjbr) SrjXov on raura TO,

i/Jv8fj re /cat aXÔrj 77aV0'rjfji&v

ev rat?

eyylyverai ;

EAI. Hois';?/ v<J.

f/ M \ /O /d'HE. i2o etaet paov, av Trptorov Aaprjs aura, TI

77or' ecrrt /cat rt StaêpouCTtv e/caara aAAÂajv.

EAI. At'Sou IJLOVOV.

HE. Ou/cow Stavota /êv /cat Aoyo? raurov

6jj,ev evros rrjs ifjvxfjs irpos avrrjv SeaAoyo?

(frcvvfjs ytyvoyLtei/os

1 TOUT' auTo

StdVota;

EAI. na^Li /xev ow.

HE. To Se y' 0.77' e/cetV^? p^vfJia.Sta TOU

,6Ta (f)96yyov /ce/cA^Tat Aoyoj;EAI. 'AA??#7].

HE. Kat ^t^v eV Adyot? auTo icrêv ov

EAI. To TTOLOV;

HE. Oacriv Te /cat arroâaiv\

1 5 emend, apogr. Parisinum 1811; ye BT ;5^ or 5^ ye

Heindorf.

440



THE SOPHIST


STR. And if there is no subject, it would not be a

sentence at all ; for we showed that a sentencewithout a subject is impossible.


STR. Now when things are said about you, but

things other are said as the same and things that areo f-J

not as things that are, it appears that when such a

combination is formed of verbs and nouns we have

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

the special name of thought. Is not that true ?

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 add. Badham.

3 oiKv W ; ws ZoiKev BT.*

ew)rd W, Stobaeus ; om. BT.

P 44,1



PLATO

EAI. "lapev.

264 HE. "Qrav ovv rovro lv^t>X?7

Kara StdVotap

EAI. Kat 770)$;rr-i / ^ J r/ \ /)> 't1\\^ '

HE. 1 1 o orap'/XT)

Kau avro L aAAa ot ai~ \ ~ f t r\ f > f ' '/3~r)

TIVI TO roiovTov av TTO.VOS, ap OLOV re opucos

rt TrA^y <f>avracriav ;

EAI. OuSeV.

HE. OUKOW 7Ti7Tp Aoyo? dXrjOrjs TIV/cat

j/re

S' efidvr)Staiôia /tev avrrjs Trpos e

StaAoyo?, Soâ Se Siavoias d

B"âtWrat

'

Se o Aeyo/xei/ cry/x/zt^ts' atcr^creco?

/cat So^rjs, dvdyKT) 8^ /cat TOVTOJV rw Aoya)

OVTCDV ifjV$r}re aurtSv eVta /cat eWore etvat.

@EAI. ncus1

S' ou;HE. Karayoet? ow ort -rrporepov rjvp

oâ /cat Aoyo? T)/card

TT)V TrpouSoKiai^

apri, [irjTravrdrraaiv dvTJvvrov cpyov errt-

a ,r)TOVVT$ avro;

EAI. KaraôcD.

48. HE.

MT)

roivvvj.ir]$

y

etV TO, AotTid a

yd/o Tieâvrat ravra, TOJ

/car'et'8^ Statpecrecof.

EAI. nottoi^8ry;

HE. AtetAo//,e$a r^? ei'ScoAoTroit/ci]? et'Sr^ Suo,

7V, T1

))^8e

EAI. Nat.

HE. Kat TOV CTO^tCTT^V L7TOfJieV d)S dTTOpotjJieV IS

OTTorepav ^/^cro/xev.

1 avrd Stobaeus ; ayrr?!' BT.

442



THE SOPHIST

THEAET. Yes, we know that.

STR. Now when this arises in the soul silently by

way of thought, can you give it any other namethan opinion ?


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.

STR. Then since speech, as we found, is true and

false, 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.

THEAET. Certainly.

STR. 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

rest of our search, either;for now that these points

are settled, we have only to revert to our previous

divisions into classes.

THEAET. What divisions ?

STR. We made two classes of image-making, the

likeness-makingand the fantastic. 1

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.

443



PLATO

0EAI.THy ravra.

SE. Kat Tovd*rjfJLtov dTTOpovfievcov ert

ovcoroSm'a, (âveVro? TOV Aoyot> TOV

OVT LKMV OVT

D OVT6 âvracr/ia 117TO irapaTrav ovSev Sta TO

0EAI. Aeyeis a

EE. Nw 8e y' 67Ti.Srj TTZÔLVTOLI [LV Aoyo?,

.VTOU 8' ovcra 8ofa iAeu7]?, eyXco/

e^^ /^*ft^/*ttTa

OVTCOV etât /cat rexyrjv e'/c ravrrj? yiyvzoOat, rijs

0EAI.

SE. Kat /t^ 6Vt y* 77ô cro^taT?)? TOUTCOV TTOTC-

, 8ia>fJLO\o'yr)iJLvov r^^lv ev rols TrpoaQev r\v.

EAI. Nat.

SE. IlaAtv TOLVVVm%etptti.fj,V, cr^Ltflvr^s St^ TO

E TrporeOev yeVo?, TropzvecrOai Kara TOVTTL St^ta det

[Jiepos rov TfJirjOevTOS, iyoêvoi rrjs TOV aofiio-Tov

KOlVtOVLO-S, O)g OLV CLVTOV TO, KOIVCL TTQ.VTCL 7Tpl\6vTS ,

Tny oiKeiav XITTOVTCS (ftvaiv eTrtSet^w/zev jLtaAtcrra

265^Liey 7]/>ttv aurots", eVetTa Se /cat rot? eyy^TaTO)

yeVet Trjs TOLavTrjs ne66$ov iretfivKocrLV.

EAI. 'Qp9a>s.

EE. OuK"OW TOTC ftev rjpxofJieOa 7roirjTU<r)v KCLL

EAI. Nat.

SE. Kat TTJS KTTjTLKrjs ev OrjpevTiKfj Kal ayojviq

KOLe.fjiTTOpiKfj

/cat Ttatv eV Totourots" et'Seatv e



THE SOPHIST


STR. And in the midst of our perplexity about

that, we were overwhelmed by a still greater dizzinesswhen the doctrine appeared which challenges every-

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 false opinion has been proved, it is possible for

imitations 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 class.

THEAET. Yes.STR. Then let us try again ;

let us divide in two

the class 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 dialectic method.

THEAET. Right.

STR. We began by making two divisions of art, the

productive and the acquisitive, did we not ?x

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. Hdw fJLV OVV.

HE. Nw 8e y' 67Tt,or) fJLifJLTjTUcr)

avTov TG'xyr), orjXov to? avrrjis rrjv TroirjTLKrjv

B Siaipereov 7TpcoT7]V. rj yap TTOV

T19 ecrrtv, et'ScoAtoj' jiteVrot, (â/zeV, dAA' ou/c

eKaarajvrj yap;

EAI. Ilai>Ta7ra(7i yuev ouv.

EE ITot^TtAC^? 81) TrpajTOV 8vo eo"7a> /êp7?*

EAI. Ilota);f-p > \ /) ^ o> > /) /

EE. 1 o f-iV tfeiov, TO o avvpaiTTivov.

EAI. OU'TTXO [Ji[JLdOir]Ka.

49- -E -

IlonjTiKTp/, eiVep /xe^ti^/xeâ TO,

Ae^'9eVra, Traaav<f>afjiev

elvai ^vvaîatria ylyvr\rai rot? ff7 frporepov ovaiv varepov

ylyveaQai.

EAI.

C SE. Za>a817

TTai'raOI'TJTCL

/cat</>i>ra

ocra r*

e/c cr7T6/oftara)v/cat piâjv (frverai /cat orra a

^WLorrarai aa)fiara r^/cra /cat ar^/cra,

Ttp'o?"^

êot; Srj/jiLovpyovvTOS (frrjO'Of.iev varepov

yiyveaOat, rrporepov OVK ovra; ^ TOJ rcDv TroAAajy

8oy/xart

/catprjfJLari

xpwfJLtvoiEAI. ITotoj;

EE. Ta>r>)i> (j>vaiv avra yzvvav airo TWOS atria?

avToiJiaLTrjs /cat aVeu oiavoias (frvovarj? , r) /zero, Aoyowre /cat

eTnaTTJ/JLif]? Oeias oVo êoi} ytyi'o/zeVry?;

EAI. 'Eya> ^Ltev tacos" StaTT)^ Ât/aW TroAAd/ci?

aôTepa /zeTaSoââ*' vw /z^v-1

fiXtTTtov els o-e

/cat VTroXafiôn'cov o'UaOai ae /cara ye #eoi> aura

yiyveaOai. TavTr) /cat auro? vevofiiKa.

EE. KaAco? ye, a) eatTTyre* /cat etjtteV ye' a<;

1

/ATJfb ; /XT) BT.

446



THE SOPHIST

THEAET. Certainly.

STR. But now, since imitative art has taken him

over, it is 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,

not of real things in each case. Do you agree ?


STR. Then let us first assume two parts of

productive art.


STR. The divine and the human.

THEAET. J don't yet understand.

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

are formed within the earth. Shall we say that theycame into being, not having been before, in anyother

way

than through God's

workmanship

? Or,

accepting the commonly expressed belief

THEAET. What belief?

STR. That nature brings them forth from some self-

acting cause, without creative intelligence. Or shall

we say that they are created by reason and by divine

knowledge that comes from God ?

THEAET. I,

perhapsbecause I am

young,often

change from one opinion to the other;but now,

looking at you and considering that you think theyare created by God, I also adopt that view.

STR. Well said, Theaetetus;and if I thought you

447



PLATO

a rcov ei? rov erreira "%povov aAAto? TTOJS

elvai, vvv av ra> Aoyoj /zero, rreidovs

dvayKaias eTreêipou/zei'Trotetv

o/zoAoyetf eêiS?)Se aov KarafjiavOdvoj ryv (frvcnv, ori Kal avv TUJV

E Trap' r)fj,)V Aoycov aur?)x

TTpooeiaw e<^'

e'A/cecrât^17?,

edcrco' xpovos yap K

yiyvoir* av aAAa,Qijcraj

raf.iev <f>v<ji

TTOielaOai Beia Te^l), TO, 8' eV rourcov WTT'

vi'L<JTciiJLva dvOpaiTTiVfl, KOI Kara rovrovSrj

TOP

Aoyov Svo TTOirjTLKrjs yeV^, TO yitev avOpannvov etvai,

TO 8e delov.

0EAI. 'Op^cD?.

HE. Te/xve ST)8uoti^ ovaaiv

8t'xa cicarepav avdis.

EAI. Hois1

;

266 EE. Ofov TOTe ^tev AcaTa TrAaTos" reavatv

7roi7]TU<r)V Traaav, vvv Be av Kara0EAI.

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. Nat.

HE. Ta Se y* cu? erepcos av Siyprj/Jieva, /iepo?

ev a,^' e/caTepa? TT?? ftept'Sos1

avroTTOir^rLKOv, rco 8'

crêSoj^ yLtaAiCTT'av \eyoioQiqv etScoAo-

Kal Kara ravra817

rrd\ivrj

StatpetTat.

EAI. Aeye OTTT^

2

e/caTepa avOcs.

50. HE. 'H/êt? /.teVTTOU /<rat TaAAa aia /cat

TO- 7T(f)VKor

y

ecrrt, rrvp Kal vScop Kal rd rovrcov,êo yevvrnâra rrdvra laaev avrd drreipya-

eKacrra'TJ rrws;

77W ; aur?; B ; avri; T. 2

STTTJ inferior MSS. ; Swot BT.

448



THE SOPHIST

were one of those who would think differently byand by, I should try now, by argument and urgent

persuasion, to makeyou

agree with

my opinion;but

since I understand your nature and see that it of

itself inclines, 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 manout of those as materials are made

byhuman

art,

and

that there are accordingly two kinds of art, the one

human and the other divine.


STR. Now that there are two, divide each of

them again.

THEAET. HOW ?

STR. You divided all

productiveart width

wise,as

it were, before;now divide it lengthwise.

THEAET. Assume that it is done.

STR. In that way we now get four parts in all;

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 theother 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 otheranimals, 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. QvTOJS.

HE. TOVTOJV Se ye eKaarajv et'ScoAa, dAA* OVK

aura TrapeVerat, SatjLtovta /cat ravra

yeyovora .

EAI. Rota,

HE. Td re eV rot? VITVOLS /cat oaa ê#

(fravrdcrfjiara avrofivfj Xeyerai,, CTKLOL[Ji6i>

orav ev

C ra> TTVpl CTKOTOS eyyiyvriTai, StTrAow Se rjVLK*ai'

(f>o)SoiKelov re KOL aXXorpiov rrepl ra Aa/X77pa KOI

Aeta et? ev fureAôy rrjs c/jurpoaOev elcoOvias oi

Ivdvriciv aiaOrâiv Trapeôv elSos aTrepyd^r0EAI. Auo yap ovv ecrrt ravra Oeias epya

,avro re /cat TO TrapaKoAovOovv et'

HE. Tt 8e rr)V rjfjLerepav r^yy^v; dp* ou/c

v OIKIOLV

OLKoSoLLiKrj ^TâojucvTrotetv,

y8e rtv' Irepav, olov ovap avdpaimvov eyprjyopovw

D EAI. ITayu /xev ouv.

HE. OVKOVV /cat rrlAAa ovrco Kara Svo Strra, epya

rjfJtercpasav Trot^rt/c^? Trpaêcos

1

,TO

/ttev

ev, avrovpyiKrj,1 TO Se et'ScuAov et'ScoAoTrott

EAI. Nuv /xaAAov efjLadov, /cat riOrjfJii 8vo

noLrjriKrj? z'iSr)'Sclav

3

/zev /cat dvOpooTTLvrjv4

Qdrepov riJirj/Jia,Kara Se Odrcpov TO /xev auTcDv ov,

TO Se o/zotco/.taTCot' TtvcDvyvvrjfj,a.

1

avrovpyiKy Heindorf; avrovpyiKrj BT.

2eldw\OTrouKy Heindorf; el8w\orrouKri BT.

3fleiW Heindorf

;êfa B ; 0e/p T.

4 avdpWTrivr]i> Heindorf ; av6pwirLv-q B ; avQpwjrlvri T.1 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

thereare

images,not the

things themselves,which

are also made by superhuman skill.


STR. The appearances in dreams, and those that

arise by day and are said to be spontaneous a shadow

when a dark object interrupts the firelight, or when

twofold light, from the objects themselves and from

outside, meets on smooth and bright surfaces andcauses upon our senses an effect the reverse of our

ordinary sight, thus producing an image.1

THEAET. Yes, these are two works of divine

creation, the thing itself and the corresponding imagein each case.

STR. And how about our own art ? Shall we not

say that we make a house by the art of building, andby the art of painting make another house, a sort of

man-made dream produced for those who 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 bythe 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). The words TTJS '^irpoadev . . . evoLvriav ai<j6ri<nv refer

to the transposition of right and left in the reflection (cf.

Theaetetus, 193 c).

451



PLATO

51. HE. Tfj? roivvv elScoXovpyiKrl? ava[JLvr)<j8a)-

on rofjizv ei/caoTt/coV, TO Se (fravracrriKov e/zeA-

Aei> etvatyevosy

el TOJ/feuSo?

OVTOJS 6Vijsevoos

/cat

6vra)v ev TLtfraveir) TT<f>vKos.

0EAI. v a ouv.

HE. Ou/cow 6(}>dvr)re /cat Sta ravra

817/caT-

pijaofJiev avrd) l vvv avafjL^ta^riJTOJS etSTy

Suo;

EAI. Nat.

267 HE. To roivvv (fxivTacrTiKov avdis Siopi,a)fJLev

^a.

EAI. Il^;

HE. To fj,V St' opyavajv yiyvo^vovtTO 8e avrov

eavrov opyavov rov TTOLOVVTOS re

EAI.

HE. "OTav, otftai, TO o*ov cr^/za Tt? TOJ eavrov

Troifj, /mi/jirjcnsrovro rrjs

jLtaAtcrTa /ce/cA^rat TTOU.

0EAI. Nat.

HE. Mt/zTyTt/cov ST)rovro avrfjs Trpocrenrovres

aTrovetjLtctjjLte^a2< TO 8' d'AAo TraV

fx</>a)/xei' /xaAa/ct-

aOevres /cat rraptvres erepa) avvayayelv re els ev

/cat TTpeTrovacLV eVcovu^Lttav aTroSovvau riv*

0EAI. evej(,Toa), TO

HE. Kat /i^y /cat rovro eVt StTrAow, (S Qeairrjre,>tf- t ~ G OJrtO/ /

agiov -))yetac/af ot a oe, cr/coTret.

EAI. Aeye.HE. Ta)v

(jLLfJLOVfJLevcovot

//.ei^ et'SoTe? o

1 i A 1 j^ "DT1

1ai/rtuj a^ry til.

2&TTOveifjubfj.e0a W ; airoveifj-ofjieda BT.

452



THE SOPHIST

STR. We must remember that there were to be

two parts of the image-making class, the likeness-

making and the fantastic,if

we shouldfind

thatfalsehood 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 appear-ance offers himself as the instrument.


STR. When anyone, by employing his own personas his instrument, makes his own figure or voice

seem similar to yours, that kind of fantastic art is

called mimetic.

THEAET. Yes.

STR. Let us, then, classify this part under the name

of mimetic art ; but as for all the rest, let us 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

and let the other part go.

STR. But it is surely worth while to consider,

Theaetetus, that the mimetic art also has two parts ;

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 8' OVK LOOTS. KOLLTOL TWO.

/zet<o StatpeCTtv dyvcoaias re KOLL yvcb&eojs 9r)crojJLV ;

EAI. OvSc/Jiiav.

SE. OVKOVV TO ye apri XeftOev etSoTCOfrjv pif-ir)jua;

TO yap crov cr^^/za rat ereytyp'ajcrAca)^

av TLS fJii[JLr)-

cratro .

C EAI. ITto? 8* ou;

HE. Tt 8eLKcuoavvr)s TO

ar^fj/jia/cat oA^? vXXrj-

(3$r)v dptTrjs; dp' OVK dyvoovvTts jueV, 8oaoyre?8e'

777^, o(f>68pa eTfi^&Lpovoi TroXXoi TO So/cow a(f>Lai

TOVTO 60S" eVo*> aUTOt? 7Tpo9vj.LLO'6aL (f)OLLVo9ai 7TOlLV,

OTL {JLaXlGTCL epyOLS T KO.I AoyOt? flL/JLOVfJ-eVOL ,

EAI. Kat 77avu ye TroAAot.

HE. M.OJV ovv Travre? aTroTuyâvoucrt rou So/ceil^

LVCLl SlKOLlOL (JLySafjiaJS OVTS ; ?! TOVTOV TfOV TOVVO.V-

TIOV;

0EAI. Udv.

HE.Mi/jL^Trjv 8r)

TOVTOV ye erepov

D XcKTeov oT/xat, TOV dyvoouvra TOW

EAI. Nat.

52. EE. IloêV OW OVOfJLCL KCLTpO) Tt?

AryêTat TrpeVov; ^ SrÂov 87) âAeTrov 6V, StoTt

TCOVyeyajp' /COT'

ei'S^ Statpe'creco?TraAata Tts,

eot/cev, dpytaxTots' ejJLTrpoaOzv KOI davvvovs Traprjv,

CUCTTC/-tT^S* eVtêtpetv /A^SeVa 8tatpeio-#ar /caô

TCOV dvofjLaTOjv dvdyKrj p,r) o~(f>6Spa evrropelv.

Se, /caV et ToX^poTepov elprjarOai, Stayvcoaeco?

eVe/ca T^V /Ltev jtzeTa o6rjs {JLL/JLTTJO-LV

1

d/oy/a Madvig ;oWa BT.

454



THE SOPHIST

knowledge. And yet what division can we imaginemore 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 whoimitates you would know you and your figure.

THEAET. Of course.

STR. But what of the figure of justice and, in a

word, of virtue in general ? Are there not manywho 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, bv imitating it in acts and/ ^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 toseem 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 whodoes 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

ETrpoaeLTTcojJiev, rrjv Se

/tier' eVtcrr^Ty? i

TWO. ^l^f](JlV.

EAi. "Ecrra>.

EE. Qarepa) roivvv xprjareov 6 yap ao

OVK eV TOLS ZiOOaiVr)V,

O.AA' 6V TO I?

0EAI. KcujLtctAa.

EE. T6V SoÔ^tt^T^V S?) CTKOTTCOfJicOa OXJT*f t \ >r o \ f >/ s >/ /

LT VyirjS LT6OLTTAOYfV

T %O)V TWO.

eavTOj .

EAI.

268 EE. "Eêt roivvv KOLL /xaAa cruî'ryv.o ^tev yet/3

einjOrjsavra)v ecmv, olofjLcvos elSevai raura a

Soâêt- TO Se 6arepov crp^/ia Sta r^v i> rot?

Aoyot? KvXivSrjcnv eêt TroAA^v vrroifjiav KO.L<f>6f$ov }

ojs dyvoel ravra a irpos rovs a'AAou? cos et'Sco?

EAI. HdvvIJLGV

ovv cmv eKarepov yevovs cuv

SE. QvKOVV TOV fJLV GLTrXoVV/Zl/A^T7yP TWO., TOV

8e clpcovLKov

EAI. Et/c

rpi/ >5>X / *&/EE. lourou o au TO yevoy ev

77ouo

EAI. "Opa au.

B HE. SACOTTCO' /cat /xot StTTto

TLV' TOV fJLV S^jLtOCTtO,T Kttt fJLCLKpols AoyOt?

TrXrjOr)Swarov elpwveveaOat, Ka9opa>, TOV Se tSta

Te KCU fipaxeoi Aoyot? dvayKaôvTa TOV77/joaSta-

Aeyojitevov 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 imita-

tion.THEAET. AgreedSTR. We must therefore apply ourselves to the

former, for we found that the sophist was amongthose who imitate but was not among those whoknow.

THEAET. Very true.

STR. Then let us examine the opinion-imitatoras 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 theyknow 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 affair.

STR. I am considering, and I think I can see two

classes. I see one who can dissemble in long speechesin public before a multitude, and the other who does

it in private in short speeches and forces the personwho converses with him to contradict himself.

THEAET. You are quite right.

457



PLATO

HE. Tiva ovv drro(f)atva)iji60a rov

elvai; rrorepa TTO\ITLKOVrj or)p,oXoyu<6v ;

EAI.

A-ôAoyt/coV.HE. Tt 8e TOP erepov pov[JLv; ao<f>6v r) oro<f>icrri-

KOV;

EAI. T6 1

/JiV TTOVCTO<f)6v dSuvaTOV, 7Tl,7Tp OVK

C etSora avrov 0fj.V fjLLfJLrjrrjs8' wv rov oo(f)ov

SfjXov OTL TrapuivvjJLiov CLVTOV TL A^J/ferat^KOL

rj$r] jjiefjidd^Kaore rovrov Set Trpoaenrelv

avrov Kivov rov TravroLTracriv ovrtos

HE. OVKOVV avvoTJaoêv avrov, KaOdrrep

, rovvofjid avfjiTrXeâvres drro reXevrrjs

0EAI. aw fJiV OVV.

HE. To 28^ rrjs evavnoTTOioXoyLKrjs

/Jipovs rrjs ooaotriKrjs /zi/z^TiKoV, rov <f>avrao~ri-

D KOV yevovs drro rijs eloaiXoTrouKrjs ov Belov aAA

dvOpajTTLKOv rfjs rroirjaeajs dcfttopiafJLevovcv Xoyois

TO OavfjiaroTrouKov fjiopiov, ravrrjs rfjs yevea? re

/cat ai/maro? o? av(f)fj

rov ovrws &o<f)Lcrrr]V etvat,

yOearara, co? eot/cev, epet.

0EAI. Yiavrdrfa.cn êv ovv.

1 r6 Stephanus ; rbv BT.8 r6 Schleiermacher ;

rbv BT.

458



THE SOPHIST

STR. And what name shall we give to him who

makes the longer speeches ? Statesman or popularorator ?

THEAET. Popular orator.

STR. And what shall we call the other? Philoso-

pher or sophist ?

THEAET. We cannot very well call him philosopher,since 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 atlast that we must truly call him the absolutely real

and actual sophist.

STR. Shall we then bind up his name as we did

before, winding it up from the end to the beginning ?


STR. The imitative kind of the dissembling part

of the art of opinion which is part of the art of con-tradiction and belongs to the fantastic class of the

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 exist-

ence,409

Aeschylus, 193 n.

All, 231 ff., 367, 369

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.

Cadmus, 377 n.

Callias, 89

Characteristic, distinguish-

ing, 249

Classes, or genera, 401, 403,

443 ; five classes, 409 ff.

Combinations of elements,

225 ff, 381;of

letters,227 ff.

Condition, passive or active,

381 ff.

Cubes, cube roots, 2' n.

Democritus, 373 n.

Dialectic, 4, 401

Difference, 262

Different, not opposite,415 ff.

Dionysodorus, 393 n.

Discourse, 425 ff, 433

Education, 313 ff.

Eleatic, 262, 359, 365 n.,

371 n.

Electra, 193 n.

Elements, active and passive,59 ff. , 149 ; admit of no

explanation, 223 ff, 237,

381, 395

Empedocles, 43,359 n.,371n.

Ephesians, 141

Epicharmus, 43Erineum, 11

Eucleides, 3, 7-11

Euphronius, 15

Eurycles, 397

Euthydemus, 393 n.

False opinion, 351 ff., 443,

445

Falsehood, 353, 429 f., 453

Fancy, 429

Fantastic art, 335, 429, 443,

453

461



INDEX

Gorgias, 371 n.

Hera, 51

Heracleitus, 4, 43, 73, 141,

359 n., 371 n.

Heracles, 103 n., 105, 125

Hesiod, 243

Hipponicus, 89

Homer, 43, 45, 46, 73, 109,

141, 155, 197, 265

Ideas, 4, 401, 403, 405, 433

Image, 347, 319, 451Imitation, 329 ff., 451 ff.

Ionian philosophers, 359,

371 n.

Iris, 55

Knowledge, 3-257 passim,

455, 457

Letters, 227 ff., 399, 433

Leucippus, 373 n.

Lysimachus, 37

Measure, man the measureof all things, 41 ff., 95 ff.,

135

Megarians, 371 n.

Meletus,257

Melissus, 145, 155

Memory, 4, 85 ff, 185 ff.

Midwives, midwifery, 3, 31,

33, 61, 257

Mimetic art, 453

Motion, 43 ff., 133 ff, 263,

385, 387, 389, 395, 405 ff.

Mysians, 253

Not -being, 161, 262, 337,

339 ff, 351, 361, 371,391,

393, 413 ff, 431

462

Nouns, 433 ff.

Oceanus, 43, 143

Opinion, 167-255 passim,351 ff, 429, 443, 445, 455 ff.

Orestes, 193 n.

Other, 263, 407 ff.

Parmenides, 43, 145, 155,

262, 265, 269, 337, 355,

357, 367, 421

Perception, 39 ff, 71, 73,

149ff.,157,161,167, 185ff,225

Phaenarete, 31

Pherecydes, 359 n.

Philosopher, 261, 265, 267,

401, 403, 459

Pindar, 121

Plato, 373 n., 379 n., 433 n.

Polydeuces, 121 n.

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.

Reason, with true opinion,223 ff.

Relative existence, 409

Rest, 263, 387, 389, 393, 395,

405, 407

Roots, 25 ff.

Same, 263, 407 ff.

Sciron, 103

Sentence, 435 ff.

Sicilian philosophers, 359Sight, theory of, 57 f.

Socrates, 3-271 passim; the

younger, 271



INDEX

Sophist, 261-459 passim

Speech, 437 ff., 441 f. ; false,

443 f.

Squares, squareroots, 25 ff.

Statesman, 261, 267

Subject, of sentence, 437 ff.

Syllables, 227 ff.

Terpsion, 3, 7-11

Tethys, 43, 143

Thales, 121

Thauraas, 55

Theaetetus, 3-459 passimTheodorus, 11-269 passimTheseus, 103 n., 105

Thought and speech the

same, 441

Truth, Protagoras 's book,

77, 79, 111

Verbs, 433 ff.

Vowels, 399

Wax, block of in the soul,

185 ff.

Whole, 231 ff, 367, 369, 371

Xenophanes,359

Zeno, 265, 365 n.

Zeus, 9, 47 n., 109, 147, 163,

203, 205, 245, 401

Printed in Great Britain by R. & R. CI.AKK, LIMITED, Edinburgh.

(123)



THE LOEB CLASSICALLIBRARY

VOLUMES ALREADY PUBLISHED

LATIN AUTHORS

AMMIANUS MARCELLINUS. J. C. Rolfe. 3 Vols.

APULEIUS : THE GOLDEN Ass (METAMORPHOSES). W. Adling-ton (1566). Revised by S. Gaselee.

ST. AUGUSTINE:

CITY OF GOD. 7 Vols. Vol. I. G. E.McCracken. Vol. VI. W. C. Greene.

ST. AUGUSTINE, CONFESSIONS OF. W. Watts (1631). 2 Vols.

ST. AUGUSTINE : SELECT LETTERS. J. H. Baxter.

AUSONIUS. H. G. Evelyn White. 2 Vols.

BEDE. J. E. King. 2 Vols.

BOETHIUS : TRACTS AND DE CONSOLATIONE PHILOSOPHIAE.

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.

CELSUS : DE MEDICINA. W. G. Spencer. 3 Vols.

CICERO : BRUTUS AND ORATOR. G. L. Hendrickson and

H. M. Hubbell.

CICERO : DE FINIBUS. H. Rackham.

CICERO : DE INVENTIONS, etc. H. M. Hubbell.

CICERO : DE NATURA DEORUM AND ACADEMICA. H. Rack-

ham.



THE LOEB CLASSICAL LIBRARY

CICERO : DE OFFICIIS. Walter Miller.

CICERO : 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 STOI-CORUM ; DE PARTITIONS ORATORIA. H. Rackham.CICERO : DE REPUBLICA, DE LEGIBUS, SOMNIUM SCIPIONIS.

Clinton W. Keyes.CICERO : DE SENECTUTE, DE AMICITIA, DE DIVINATIONE.

W. A. Falconer.

CICERO : IN CATILINAM, PRO MURENA, PRO SULLA, PROFLACCO. 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.

CICERO : PRO ARCHIA, POST REDITUM, DE DOMO, DE HA-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, PROBALBO. 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.

[CICERO] : RHETORICA AD HERENNIUM. H. Caplan.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.

CURTIUS, Q. : HISTORY OF ALEXANDER. J. C. Rolfe. 2 Vols.

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.

GELHUS. J. C. Rolfe. 3 Vols.

HORACE : ODES AND EPODES. C. E. Bennett.

HORACE : SATIRES, EPISTLES, ARS POETICA. H. R. Fairclough.JEROME : SELECT LETTERS. F. A. Wright.JUVENAL AND PERSIUS. G. G. Ramsay.

2




LIVY. B. O. Foster, F. G. Moore, Evan T. Sage, A. C.

Schlesinger and R. M. Geer (General Index). 14 Vols.

LUCAN. J. D. Duff.

LUCRETIUS. W. H. D. Rouse.MARTIAL. W. C. A. Ker. 2 Vols.

MINOR LATIN POETS : from PUBLILIUS SYRUS to RUTILIUS

NAMATIANUS, including GRATTIUS, CALPURNIUS SICULUS,

NEMESIANUS, AVIANUS, with"Aetna,"

"Phoenix

"and

other poems. J. Wight Duff and Arnold M. Duff.

OVID : THE ART OF LOVE AND OTHER POEMS. J. H. Moz-

ley.

OVID : FASTI. Sir James G. Frazer.

OVID : HEROIDES AND AMORES. Grant Showerman.OVID : METAMORPHOSES. F. J. Miller. 2 Vols.

OVID : 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 byW. 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 AGRICOLAAND GERMANIA. Maurice Hutton.

TACITUS : HISTORIES AND ANNALS. C. H. Moore and J.

Jackson. 4 Vols.

3




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! .

F. W. Shipley.VIRGIL. H. R. Fairclough. 2 Vols.

VITHUVIUS : DE ARCHITECTURA. F. Granger. 2 Vols.

GREEK AUTHORS

ACHILLES TATIUS. S. Gaselee.

AELIAN : ON THE NATURE 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.

ALCIPHRON, AELIAN AND PHILOSTRATUS : LETTERS. A. R.

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.

AHATUS. Gf. CALLIMACHUS.

ARISTOPHANES. Benjamin Bickley Rogers. 3 Vols. Versetrans.

ARISTOTLE : ART OF RHETORIC. J. H. Freese.

ARISTOTLE : ATHENIAN CONSTITUTION, EUDEMIAN ETHICS,

VIRTUES AND VICES. H. Rackham.

ARISTOTLE : GENERATION OF ANIMALS. A. L. Peck.

ARISTOTLE : METAPHYSICS. H. Tredennick. 2 Vols.

ARISTOTLE : METEOROLOGICA. H. D. P. Lee.

ARISTOTLE : MINOR WORKS. W. S. Hett." On Colours,"

" On Things Heard," " Physiognomies," " On Plants,"" On Marvellous Things Heard,"

"Mechanical Problems,"

" On Indivisible Lines,""Situations and Names of

Winds,"" On Melissus, Xenophanes, and Gorgias."

ARISTOTLE : NICOMACHEAN ETHICS. H. Rackham.




ARISTOTLE : OECONOMICA AND MAGNA MORALIA. G. C.

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.

ARISTOTLE : POSTERIOR ANALYTICS. H. Tredennick ;

TOPICS. E. S. Forster.

ARISTOTLE : SOPHISTICAL REFUTATIONS. COMING-TO-BE AND

PASSING-AWAY. E. S. Forster. ON THE COSMOS. D. J.

Furley.ARISTOTLE : PARTS OF ANIMALS. A. L. Peck ; MOTION AND

PROGRESSION OF ANIMALS. E. S. Forster.

ARISTOTLE : PHYSICS. Rev. P. Wicksteed and F. M. Corn-

ford. 2 Vols.

ARISTOTLE : POETICS ; LONGINUS ON THE SUBLIME. W.Hamilton Fyfe ; DEMETRIUS ON STYLE. W. Rhys Roberts.

ARISTOTLE : POLITICS. H. Rackham.

ARISTOTLE : PROBLEMS. W. S. Hett. 2 Vols.

ARISTOTLE:

RHETORICA AD ALEXANDHUM. H. Rackham.(With Problems, Vol. II.)

ARRIAN : HISTORY OF ALEXANDER AND INDICA. Rev. E.

Iliffe Robson. 2 Vols.

ATHENAEUS : DEIPNOSOPHISTAE. C. B. Gulick. 7 Vols.

ST. BASIL : LETTERS. R. J. Deferrari. 4 Vols.

CALLIMACHUS : FRAGMENTS. C. A. Trypanis.CALLIMACHUS : HYMNS AND EPIGRAMS, AND LYCOPHRON.

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 MINORORATIONS : 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.




Dio CHRYSOSTOM. 5 Vols. Vols. I and II. J. W. Cohoon.

Vol. III. J. W. Cohoon and H. Lamar Crosby. Vols. IVand V. H. Lamar Crosby.

DIODORUS SICULUS. 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.

DIONYSIUS OF HALICARNASSUS : ROMAN ANTIQUITIES. Spel-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. S.

Jones and E. T. Withington. 4 Vols.

HOMER : ILIAD. A. T. Murray. 2 Vols.

HOMER : ODYSSEY. A. T. Murray. 2 Vols.

ISAEUS. 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.

LONGUS : DAPHNIS AND CHLOE. Thornley's translation

revised by J. M. Edmonds; and PARTHENIUS. S. Gaselee.

LUCIAN. 8 Vols. Vols. I-V. A. M. Harmon; Vol. VI.

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.




MARCUS AURELIUS. C. R. Haines.

MENANDER. F. G. Allinson.

MINOR ATTIC ORATORS. 2 Vols. K. J. Maidment and

J. 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. Wycher-ley.

PHILO. 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.

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 : STATESMAN, PHILEBUS. H. N. Fowler ; ION.

W. R. M. Lamb.PLATO : THEAETETUS AND SOPHIST. H. N. Fowler.

PLATO : TIMAEUS, CRITIAS, CLITOPHO, MENEXENUS, EPI-

STULAE. 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 andB. Einarson ; Vol. IX. E. L. Minar, Jr., F. H. Sandbach,




W. C. Helmbold ; Vol. X. H. N. Fowler : Vol. XII. H.

Cherniss and W. C. Helmbold.

PLUTARCH : THE PARALLEL LIVES. B. Perrin. 11 Vols.

POLYBIUS. W. R. Paton. 6 Vols.

PROCOPIUS : HISTORY OF THE WARS. H. B. Dewing. 7 Vols.

PTOLEMY : TETRABIBLOS. Of. MANETHO.

QUINTUS SMYRNAEUS. A. S. Way. Verse trans.

SEXTUS EMPIRICUS. Rev. R. G. Bury. 4 Vols.

SOPHOCLES. F. Storr. 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 SYMPO-

SIUM. C. L. Brownson and O. J. Todd. 3 Vols.

XENOPHON : MEMORABILIA AND OECONOMICUS. E. C. Mar-chant.

XENOPHON : SCRIPTA MINORA. E. C. Marchant.

VOLUMES IN PREPARATION

GREEK AUTHORS

ARISTOTLE : HISTORY OF ANIMALS. A. L. Peck.

PLOTINUS. A. H. Armstrong1

.

LATIN AUTHORS

BABRIUS AND PHAEDRUS. B. E. Perry.

DESCRIPTIVE PROSPECTUS ON APPLICATION

CAMBRIDGE, MASS. LONDON

HARVARD UNIV. PRESS WILLIAM HEINEMANN LTD

8



VOLUMES PUBLISHED LATIN AUTHORS continued

CICERO: KA DEORUM. ACADEMICA

Cl I5E OFFICIIS

CI( .

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 RULLUMCICERO: PRO MILONE, IN PISONEM, PRO SCAURO, PRO ONTEIO,

PRO RAB POSTUMO, PRO MARCELLO. PRO LIOARIO, PRO REGE

DEIOTARO

CICERO: PRO SESTIO. IN VATINIUMCICEJRO: 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 NEPOSFRONTINUS: STRATAGEMS and AQUEDUCTSPRONTO: CORRESPONDENCE. 2 vols.

-GEL1LIUS, A.: ATTIC NIGHTS. 3 vols.

plato - theaetetus, sophist

Documents