--- title: "Theaetetus · Θεαίτητος" author: "Plato" translator: "Harold North Fowler" languages: [grc, en] shelf: "Philosophy" section: 4 of 6 url: https://scriptura.si/works/plato-theaetetus/4/ cite: "Plato, tr. Harold North Fowler, Theaetetus · Θεαίτητος, section 4. Scriptura (scriptura.si), https://scriptura.si/works/plato-theaetetus/4/" --- # Theaetetus · Θεαίτητος *Plato, tr. Harold North Fowler* What is knowledge? Socrates, the midwife of ideas, tests three answers. > Greek: ed. John Burnet, from the Perseus Digital Library (canonical-greekLit, tlg0059.tlg006, CC BY-SA 4.0). > English: Harold North Fowler, from the Perseus Digital Library (tlg0059.tlg006.perseus-eng2). Notes are not included. > Rows follow the references the two texts share (chapters and sections), cut where both reach the end of a sentence. ## 4. Pages 176–187 Source: https://scriptura.si/works/plato-theaetetus/4/ · cite a paragraph as https://scriptura.si/works/plato-theaetetus/4/#p-N [¶0] THEO. What penalty do you mean? > Greek: ΘΕΟ. τίνα δὴ λέγεις; [¶1] 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. > Greek: ΣΩ. παραδειγμάτων, ὦ φίλε, ἐν τῷ ὄντι ἑστώτων, τοῦ μὲν θείου εὐδαιμονεστάτου, τοῦ δὲ ἀθέου ἀθλιωτάτου, οὐχ ὁρῶντες ὅτι οὕτως ἔχει, ὑπὸ ἠλιθιότητός τε καὶ τῆς ἐσχάτης ἀνοίας λανθάνουσι τῷ μὲν ὁμοιούμενοι διὰ τὰς ἀδίκους πράξεις, τῷ δὲ ἀνομοιούμενοι. [¶2] 177. They therefore pay the penalty for this by living a life that conforms 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, and here on earth they will always live the life like themselves—evil men associating with evil—when they hear this, they will be so confident in their unscrupulous cleverness that they will think our words the talk of fools. THEO. Very true, Socrates. > Greek: 177. οὗ δὴ τίνουσι δίκην ζῶντες τὸν εἰκότα βίον ᾧ ὁμοιοῦνται· ἐὰν δʼ εἴπωμεν ὅτι, ἂν μὴ ἀπαλλαγῶσι τῆς δεινότητος, καὶ τελευτήσαντας αὐτοὺς ἐκεῖνος μὲν ὁ τῶν κακῶν καθαρὸς τόπος οὐ δέξεται, ἐνθάδε δὲ τὴν αὑτοῖς ὁμοιότητα τῆς διαγωγῆς ἀεὶ ἕξουσι, κακοὶ κακοῖς συνόντες, ταῦτα δὴ καὶ παντάπασιν ὡς δεινοὶ καὶ πανοῦργοι ἀνοήτων τινῶν ἀκούσονται. ΘΕΟ. καὶ μάλα δή, ὦ Σώκρατες. [¶3] 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 become strangely dissatisfied with themselves and their arguments; their brilliant rhetoric withers away, so that they seem no better than children. But this is a digression. Let us turn away from these matters—if we do not, they will come on like an ever-rising flood and bury in silt our original argument—and let us, if you please, proceed. > Greek: ΣΩ. οἶδά τοι, ὦ ἑταῖρε. ἓν μέντοι τι αὐτοῖς συμβέβηκεν· ὅταν ἰδίᾳ λόγον δέῃ δοῦναί τε καὶ δέξασθαι περὶ ὧν ψέγουσι, καὶ ἐθελήσωσιν ἀνδρικῶς πολὺν χρόνον ὑπομεῖναι καὶ μὴ ἀνάνδρως φυγεῖν, τότε ἀτόπως, ὦ δαιμόνιε, τελευτῶντες οὐκ ἀρέσκουσιν αὐτοὶ αὑτοῖς περὶ ὧν λέγουσι, καὶ ἡ ῥητορικὴ ἐκείνη πως ἀπομαραίνεται, ὥστε παίδων μηδὲν δοκεῖν διαφέρειν. περὶ μὲν οὖν τούτων, ἐπειδὴ καὶ πάρεργα τυγχάνει λεγόμενα, ἀποστῶμεν—εἰ δὲ μή, πλείω ἀεὶ ἐπιρρέοντα καταχώσει ἡμῶν τὸν ἐξ ἀρχῆς λόγον—ἐπὶ δὲ τὰ ἔμπροσθεν ἴωμεν, εἰ καὶ σοὶ δοκεῖ. [¶4] THEO. To me, Socrates, such digressions are quite as agreeable as the argument; for they are easier for a man of my age to follow. However, if you prefer, let us return to our argument. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. ἐμοὶ μὲν τὰ τοιαῦτα, ὦ Σώκρατες, οὐκ ἀηδέστερα ἀκούειν· ῥᾴω γὰρ τηλικῷδε ὄντι ἐπακολουθεῖν. εἰ μέντοι δοκεῖ, πάλιν ἐπανίωμεν. [¶5] SOC. Very well. We were at about the point in our argument where we said that those who declare that only motion is reality, and that whatever seems to each man really is to him to whom it seems, are willing to maintain their position in regard to other matters and to maintain especially in regard to justice that whatever laws a state makes, because they seem to it just, are just to the state that made them, as long as they remain in force; but as regards the good, that nobody has the courage to go on and contend that whatever laws a state passes thinking them advantageous to it are really advantageous as long as they remain in force, unless what he means is merely the name “advantageous”; and that would be making a joke of our argument. Am I right? > Greek: ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν ἐνταῦθά που ἦμεν τοῦ λόγου, ἐν ᾧ ἔφαμεν τοὺς τὴν φερομένην οὐσίαν λέγοντας, καὶ τὸ ἀεὶ δοκοῦν ἑκάστῳ τοῦτο καὶ εἶναι τούτῳ ᾧ δοκεῖ, ἐν μὲν τοῖς ἄλλοις ἐθέλειν διισχυρίζεσθαι καὶ οὐχ ἥκιστα περὶ τὰ δίκαια, ὡς παντὸς μᾶλλον ἃ ἂν θῆται πόλις δόξαντα αὑτῇ, ταῦτα καὶ ἔστι δίκαια τῇ θεμένῃ, ἕωσπερ ἂν κέηται· περὶ δὲ τἀγαθὰ οὐδένα ἀνδρεῖον ἔθʼ οὕτως εἶναι ὥστε τολμᾶν διαμάχεσθαι ὅτι καὶ ἃ ἂν ὠφέλιμα οἰηθεῖσα πόλις ἑαυτῇ θῆται, καὶ ἔστι τοσοῦτον χρόνον ὅσον ἂν κέηται ὠφέλιμα, πλὴν εἴ τις τὸ ὄνομα λέγοι· τοῦτο δέ που σκῶμμʼ ἂν εἴη πρὸς ὃ λέγομεν. ἢ οὐχί; [¶6] THEO. Certainly. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. πάνυ γε. [¶7] SOC. Yes; for he must not mean merely the name, but the thing named must be the object of his attention. > Greek: ΣΩ. μὴ γὰρ λεγέτω τὸ ὄνομα, ἀλλὰ τὸ πρᾶγμα τὸ ὀνομαζόμενον θεωρείτω. [¶8] THEO. True. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. μὴ γάρ. [¶9] SOC. But the state, in making laws, aims, of course, at advantage, whatever the name it gives it, and makes all its laws as advantageous as possible to itself, to the extent of its belief and ability; or has it in making laws anything else in view? > Greek: ΣΩ. ἀλλʼ ὃ ἂν τοῦτο ὀνομάζῃ, τούτου δήπου στοχάζεται νομοθετουμένη, καὶ πάντας τοὺς νόμους, καθʼ ὅσον οἴεταί τε καὶ δύναται, ὡς ὠφελιμωτάτους ἑαυτῇ τίθεται· ἢ πρὸς ἄλλο τι βλέπουσα νομοθετεῖται; [¶10] 178. THEO. Certainly not. > Greek: 178. ΘΕΟ. οὐδαμῶς. [¶11] SOC. And does it always hit the mark, or does every state often miss it? > Greek: ΣΩ. ἦ οὖν καὶ τυγχάνει ἀεί, ἢ πολλὰ καὶ διαμαρτάνει ἑκάστη; [¶12] THEO. I should say they do often miss it! > Greek: ΘΕΟ. οἶμαι ἔγωγε καὶ ἁμαρτάνειν. [¶13] 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 them with the idea that they will be advantageous in after time; and this is rightly called the future. > Greek: ΣΩ. ἔτι τοίνυν ἐνθένδε ἂν μᾶλλον πᾶς τις ὁμολογήσειεν ταὐτὰ ταῦτα, εἰ περὶ παντός τις τοῦ εἴδους ἐρωτῴη ἐν ᾧ καὶ τὸ ὠφέλιμον τυγχάνει ὄν· ἔστι δέ που καὶ περὶ τὸν μέλλοντα χρόνον. ὅταν γὰρ νομοθετώμεθα, ὡς ἐσομένους ὠφελίμους τοὺς νόμους τιθέμεθα εἰς τὸν ἔπειτα χρόνον· τοῦτο δὲ μέλλον ὀρθῶς ἂν λέγοιμεν. [¶14] THEO. Certainly. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. πάνυ γε. [¶15] SOC. Come then, on this assumption, let us question 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? > Greek: ΣΩ. ἴθι δή, οὑτωσὶ ἐρωτῶμεν Πρωταγόραν ἢ ἄλλον τινὰ τῶν ἐκείνῳ τὰ αὐτὰ λεγόντων· πάντων μέτρον ἄνθρωπός ἐστιν, ὡς φατέ, ὦ Πρωταγόρα, λευκῶν βαρέων κούφων, οὐδενὸς ὅτου οὐ τῶν τοιούτων· ἔχων γὰρ αὐτῶν τὸ κριτήριον ἐν αὑτῷ, οἷα πάσχει τοιαῦτα οἰόμενος, ἀληθῆ τε οἴεται αὑτῷ καὶ ὄντα. οὐχ οὕτω; [¶16] THEO. Yes. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. οὕτω. [¶17] SOC. Does he, then, also, Protagoras, we shall say, possess within himself the standard by which to judge of the things which are yet to be, and do those things which he thinks will be actually come to pass for him who thought them? Take, for instance, heat; if some ordinary man thinks he is going to take a fever, that is to say, that this particular heat will be, and some other man, who is a physician, thinks the contrary, whose opinion shall we expect the future to prove right? Or perhaps the opinion of both, and the man will become, not hot or feverish to the physician, but to himself both? > Greek: ΣΩ. ἦ καὶ τῶν μελλόντων ἔσεσθαι, φήσομεν, ὦ Πρωταγόρα, ἔχει τὸ κριτήριον ἐν αὑτῷ, καὶ οἷα ἂν οἰηθῇ ἔσεσθαι, ταῦτα καὶ γίγνεται ἐκείνῳ τῷ οἰηθέντι; οἷον θερμή· ἆρʼ ὅταν τις οἰηθῇ ἰδιώτης αὑτὸν πυρετὸν λήψεσθαι καὶ ἔσεσθαι ταύτην τὴν θερμότητα, καὶ ἕτερος, ἰατρὸς δέ, ἀντοιηθῇ, κατὰ τὴν ποτέρου δόξαν φῶμεν τὸ μέλλον ἀποβήσεσθαι, ἢ κατὰ τὴν ἀμφοτέρων, καὶ τῷ μὲν ἰατρῷ οὐ θερμὸς οὐδὲ πυρέττων γενήσεται, ἑαυτῷ δὲ ἀμφότερα; [¶18] THEO. No, that would be ridiculous. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. γελοῖον μεντἂν εἴη. [¶19] SOC. But, I imagine, in regard to the sweetness or dryness which will be in a wine, the opinion of the husbandman, not that of the lyre-player, will be valid. > Greek: ΣΩ. ἀλλʼ οἶμαι περὶ οἴνου γλυκύτητος καὶ αὐστηρότητος μελλούσης ἔσεσθαι ἡ τοῦ γεωργοῦ δόξα ἀλλʼ οὐχ ἡ τοῦ κιθαριστοῦ κυρία. [¶20] THEO. Of course. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. τί μήν; [¶21] SOC. And again, in a matter of discord or tunefulness in music that has never been played, a gymnastic teacher could not judge better than a musician what will, when performed, seem tuneful even to a gymnastic teacher himself. > Greek: ΣΩ. οὐδʼ ἂν αὖ περὶ ἀναρμόστου τε καὶ εὐαρμόστου ἐσομένου παιδοτρίβης ἂν βέλτιον δοξάσειεν μουσικοῦ, ὃ καὶ ἔπειτα αὐτῷ τῷ παιδοτρίβῃ δόξει εὐάρμοστον εἶναι. [¶22] THEO. Certainly not. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. οὐδαμῶς. [¶23] SOC. Then, too, when a banquet is in preparation the opinion of him who is to be a guest, unless he has training in cookery, is of less value concerning the pleasure that will be derived from the viands than that of the cook. For we need not yet argue about that which already is or has been pleasant to each one but concerning that which will in the future seem and be pleasant to each one, is he himself the best judge for himself, or would you, Protagoras—at least as regards the arguments which will be persuasive in court to each of us—be able to give an opinion beforehand better than anyone whatsoever who has no especial training? > Greek: ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν καὶ τοῦ μέλλοντος ἑστιάσεσθαι μὴ μαγειρικοῦ ὄντος, σκευαζομένης θοίνης, ἀκυροτέρα ἡ κρίσις τῆς τοῦ ὀψοποιοῦ περὶ τῆς ἐσομένης ἡδονῆς. περὶ μὲν γὰρ τοῦ ἤδη ὄντος ἑκάστῳ ἡδέος ἢ γεγονότος μηδέν πω τῷ λόγῳ διαμαχώμεθα, ἀλλὰ περὶ τοῦ μέλλοντος ἑκάστῳ καὶ δόξειν καὶ ἔσεσθαι πότερον αὐτὸς αὑτῷ ἄριστος κριτής, ἢ σύ, ὦ Πρωταγόρα, τό γε περὶ λόγους πιθανὸν ἑκάστῳ ἡμῶν ἐσόμενον εἰς δικαστήριον βέλτιον ἂν προδοξάσαις ἢ τῶν ἰδιωτῶν ὁστισοῦν; [¶24] THEO. Certainly, Socrates, in this, at any rate, he used to declare emphatically that he himself excelled everyone. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. καὶ μάλα, ὦ Σώκρατες, τοῦτό γε σφόδρα ὑπισχνεῖτο πάντων διαφέρειν αὐτός. [¶25] SOC. Yes, my friend, he certainly did; otherwise nobody would have paid him a high fee for his conversations, if he had not made his pupils believe that neither a prophet nor anyone else could judge better than himself what was in the future to be and seem. > Greek: ΣΩ. νὴ Δία, ὦ μέλε· ἢ οὐδείς γʼ ἂν αὐτῷ διελέγετο διδοὺς πολὺ ἀργύριον, εἰ μὴ τοὺς συνόντας ἔπειθεν ὅτι καὶ τὸ μέλλον ἔσεσθαί τε καὶ δόξειν οὔτε μάντις οὔτε τις ἄλλος ἄμεινον κρίνειεν ἂν ἢ αὐτός [αὑτῷ]. [¶26] 179. THEO. Very true. > Greek: 179. ΘΕΟ. ἀληθέστατα. [¶27] SOC. Both lawmaking, then, and the advantageous are concerned with the future, and everyone would agree that a state in making laws must often fail to attain the greatest advantage? > Greek: ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν καὶ αἱ νομοθεσίαι καὶ τὸ ὠφέλιμον περὶ τὸ μέλλον ἐστί, καὶ πᾶς ἂν ὁμολογοῖ νομοθετουμένην πόλιν πολλάκις ἀνάγκην εἶναι τοῦ ὠφελιμωτάτου ἀποτυγχάνειν; [¶28] THEO. Assuredly. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. μάλα γε. [¶29] SOC. Then it will be a fair answer if we say to your master that he is obliged to agree that one man is wiser than another, and that such a wise man is a measure, but that I, who am without knowledge, am not in the least obliged to become a measure, as the argument in his behalf just now tried to oblige me to be, whether I would or no. > Greek: ΣΩ. μετρίως ἄρα ἡμῖν πρὸς τὸν διδάσκαλόν σου εἰρήσεται ὅτι ἀνάγκη αὐτῷ ὁμολογεῖν σοφώτερόν τε ἄλλον ἄλλου εἶναι καὶ τὸν μὲν τοιοῦτον μέτρον εἶναι, ἐμοὶ δὲ τῷ ἀνεπιστήμονι μηδὲ ὁπωστιοῦν ἀνάγκην εἶναι μέτρῳ γίγνεσθαι, ὡς ἄρτι με ἠνάγκαζεν ὁ ὑπὲρ ἐκείνου λόγος, εἴτʼ ἐβουλόμην εἴτε μή, τοιοῦτον εἶναι. [¶30] THEO. In that respect, Socrates, I think that the argument is most clearly proved to be wrong, and it is proved wrong in this also, in that it declares the opinions of others to be valid, whereas it was shown that they do not consider his arguments true at all. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. ἐκείνῃ μοι δοκεῖ, ὦ Σώκρατες, μάλιστα ἁλίσκεσθαι ὁ λόγος, ἁλισκόμενος καὶ ταύτῃ, ᾗ τὰς τῶν ἄλλων δόξας κυρίας ποιεῖ, αὗται δὲ ἐφάνησαν τοὺς ἐκείνου λόγους οὐδαμῇ ἀληθεῖς ἡγούμεναι. [¶31] SOC. In many other respects, Theodorus, it could be proved that not every opinion of every person is true, at any rate in matters of that kind; but it is more difficult to prove that opinions are not true in regard to the momentary states of feeling of each person, from which our perceptions and the opinions concerning them arise. But perhaps I am quite wrong; for it may be impossible to prove that they are not true, and those who say that they are manifest and are forms of knowledge may perhaps be right, and Theaetetus here was not far from the mark in saying that perception and knowledge are identical. So we must, as the argument in behalf of Protagoras enjoined upon us, come up closer and examine this doctrine of motion as the fundamental essence, rapping on it to see whether it rings sound or unsound. As you know, a strife has arisen about it, no mean one, either, and waged by not a few combatants. > Greek: ΣΩ. πολλαχῇ, ὦ Θεόδωρε, καὶ ἄλλῃ ἂν τό γε τοιοῦτον ἁλοίη μὴ πᾶσαν παντὸς ἀληθῆ δόξαν εἶναι· περὶ δὲ τὸ παρὸν ἑκάστῳ πάθος, ἐξ ὧν αἱ αἰσθήσεις καὶ αἱ κατὰ ταύτας δόξαι γίγνονται, χαλεπώτερον ἑλεῖν ὡς οὐκ ἀληθεῖς. ἴσως δὲ οὐδὲν λέγω· ἀνάλωτοι γάρ, εἰ ἔτυχον, εἰσίν, καὶ οἱ φάσκοντες αὐτὰς ἐναργεῖς τε εἶναι καὶ ἐπιστήμας τάχα ἂν ὄντα λέγοιεν, καὶ Θεαίτητος ὅδε οὐκ ἀπὸ σκοποῦ εἴρηκεν αἴσθησιν καὶ ἐπιστήμην ταὐτὸν θέμενος. προσιτέον οὖν ἐγγυτέρω, ὡς ὁ ὑπὲρ Πρωταγόρου λόγος ἐπέταττε, καὶ σκεπτέον τὴν φερομένην ταύτην οὐσίαν διακρούοντα εἴτε ὑγιὲς εἴτε σαθρὸν φθέγγεται· μάχη δʼ οὖν περὶ αὐτῆς οὐ φαύλη οὐδʼ ὀλίγοις γέγονεν. [¶32] THEO. Yes, far from mean, and it is spreading far and wide all over Ionia; for the disciples of Heracleitus are supporting this doctrine very vigorously. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. πολλοῦ καὶ δεῖ φαύλη εἶναι, ἀλλὰ περὶ μὲν τὴν Ἰωνίαν καὶ ἐπιδίδωσι πάμπολυ. οἱ γὰρ τοῦ Ἡρακλείτου ἑταῖροι χορηγοῦσι τούτου τοῦ λόγου μάλα ἐρρωμένως. [¶33] SOC. Therefore, my dear Theodorus, we must all the more examine it from the beginning as they themselves present it. > Greek: ΣΩ. τῷ τοι, ὦ φίλε Θεόδωρε, μᾶλλον σκεπτέον καὶ ἐξ ἀρχῆς, ὥσπερ αὐτοὶ ὑποτείνονται. [¶34] THEO. Certainly we must. For it is no more possible, Socrates, to discuss these doctrines of Heracleitus (or, as you say, of Homer or even earlier sages) with the Ephesians themselves—those, at least, who profess to be familiar with them—than with madmen. For they are, quite in accordance with their text-books, in perpetual motion; but as for keeping to an argument or a question and quietly answering and asking in turn, their power of doing that is less than nothing; or rather the words “nothing at all” fail to express the absence from these fellows of even the slightest particle of rest. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. παντάπασι μὲν οὖν. καὶ γάρ, ὦ Σώκρατες, περὶ τούτων τῶν Ἡρακλειτείων ἤ, ὥσπερ σὺ λέγεις, Ὁμηρείων καὶ ἔτι παλαιοτέρων, αὐτοῖς μὲν τοῖς περὶ τὴν Ἔφεσον, ὅσοι προσποιοῦνται ἔμπειροι, οὐδὲν μᾶλλον οἷόν τε διαλεχθῆναι ἢ τοῖς οἰστρῶσιν. ἀτεχνῶς γὰρ κατὰ τὰ συγγράμματα φέρονται, τὸ δʼ ἐπιμεῖναι ἐπὶ λόγῳ καὶ ἐρωτήματι καὶ ἡσυχίως ἐν μέρει ἀποκρίνασθαι καὶ ἐρέσθαι ἧττον αὐτοῖς ἔνι ἢ τὸ μηδέν· [¶35] 180. But if you ask one of them a question, he pulls out puzzling little phrases, like arrows from a quiver, and shoots them off; and if you try to get hold of an explanation of what he has said, you will be struck with another phrase of novel and distorted wording, and you never make any progress whatsoever with any of them, nor do they themselves with one another, for that matter, but they take very good care to allow nothing to be settled either in an argument or in their own minds, thinking, I suppose, that this is being stationary; but they wage bitter war against the stationary, and, so far as they can, they banish it altogether. SOC. Perhaps, Theodorus, you have seen the men when they are fighting, but have not been with them when they are at peace; for they are no friends of yours; but I fancy they utter such peaceful doctrines at leisure to those pupils whom they wish to make like themselves. > Greek: 180. μᾶλλον δὲ ὑπερβάλλει τὸ οὐδʼ οὐδὲν πρὸς τὸ μηδὲ σμικρὸν ἐνεῖναι τοῖς ἀνδράσιν ἡσυχίας. ἀλλʼ ἄν τινά τι ἔρῃ, ὥσπερ ἐκ φαρέτρας ῥηματίσκια αἰνιγματώδη ἀνασπῶντες ἀποτοξεύουσι, κἂν τούτου ζητῇς λόγον λαβεῖν τί εἴρηκεν, ἑτέρῳ πεπλήξῃ καινῶς μετωνομασμένῳ. περανεῖς δὲ οὐδέποτε οὐδὲν πρὸς οὐδένα αὐτῶν· οὐδέ γε ἐκεῖνοι αὐτοὶ πρὸς ἀλλήλους, ἀλλʼ εὖ πάνυ φυλάττουσι τὸ μηδὲν βέβαιον ἐᾶν εἶναι μήτʼ ἐν λόγῳ μήτʼ ἐν ταῖς αὑτῶν ψυχαῖς, ἡγούμενοι, ὡς ἐμοὶ δοκεῖ, αὐτὸ στάσιμον εἶναι· τούτῳ δὲ πάνυ πολεμοῦσιν, καὶ καθʼ ὅσον δύνανται πανταχόθεν ἐκβάλλουσιν. ΣΩ. ἴσως, ὦ Θεόδωρε, τοὺς ἄνδρας μαχομένους ἑώρακας, εἰρηνεύουσιν δὲ οὐ συγγέγονας· οὐ γὰρ σοὶ ἑταῖροί εἰσιν. ἀλλʼ οἶμαι τὰ τοιαῦτα τοῖς μαθηταῖς ἐπὶ σχολῆς φράζουσιν, οὓς ἂν βούλωνται ὁμοίους αὑτοῖς ποιῆσαι. [¶36] THEO. What pupils, my good man? Such people do not become pupils of one another, but they grow up of themselves, each one getting his inspiration from any chance source, and each thinks the other knows nothing. From these people, then, as I was going to say, you would never get an argument either with their will or against it; but we must ourselves take over the question and investigate it as if it were a problem of mathematics. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. ποίοις μαθηταῖς, ὦ δαιμόνιε; οὐδὲ γίγνεται τῶν τοιούτων ἕτερος ἑτέρου μαθητής, ἀλλʼ αὐτόματοι ἀναφύονται ὁπόθεν ἂν τύχῃ ἕκαστος αὐτῶν ἐνθουσιάσας, καὶ τὸν ἕτερον ὁ ἕτερος οὐδὲν ἡγεῖται εἰδέναι. παρὰ μὲν οὖν τούτων, ὅπερ ᾖα ἐρῶν, οὐκ ἄν ποτε λάβοις λόγον οὔτε ἑκόντων οὔτε ἀκόντων· αὐτοὺς δὲ δεῖ παραλαβόντας ὥσπερ πρόβλημα ἐπισκοπεῖσθαι. [¶37] SOC. Yes, what you say is reasonable. Now as for the problem, have we not heard from the ancients, who concealed their meaning from the multitude by their poetry, that the origin of all things is Oceanus and Tethys, flowing streams, and that nothing is at rest and likewise from the modern, who, since they are wiser, declare their meaning openly, in order that even cobblers may hear and know their wisdom and may cease from the silly belief that some things are at rest and others in motion, and, after learning that everything is in motion, may honor their teachers? But, Theodorus, I almost forgot that others teach the opposite of this, So that it is motionless, the name of which is the All, and all the other doctrines maintained by Melissus and Parmenides and the rest, in opposition to all these they maintain that everything is one and is stationary within itself, having no place in which to move. SO.What shall we do with all these people, my friend? For, advancing little by little, we have unwittingly fallen between the two parties, and, unless we protect ourselves and escape somehow, we shall pay the penalty, like those in the palaestra, who in playing on the line are caught by both sides and dragged in opposite directions. > Greek: ΣΩ. καὶ μετρίως γε λέγεις. τὸ δὲ δὴ πρόβλημα ἄλλο τι παρειλήφαμεν παρὰ μὲν τῶν ἀρχαίων μετὰ ποιήσεως ἐπικρυπτομένων τοὺς πολλούς, ὡς ἡ γένεσις τῶν ἄλλων πάντων Ὠκεανός τε καὶ Τηθὺς ῥεύματα ⟨ὄντα⟩ τυγχάνει καὶ οὐδὲν ἕστηκε, παρὰ δὲ τῶν ὑστέρων ἅτε σοφωτέρων ἀναφανδὸν ἀποδεικνυμένων, ἵνα καὶ οἱ σκυτοτόμοι αὐτῶν τὴν σοφίαν μάθωσιν ἀκούσαντες καὶ παύσωνται ἠλιθίως οἰόμενοι τὰ μὲν ἑστάναι, τὰ δὲ κινεῖσθαι τῶν ὄντων, μαθόντες δὲ ὅτι πάντα κινεῖται τιμῶσιν αὐτούς; ὀλίγου δὲ ἐπελαθόμην, ὦ Θεόδωρε, ὅτι ἄλλοι αὖ τἀναντία τούτοις ἀπεφήναντο, οἷον ἀκίνητον τελέθει τῷ παντὶ ὄνομʼ εἶναι καὶ ἄλλα ὅσα Μέλισσοί τε καὶ Παρμενίδαι ἐναντιούμενοι πᾶσι τούτοις διισχυρίζονται, ὡς ἕν τε πάντα ἐστὶ καὶ ἕστηκεν αὐτὸ ἐν αὑτῷ οὐκ ἔχον χώραν ἐν ᾗ κινεῖται. ΣΩ. τούτοις οὖν, ὦ ἑταῖρε, πᾶσι τί χρησόμεθα; κατὰ σμικρὸν γὰρ προϊόντες λελήθαμεν ἀμφοτέρων εἰς τὸ μέσον πεπτωκότες, καὶ ἂν μή πῃ ἀμυνόμενοι διαφύγωμεν, δίκην δώσομεν ὥσπερ οἱ ἐν ταῖς παλαίστραις διὰ γραμμῆς παίζοντες, ὅταν ὑπʼ ἀμφοτέρων ληφθέντες ἕλκωνται εἰς τἀναντία. [¶38] 181. I think, then, we had better examine first the one party, those whom we originally set out to join, the flowing ones, and if we find their arguments sound, we will help them to pull us over, trying thus to escape the others; but if we find that the partisans of “the whole” seem to have truer doctrines, we will take refuge with them from those who would move what is motionless. But if we find that neither party has anything reasonable to say, we shall be ridiculous if we think that we, who are of no account, can say anything worth while after having rejected the doctrines of very ancient and very wise men. Therefore, Theodorus, see whether it is desirable to go forward into so great a danger. THEO. Oh, it would be unendurable, Socrates, not to examine thoroughly the doctrines of both parties. > Greek: 181. δοκεῖ οὖν μοι τοὺς ἑτέρους πρότερον σκεπτέον, ἐφʼ οὕσπερ ὡρμήσαμεν, τοὺς ῥέοντας, καὶ ἐὰν μέν τι φαίνωνται λέγοντες, συνέλξομεν μετʼ αὐτῶν ἡμᾶς αὐτούς, τοὺς ἑτέρους ἐκφυγεῖν πειρώμενοι· ἐὰν δὲ οἱ τοῦ ὅλου στασιῶται ἀληθέστερα λέγειν δοκῶσι, φευξόμεθα παρʼ αὐτοὺς ἀπʼ αὖ τῶν τὰ ἀκίνητα κινούντων. ἀμφότεροι δʼ ἂν φανῶσι μηδὲν μέτριον λέγοντες, γελοῖοι ἐσόμεθα ἡγούμενοι ἡμᾶς μὲν τὶ λέγειν φαύλους ὄντας, παμπαλαίους δὲ καὶ πασσόφους ἄνδρας ἀποδεδοκιμακότες. ὅρα οὖν, ὦ Θεόδωρε, εἰ λυσιτελεῖ εἰς τοσοῦτον προϊέναι κίνδυνον. ΘΕΟ. οὐδὲν μὲν οὖν ἀνεκτόν, ὦ Σώκρατες, μὴ οὐ διασκέψασθαι τί λέγουσιν ἑκάτεροι τῶν ἀνδρῶν. [¶39] SOC. Then they must be examined, since you are so urgent. Now I think the starting-point of our examination of the doctrine of motion is this: Exactly what do they mean, after all, when they say that all things are in motion? What I wish to ask is this: Do they mean to say that there is only one kind of motion or, as I believe, two? But it must not be my belief alone; you must share it also, that if anything happens to us we may suffer it in common. Tell me, do you call it motion when a thing changes its place or turns round in the same place? > Greek: ΣΩ. σκεπτέον ἂν εἴη σοῦ γε οὕτω προθυμουμένου. δοκεῖ οὖν μοι ἀρχὴ εἶναι τῆς σκέψεως κινήσεως πέρι, ποῖόν τί ποτε ἄρα λέγοντές φασι τὰ πάντα κινεῖσθαι. βούλομαι δὲ λέγειν τὸ τοιόνδε· πότερον ἕν τι εἶδος αὐτῆς λέγουσιν ἤ, ὥσπερ ἐμοὶ φαίνεται, δύο; μὴ μέντοι μόνον ἐμοὶ δοκείτω, ἀλλὰ συμμέτεχε καὶ σύ, ἵνα κοινῇ πάσχωμεν ἄν τι καὶ δέῃ. καί μοι λέγε· ἆρα κινεῖσθαι καλεῖς ὅταν τι χώραν ἐκ χώρας μεταβάλλῃ ἢ καὶ ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ στρέφηται; [¶40] THEO. Yes. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. ἔγωγε. [¶41] SOC. Let this, then, be one kind of motion. Now when a thing remains in the same place, but grows old, or becomes black instead of white, or hard instead of soft, or undergoes any other kind of alteration, is it not proper to say that this is another kind of motion? > Greek: ΣΩ. τοῦτο μὲν τοίνυν ἓν ἔστω εἶδος. ὅταν δὲ ᾖ μὲν ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ, γηράσκῃ δέ, ἢ μέλαν ἐκ λευκοῦ ἢ σκληρὸν ἐκ μαλακοῦ γίγνηται, ἤ τινα ἄλλην ἀλλοίωσιν ἀλλοιῶται, ἆρα οὐκ ἄξιον ἕτερον εἶδος φάναι κινήσεως; [¶42] THEO. I think so. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. [ἔμοιγε δοκεῖ] ἀναγκαῖον μὲν οὖν. [¶43] SOC. Nay, it must be true. So I say that there are these two kinds of motion: “alteration,” and “motion in space.” > Greek: ΣΩ. δύο δὴ λέγω τούτω εἴδει κινήσεως, ἀλλοίωσιν, τὴν δὲ φοράν. [¶44] THEO. And you are right. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. ὀρθῶς γε λέγων. [¶45] SOC. Now that we have made this distinction, let us at once converse with those who say that all things are in motion, and let us ask them, “Do you mean that everything moves in both ways, moving in space and undergoing alteration, or one thing in both ways and another in one of the two ways only?” > Greek: ΣΩ. τοῦτο τοίνυν οὕτω διελόμενοι διαλεγώμεθα ἤδη τοῖς τὰ πάντα φάσκουσιν κινεῖσθαι καὶ ἐρωτῶμεν· πότερον πᾶν φατε ἀμφοτέρως κινεῖσθαι, φερόμενόν τε καὶ ἀλλοιούμενον, ἢ τὸ μέν τι ἀμφοτέρως, τὸ δʼ ἑτέρως; [¶46] THEO. By Zeus, I cannot tell! But I think they would say that everything moves in both ways. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. ἀλλὰ μὰ Δίʼ ἔγωγε οὐκ ἔχω εἰπεῖν· οἶμαι δʼ ἂν φάναι ἀμφοτέρως. [¶47] SOC. Yes; otherwise, my friend, they will find that things in motion are also things at rest, and it will be no more correct to say that all things are in motion than that all things are at rest. > Greek: ΣΩ. εἰ δέ γε μή, ὦ ἑταῖρε, κινούμενά τε αὐτοῖς καὶ ἑστῶτα φανεῖται, καὶ οὐδὲν μᾶλλον ὀρθῶς ἕξει εἰπεῖν ὅτι κινεῖται τὰ πάντα ἢ ὅτι ἕστηκεν. [¶48] THEO. What you say is very true. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. ἀληθέστατα λέγεις. [¶49] SOC. Then since they must be in motion, and since absence of motion must be impossible for anything, all things are always in all kinds of motion. > Greek: ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν ἐπειδὴ κινεῖσθαι αὐτὰ δεῖ, τὸ δὲ μὴ κινεῖσθαι μὴ ἐνεῖναι μηδενί, πάντα δὴ πᾶσαν κίνησιν ἀεὶ κινεῖται. [¶50] 182. THEO. Necessarily. > Greek: 182. ΘΕΟ. ἀνάγκη. [¶51] SOC. Then just examine this point of their doctrine. Did we not find that they say that heat or whiteness or anything you please arises in some such way as this, namely that each of these moves simultaneously with perception between the active and the passive element, and the passive becomes percipient, but not perception, and the active becomes, not a quality, but endowed with a quality? Now perhaps quality seems an extraordinary word, and you do not understand it when used with general application, so let me give particular examples. For the active element becomes neither heat nor whiteness, but hot or white, and other things in the same way; you probably remember that this was what we said earlier in our discourse, that nothing is in itself unvaryingly one, neither the active nor the passive, but from the union of the two with one another the perceptions and the perceived give birth and the latter become things endowed with some quality while the former become percipient. > Greek: ΣΩ. σκόπει δή μοι τόδε αὐτῶν· τῆς θερμότητος ἢ λευκότητος ἢ ὁτουοῦν γένεσιν οὐχ οὕτω πως ἐλέγομεν φάναι αὐτούς, φέρεσθαι ἕκαστον τούτων ἅμα αἰσθήσει μεταξὺ τοῦ ποιοῦντός τε καὶ πάσχοντος, καὶ τὸ μὲν πάσχον αἰσθητικὸν ἀλλʼ οὐκ αἴσθησιν [ἔτι] γίγνεσθαι, τὸ δὲ ποιοῦν ποιόν τι ἀλλʼ οὐ ποιότητα; ἴσως οὖν ἡ ποιότης ἅμα ἀλλόκοτόν τε φαίνεται ὄνομα καὶ οὐ μανθάνεις ἁθρόον λεγόμενον· κατὰ μέρη οὖν ἄκουε. τὸ γὰρ ποιοῦν οὔτε θερμότης οὔτε λευκότης, θερμὸν δὲ καὶ λευκὸν γίγνεται, καὶ τἆλλα οὕτω· μέμνησαι γάρ που ἐν τοῖς πρόσθεν ὅτι οὕτως ἐλέγομεν, ἓν μηδὲν αὐτὸ καθʼ αὑτὸ εἶναι, μηδʼ αὖ τὸ ποιοῦν ἢ πάσχον, ἀλλʼ ἐξ ἀμφοτέρων πρὸς ἄλληλα συγγιγνομένων τὰς αἰσθήσεις καὶ τὰ αἰσθητὰ ἀποτίκτοντα τὰ μὲν ποιʼ ἄττα γίγνεσθαι, τὰ δὲ αἰσθανόμενα. [¶52] THEO. I remember, of course. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. μέμνημαι· πῶς δʼ οὔ; [¶53] SOC. Let us then pay no attention to other matters, whether they teach one thing or another; but let us attend strictly to this only, which is the object of our discussion. Let us ask them, “Are all things, according to your doctrine, in motion and flux?” Is that so? > Greek: ΣΩ. τὰ μὲν τοίνυν ἄλλα χαίρειν ἐάσωμεν, εἴτε ἄλλως εἴτε οὕτως λέγουσιν· οὗ δʼ ἕνεκα λέγομεν, τοῦτο μόνον φυλάττωμεν, ἐρωτῶντες· Κινεῖται καὶ ῥεῖ, ὥς φατε, τὰ πάντα; ἦ γάρ; [¶54] THEO. Yes. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. ναί. [¶55] SOC. Have they then both kinds of motion which we distinguished? Are they moving in space and also undergoing alteration? > Greek: ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν ἀμφοτέρας ἃς διειλόμεθα κινήσεις, φερόμενά τε καὶ ἀλλοιούμενα; [¶56] THEO. Of course; that is, if they are to be in perfect motion. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. πῶς δʼ οὔ; εἴπερ γε δὴ τελέως κινήσεται. [¶57] SOC. Then if they moved only in space, but did not undergo alteration, we could perhaps say what qualities belong to those moving things which are in flux, could we not? > Greek: ΣΩ. εἰ μὲν τοίνυν ἐφέρετο μόνον, ἠλλοιοῦτο δὲ μή, εἴχομεν ἄν που εἰπεῖν οἷα ἄττα ῥεῖ τὰ φερόμενα· ἢ πῶς λέγομεν; [¶58] THEO. That is right. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. οὕτως. [¶59] SOC. But since not even this remains fixed—that the thing in flux flows white, but changes, so that there is a flux of the very whiteness, and a change of color, that it may not in that way be convicted of remaining fixed, is it possible to give any name to a color, and yet to speak accurately? > Greek: ΣΩ. ἐπειδὴ δὲ οὐδὲ τοῦτο μένει, τὸ λευκὸν ῥεῖν τὸ ῥέον, ἀλλὰ μεταβάλλει, ὥστε καὶ αὐτοῦ τούτου εἶναι ῥοήν, τῆς λευκότητος, καὶ μεταβολὴν εἰς ἄλλην χρόαν, ἵνα μὴ ἁλῷ ταύτῃ μένον, ἆρά ποτε οἷόν τέ τι προσειπεῖν χρῶμα, ὥστε καὶ ὀρθῶς προσαγορεύειν; [¶60] THEO. How can it be possible, Socrates, or to give a name to anything else of this sort, if while we are speaking it always evades us, being, as it is, in flux? > Greek: ΘΕΟ. καὶ τίς μηχανή, ὦ Σώκρατες; ἢ ἄλλο γέ τι τῶν τοιούτων, εἴπερ ἀεὶ λέγοντος ὑπεξέρχεται ἅτε δὴ ῥέον; [¶61] SOC. But what shall we say of any of the perceptions, such as seeing or hearing? Does it perhaps remain fixed in the condition of seeing or hearing? > Greek: ΣΩ. τί δὲ περὶ αἰσθήσεως ἐροῦμεν ὁποιασοῦν, οἷον τῆς τοῦ ὁρᾶν ἢ ἀκούειν; μένειν ποτὲ ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ ὁρᾶν ἢ ἀκούειν; [¶62] THEO. It must be impossible, if all things are in motion. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. οὔκουν δεῖ γε, εἴπερ πάντα κινεῖται. [¶63] SOC. Then we must not speak of seeing more than not seeing, or of any other perception more than of non-perception, if all things are in all kinds of motion. > Greek: ΣΩ. οὔτε ἄρα ὁρᾶν προσρητέον τι μᾶλλον ἢ μὴ ὁρᾶν, οὐδέ τινʼ ἄλλην αἴσθησιν μᾶλλον ἢ μή, πάντων γε πάντως κινουμένων. [¶64] THEO. No, we must not. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. οὐ γὰρ οὖν. [¶65] SOC. And yet perception is knowledge, as Theaetetus and I said. > Greek: ΣΩ. καὶ μὴν αἴσθησίς γε ἐπιστήμη, ὡς ἔφαμεν ἐγώ τε καὶ Θεαίτητος. [¶66] THEO. Yes, you did say that. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. ἦν ταῦτα. [¶67] SOC. Then when we were asked “what is knowledge?” we answered no more what knowledge is than what not-knowledge is. > Greek: ΣΩ. οὐδὲν ἄρα ἐπιστήμην μᾶλλον ἢ μὴ ἐπιστήμην ἀπεκρινάμεθα ἐρωτώμενοι ὅτι ἐστὶν ἐπιστήμη. [¶68] 183. THEO. So it seems. > Greek: 183. ΘΕΟ. ἐοίκατε. [¶69] 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.” > Greek: ΣΩ. καλὸν ἂν ἡμῖν συμβαίνοι τὸ ἐπανόρθωμα τῆς ἀποκρίσεως, προθυμηθεῖσιν ἀποδεῖξαι ὅτι πάντα κινεῖται, ἵνα δὴ ἐκείνη ἡ ἀπόκρισις ὀρθὴ φανῇ. τὸ δʼ, ὡς ἔοικεν, ἐφάνη, εἰ πάντα κινεῖται, πᾶσα ἀπόκρισις, περὶ ὅτου ἄν τις ἀποκρίνηται, ὁμοίως ὀρθὴ εἶναι, οὕτω τʼ ἔχειν φάναι καὶ μὴ οὕτω, εἰ δὲ βούλει, γίγνεσθαι, ἵνα μὴ στήσωμεν αὐτοὺς τῷ λόγῳ. [¶70] THEO. You are right. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. ὀρθῶς λέγεις. [¶71] 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 might be most fitting for them, since it is indefinite. > Greek: ΣΩ. πλήν γε, ὦ Θεόδωρε, ὅτι οὕτω τε εἶπον καὶ οὐχ οὕτω. δεῖ δὲ οὐδὲ τοῦτο ⟨τὸ⟩ οὕτω λέγειν—οὐδὲ γὰρ ἂν ἔτι κινοῖτο ⟨τὸ⟩ οὕτω —οὐδʼ αὖ μὴ οὕτω — οὐδὲ γὰρ τοῦτο κίνησις—ἀλλά τινʼ ἄλλην φωνὴν θετέον τοῖς τὸν λόγον τοῦτον λέγουσιν, ὡς νῦν γε πρὸς τὴν αὑτῶν ὑπόθεσιν οὐκ ἔχουσι ῥήματα, εἰ μὴ ἄρα τὸ οὐδʼ οὕτως μάλιστα [δʼ οὕτως] ἂν αὐτοῖς ἁρμόττοι, ἄπειρον λεγόμενον. [¶72] THEO. At any rate that is the most appropriate form of speech for them. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. οἰκειοτάτη γοῦν διάλεκτος αὕτη αὐτοῖς. [¶73] SOC. So, Theodorus, we have got rid of your friend, and we do not yet concede to him that every man is a measure of all things, unless he be a sensible man; and we are not going to concede that knowledge is perception, at least not by the theory of universal motion, unless Theaetetus here has something different to say. > Greek: ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν, ὦ Θεόδωρε, τοῦ τε σοῦ ἑταίρου ἀπηλλάγμεθα, καὶ οὔπω συγχωροῦμεν αὐτῷ πάντʼ ἄνδρα πάντων χρημάτων μέτρον εἶναι, ἂν μὴ φρόνιμός τις ᾖ· ἐπιστήμην τε αἴσθησιν οὐ συγχωρησόμεθα κατά γε τὴν τοῦ πάντα κινεῖσθαι μέθοδον, [ἢ] εἰ μή [τί] πως ἄλλως Θεαίτητος ὅδε λέγει. [¶74] THEO. An excellent idea, Socrates; for now that this matter is settled, I too should be rid of the duty of answering your questions according to our agreement, since the argument about Protagoras is ended. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. ἄριστʼ εἴρηκας, ὦ Σώκρατες· τούτων γὰρ περανθέντων καὶ ἐμὲ ἔδει ἀπηλλάχθαι σοι ἀποκρινόμενον κατὰ τὰς συνθήκας, ἐπειδὴ τὸ περὶ τοῦ Πρωταγόρου λόγου τέλος σχοίη. [¶75] THEAET. No, Theodorus, not until you and Socrates have discussed those who say all things are at rest, as you proposed just now. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. μὴ πρίν γʼ ἄν, ὦ Θεόδωρε, Σωκράτης τε καὶ σὺ τοὺς φάσκοντας αὖ τὸ πᾶν ἑστάναι διέλθητε, ὥσπερ ἄρτι προύθεσθε. [¶76] THEO. A young man like you, Theaetetus, teaching your elders to do wrong by breaking their agreements! No; prepare to answer Socrates yourself for the rest of the argument. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. νέος ὤν, ὦ Θεαίτητε, τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους ἀδικεῖν διδάσκεις ὁμολογίας παραβαίνοντας; ἀλλὰ παρασκευάζου ὅπως τῶν ἐπιλοίπων Σωκράτει δώσεις λόγον. [¶77] THEAET. I will if he wishes it. But I should have liked best to hear about the doctrine I mentioned. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. ἐάνπερ γε βούληται. ἥδιστα μεντἂν ἤκουσα περὶ ὧν λέγω. [¶78] THEO. Calling Socrates to an argument is calling cavalry into an open plain. Just ask him a question and you shall hear. > Greek: ΘΕΟ. Ἱππέας εἰς πεδίον προκαλῇ Σωκράτη εἰς λόγους προκαλούμενος· ἐρώτα οὖν καὶ ἀκούσῃ. [¶79] SOC. Still I think, Theodorus, I shall not comply with the request of Theaetetus. > Greek: ΣΩ. ἀλλά μοι δοκῶ, ὦ Θεόδωρε, περί γε ὧν κελεύει Θεαίτητος οὐ πείσεσθαι αὐτῷ. [¶80] THEO. Why will you not comply with it? > Greek: ΘΕΟ. τί δὴ οὖν οὐ πείσεσθαι; [¶81] SOC. Because I have a reverential fear of examining in a flippant manner Melissus and the others who teach that the universe is one and motionless, and because I reverence still more one man, Parmenides. Parmenides seems to me to be, in Homer’s words, “one to be venerated” and also “awful.” For I met him when I was very young and he was very old, and he appeared to me to possess an absolutely noble depth of mind. > Greek: ΣΩ. μέλισσον μὲν καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους, οἳ ἓν ἑστὸς λέγουσι τὸ πᾶν, αἰσχυνόμενος μὴ φορτικῶς σκοπῶμεν, ἧττον αἰσχύνομαι ἢ ἕνα ὄντα Παρμενίδην. Παρμενίδης δέ μοι φαίνεται, τὸ τοῦ Ὁμήρου, αἰδοῖός τέ μοι εἶναι ἅμα δεινός τε. συμπροσέμειξα γὰρ δὴ τῷ ἀνδρὶ πάνυ νέος πάνυ πρεσβύτῃ, καί μοι ἐφάνη βάθος τι ἔχειν παντάπασι γενναῖον. [¶82] 184. So I am afraid we may not understand his words and may be still farther from understanding what he meant by them; but my chief fear is that the question with which we started, about the nature of knowledge, may fail to be investigated, because of the disorderly crowd of arguments which will burst in upon us if we let them in; especially as the argument we are now proposing is of vast extent, and would not receive its deserts if we treated it as a side issue, and if we treat it as it deserves, it will take so long as to do away with the discussion about knowledge. Neither of these things ought to happen, but we ought to try by the science of midwifery to deliver Theaetetus of the thoughts about knowledge with which he is pregnant. THEO. Yes, if that is your opinion, we ought to do so. > Greek: 184. φοβοῦμαι οὖν μὴ οὔτε τὰ λεγόμενα συνιῶμεν, τί τε διανοούμενος εἶπε πολὺ πλέον λειπώμεθα, καὶ τὸ μέγιστον, οὗ ἕνεκα ὁ λόγος ὥρμηται, ἐπιστήμης πέρι τί ποτʼ ἐστίν, ἄσκεπτον γένηται ὑπὸ τῶν ἐπεισκωμαζόντων λόγων, εἴ τις αὐτοῖς πείσεται· ἄλλως τε καὶ ὃν νῦν ἐγείρομεν πλήθει ἀμήχανον, εἴτε τις ἐν παρέργῳ σκέψεται, ἀνάξιʼ ἂν πάθοι, εἴτε ἱκανῶς, μηκυνόμενος τὸ τῆς ἐπιστήμης ἀφανιεῖ. δεῖ δὲ οὐδέτερα, ἀλλὰ Θεαίτητον ὧν κυεῖ περὶ ἐπιστήμης πειρᾶσθαι ἡμᾶς τῇ μαιευτικῇ τέχνῃ ἀπολῦσαι. ΘΕΟ. ἀλλὰ χρή, εἰ δοκεῖ, οὕτω ποιεῖν. [¶83] SOC. Consider, then, Theaetetus, this further point about what has been said. Now you answered that perception is knowledge, did you not? > Greek: ΣΩ. ἔτι τοίνυν, ὦ Θεαίτητε, τοσόνδε περὶ τῶν εἰρημένων ἐπίσκεψαι. αἴσθησιν γὰρ δὴ ἐπιστήμην ἀπεκρίνω· ἦ γάρ; [¶84] THEAET. Yes. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. ναί. [¶85] SOC. If, then, anyone should ask you, “By what does a man see white and black colors and by what does he hear high and low tones?” you would, I fancy, say, “By his eyes and ears.” > Greek: ΣΩ. εἰ οὖν τίς σε ὧδʼ ἐρωτῴη· τῷ τὰ λευκὰ καὶ μέλανα ὁρᾷ ἄνθρωπος καὶ τῷ τὰ ὀξέα καὶ βαρέα ἀκούει; εἴποις ἂν οἶμαι ὄμμασί τε καὶ ὠσίν. [¶86] THEAET. Yes, I should. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. ἔγωγε. [¶87] SOC. The easy use of words and phrases and the avoidance of strict precision is in general a sign of good breeding; indeed, the opposite is hardly worthy of a gentleman, but sometimes it is necessary, as now it is necessary to object to your answer, in so far as it is incorrect. Just consider; which answer is more correct, that our eyes are that by which we see or that through which we see, and our ears that by which or that through which we hear? > Greek: ΣΩ. τὸ δὲ εὐχερὲς τῶν ὀνομάτων τε καὶ ῥημάτων καὶ μὴ διʼ ἀκριβείας ἐξεταζόμενον τὰ μὲν πολλὰ οὐκ ἀγεννές, ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον τὸ τούτου ἐναντίον ἀνελεύθερον, ἔστι δὲ ὅτε ἀναγκαῖον, οἷον καὶ νῦν ἀνάγκη ἐπιλαβέσθαι τῆς ἀποκρίσεως ἣν ἀποκρίνῃ, ᾗ οὐκ ὀρθή. σκόπει γάρ· ἀπόκρισις ποτέρα ὀρθοτέρα, ᾧ ὁρῶμεν τοῦτο εἶναι ὀφθαλμούς, ἢ διʼ οὗ ὁρῶμεν, καὶ ᾧ ἀκούομεν ὦτα, ἢ διʼ οὗ ἀκούομεν; [¶88] THEAET. I think, Socrates, we perceive through, rather than by them, in each case. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. διʼ ὧν ἕκαστα αἰσθανόμεθα, ἔμοιγε δοκεῖ, ὦ Σώκρατες, μᾶλλον ἢ οἷς. [¶89] SOC. Yes, for it would be strange indeed, my boy, if there are many senses ensconced within us, as if we were so many wooden horses of Troy, and they do not all unite in one power, whether we should call it soul or something else, by which we perceive through these as instruments the objects of perception. > Greek: ΣΩ. δεινὸν γάρ που, ὦ παῖ, εἰ πολλαί τινες ἐν ἡμῖν ὥσπερ ἐν δουρείοις ἵπποις αἰσθήσεις ἐγκάθηνται, ἀλλὰ μὴ εἰς μίαν τινὰ ἰδέαν, εἴτε ψυχὴν εἴτε ὅτι δεῖ καλεῖν, πάντα ταῦτα συντείνει, ᾗ διὰ τούτων οἷον ὀργάνων αἰσθανόμεθα ὅσα αἰσθητά. [¶90] THEAET. I think what you suggest is more likely than the other way. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. ἀλλά μοι δοκεῖ οὕτω μᾶλλον ἢ ἐκείνως. [¶91] SOC. Now the reason why I am so precise about the matter is this: I want to know whether there is some one and the same power within ourselves by which we perceive black and white through the eyes, and again other qualities through the other organs, and whether you will be able, if asked, to refer all such activities to the body. But perhaps it is better that you make the statement in answer to a question than that I should take all the trouble for you. So tell me: do you not think that all the organs through which you perceive hot and hard and light and sweet are parts of the body? Or are they parts of something else? > Greek: ΣΩ. τοῦδέ τοι ἕνεκα αὐτά σοι διακριβοῦμαι, εἴ τινι ἡμῶν αὐτῶν τῷ αὐτῷ διὰ μὲν ὀφθαλμῶν ἐφικνούμεθα λευκῶν τε καὶ μελάνων, διὰ δὲ τῶν ἄλλων ἑτέρων αὖ τινῶν· καὶ ἕξεις ἐρωτώμενος πάντα τὰ τοιαῦτα εἰς τὸ σῶμα ἀναφέρειν; ἴσως δὲ βέλτιον σὲ λέγειν αὐτὰ ἀποκρινόμενον μᾶλλον ἢ ἐμὲ ὑπὲρ σοῦ πολυπραγμονεῖν. καί μοι λέγε· θερμὰ καὶ σκληρὰ καὶ κοῦφα καὶ γλυκέα διʼ ὧν αἰσθάνῃ, ἆρα οὐ τοῦ σώματος ἕκαστα τίθης; ἢ ἄλλου τινός; [¶92] THEAET. Of nothing else. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. οὐδενὸς ἄλλου. [¶93] SOC. And will you also be ready to agree that it is impossible to perceive through one sense what you perceive through another; for instance, to perceive through sight what you perceive through hearing, or through hearing what you perceive through sight? > Greek: ΣΩ. ἦ καὶ ἐθελήσεις ὁμολογεῖν ἃ διʼ ἑτέρας δυνάμεως αἰσθάνῃ, ἀδύνατον εἶναι διʼ ἄλλης ταῦτʼ αἰσθέσθαι, οἷον ἃ διʼ ἀκοῆς, διʼ ὄψεως, ἢ ἃ διʼ ὄψεως, διʼ ἀκοῆς; [¶94] 185. THEAET. Of course I shall. > Greek: 185. ΘΕΑΙ. πῶς γὰρ οὐκ ἐθελήσω; [¶95] SOC. Then if you have any thought about both of these together, you would not have perception about both together either through one organ or through the other. > Greek: ΣΩ. εἴ τι ἄρα περὶ ἀμφοτέρων διανοῇ, οὐκ ἂν διά γε τοῦ ἑτέρου ὀργάνου, οὐδʼ αὖ διὰ τοῦ ἑτέρου περὶ ἀμφοτέρων αἰσθάνοιʼ ἄν. [¶96] THEAET. No. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. οὐ γὰρ οὖν. [¶97] SOC. Now in regard to sound and color, you have, in the first place, this thought about both of them, that they both exist? > Greek: ΣΩ. περὶ δὴ φωνῆς καὶ περὶ χρόας πρῶτον μὲν αὐτὸ τοῦτο περὶ ἀμφοτέρων ἦ διανοῇ, ὅτι ἀμφοτέρω ἐστόν; [¶98] THEAET. Certainly. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. ἔγωγε. [¶99] SOC. And that each is different from the other and the same as itself? > Greek: ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν καὶ ὅτι ἑκάτερον ἑκατέρου μὲν ἕτερον, ἑαυτῷ δὲ ταὐτόν; [¶100] THEAET. Of course. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. τί μήν; [¶101] SOC. And that both together are two and each separately is one? > Greek: ΣΩ. καὶ ὅτι ἀμφοτέρω δύο, ἑκάτερον δὲ ἕν; [¶102] THEAET. Yes, that also. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. καὶ τοῦτο. [¶103] SOC. And are you able also to observe whether they are like or unlike each other? > Greek: ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν καὶ εἴτε ἀνομοίω εἴτε ὁμοίω ἀλλήλοιν, δυνατὸς εἶ ἐπισκέψασθαι; [¶104] THEAET. May be. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. ἴσως. [¶105] 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 color, 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. > Greek: ΣΩ. ταῦτα δὴ πάντα διὰ τίνος περὶ αὐτοῖν διανοῇ; οὔτε γὰρ διʼ ἀκοῆς οὔτε διʼ ὄψεως οἷόν τε τὸ κοινὸν λαμβάνειν περὶ αὐτῶν. ἔτι δὲ καὶ τόδε τεκμήριον περὶ οὗ λέγομεν· εἰ γὰρ δυνατὸν εἴη ἀμφοτέρω σκέψασθαι ἆρʼ ἐστὸν ἁλμυρὼ ἢ οὔ, οἶσθʼ ὅτι ἕξεις εἰπεῖν ᾧ ἐπισκέψῃ, καὶ τοῦτο οὔτε ὄψις οὔτε ἀκοὴ φαίνεται, ἀλλά τι ἄλλο. [¶106] THEAET. Of course it is,—the faculty exerted through the tongue. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. τί δʼ οὐ μέλλει, ἥ γε διὰ τῆς γλώττης δύναμις; [¶107] 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 being and not-being, and the other attributes of things, about which we were asking just now? What organs will you assign for all these, through which that part of us which perceives gains perception of each and all of them? > Greek: ΣΩ. καλῶς λέγεις. ἡ δὲ δὴ διὰ τίνος δύναμις τό τʼ ἐπὶ πᾶσι κοινὸν καὶ τὸ ἐπὶ τούτοις δηλοῖ σοι, ᾧ τὸ ἔστιν ἐπονομάζεις καὶ τὸ οὐκ ἔστι καὶ ἃ νυνδὴ ἠρωτῶμεν περὶ αὐτῶν; τούτοις πᾶσι ποῖα ἀποδώσεις ὄργανα διʼ ὧν αἰσθάνεται ἡμῶν τὸ αἰσθανόμενον ἕκαστα; [¶108] THEAET. You mean being and not-being, and likeness and unlikeness, and identity and difference, and also unity and plurality as applied to them. And you are evidently asking also through what bodily organs we perceive by our soul the odd and the even and everything else that is in the same category. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. οὐσίαν λέγεις καὶ τὸ μὴ εἶναι, καὶ ὁμοιότητα καὶ ἀνομοιότητα, καὶ τὸ ταὐτόν τε καὶ [τὸ] ἕτερον, ἔτι δὲ ἕν τε καὶ τὸν ἄλλον ἀριθμὸν περὶ αὐτῶν. δῆλον δὲ ὅτι καὶ ἄρτιόν τε καὶ περιττὸν ἐρωτᾷς, καὶ τἆλλα ὅσα τούτοις ἕπεται, διὰ τίνος ποτὲ τῶν τοῦ σώματος τῇ ψυχῇ αἰσθανόμεθα. [¶109] SOC. Bravo, Theaetetus! you follow me exactly; that is just what I mean by my question. > Greek: ΣΩ. ὑπέρευ, ὦ Θεαίτητε, ἀκολουθεῖς, καὶ ἔστιν ἃ ἐρωτῶ αὐτὰ ταῦτα. [¶110] 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. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. ἀλλὰ μὰ Δία, ὦ Σώκρατες, ἔγωγε οὐκ ἂν ἔχοιμι εἰπεῖν, πλήν γʼ ὅτι μοι δοκεῖ τὴν ἀρχὴν οὐδʼ εἶναι τοιοῦτον οὐδὲν τούτοις ὄργανον ἴδιον ὥσπερ ἐκείνοις, ἀλλʼ αὐτὴ διʼ αὑτῆς ἡ ψυχὴ τὰ κοινά μοι φαίνεται περὶ πάντων ἐπισκοπεῖν. [¶111] SOC. Why, you are beautiful, Theaetetus, and not, as Theodorus said, ugly; for he who speaks beautifully is beautiful and good. But besides being beautiful, you have done me a favor by relieving me from a long discussion, if you think that the soul views some things by itself directly and others through the bodily faculties; for that was my own opinion, and I wanted you to agree. > Greek: ΣΩ. καλὸς γὰρ εἶ, ὦ Θεαίτητε, καὶ οὐχ, ὡς ἔλεγε Θεόδωρος, αἰσχρός· ὁ γὰρ καλῶς λέγων καλός τε καὶ ἀγαθός. πρὸς δὲ τῷ καλῷ εὖ ἐποίησάς με μάλα συχνοῦ λόγου ἀπαλλάξας, εἰ φαίνεταί σοι τὰ μὲν αὐτὴ διʼ αὑτῆς ἡ ψυχὴ ἐπισκοπεῖν, τὰ δὲ διὰ τῶν τοῦ σώματος δυνάμεων. τοῦτο γὰρ ἦν ὃ καὶ αὐτῷ μοι ἐδόκει, ἐβουλόμην δὲ καὶ σοὶ δόξαι. [¶112] 186. THEAET. Well, I do think so. > Greek: 186. ΘΕΑΙ. ἀλλὰ μὴν φαίνεταί γε. [¶113] SOC. To which class, then, do you assign being; for this, more than anything else, belongs to all things? > Greek: ΣΩ. ποτέρων οὖν τίθης τὴν οὐσίαν; τοῦτο γὰρ μάλιστα ἐπὶ πάντων παρέπεται. [¶114] THEAET. I assign them to the class of notions which the soul grasps by itself directly. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. ἐγὼ μὲν ὧν αὐτὴ ἡ ψυχὴ καθʼ αὑτὴν ἐπορέγεται. [¶115] SOC. And also likeness and unlikeness and identity and difference? > Greek: ΣΩ. ἦ καὶ τὸ ὅμοιον καὶ τὸ ἀνόμοιον καὶ τὸ ταὐτὸν καὶ ἕτερον; [¶116] THEAET. Yes. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. ναί. [¶117] SOC. And how about beautiful and ugly, and good and bad? > Greek: ΣΩ. τί δέ; καλὸν καὶ αἰσχρὸν καὶ ἀγαθὸν καὶ κακόν; [¶118] THEAET. I think that these also are among the things the essence of which the soul most certainly views in their relations to one another, reflecting within itself upon the past and present in relation to the future. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. καὶ τούτων μοι δοκεῖ ἐν τοῖς μάλιστα πρὸς ἄλληλα σκοπεῖσθαι τὴν οὐσίαν, ἀναλογιζομένη ἐν ἑαυτῇ τὰ γεγονότα καὶ τὰ παρόντα πρὸς τὰ μέλλοντα. [¶119] SOC. Stop there. Does it not perceive the hardness of the hard through touch, and likewise the softness of the soft? > Greek: ΣΩ. ἔχε δή· ἄλλο τι τοῦ μὲν σκληροῦ τὴν σκληρότητα διὰ τῆς ἐπαφῆς αἰσθήσεται, καὶ τοῦ μαλακοῦ τὴν μαλακότητα ὡσαύτως; [¶120] THEAET. Yes. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. ναί. [¶121] 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. > Greek: ΣΩ. τὴν δέ γε οὐσίαν καὶ ὅτι ἐστὸν καὶ τὴν ἐναντιότητα πρὸς ἀλλήλω καὶ τὴν οὐσίαν αὖ τῆς ἐναντιότητος αὐτὴ ἡ ψυχὴ ἐπανιοῦσα καὶ συμβάλλουσα πρὸς ἄλληλα κρίνειν πειρᾶται ἡμῖν. [¶122] THEAET. Certainly. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. πάνυ μὲν οὖν. [¶123] 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? > Greek: ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν τὰ μὲν εὐθὺς γενομένοις πάρεστι φύσει αἰσθάνεσθαι ἀνθρώποις τε καὶ θηρίοις, ὅσα διὰ τοῦ σώματος παθήματα ἐπὶ τὴν ψυχὴν τείνει· τὰ δὲ περὶ τούτων ἀναλογίσματα πρός τε οὐσίαν καὶ ὠφέλειαν μόγις καὶ ἐν χρόνῳ διὰ πολλῶν πραγμάτων καὶ παιδείας παραγίγνεται οἷς ἂν καὶ παραγίγνηται; [¶124] THEAET. Assuredly. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. παντάπασι μὲν οὖν. [¶125] SOC. Is it, then, possible for one to attain “truth” who cannot even get as far as “being”? > Greek: ΣΩ. οἷόν τε οὖν ἀληθείας τυχεῖν, ᾧ μηδὲ οὐσίας; [¶126] THEAET. No. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. ἀδύνατον. [¶127] SOC. And will a man ever have knowledge of anything the truth of which he fails to attain? > Greek: ΣΩ. οὗ δὲ ἀληθείας τις ἀτυχήσει, ποτὲ τούτου ἐπιστήμων ἔσται; [¶128] THEAET. How can he, Socrates? > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. καὶ πῶς ἄν, ὦ Σώκρατες; [¶129] 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. > Greek: ΣΩ. ἐν μὲν ἄρα τοῖς παθήμασιν οὐκ ἔνι ἐπιστήμη, ἐν δὲ τῷ περὶ ἐκείνων συλλογισμῷ· οὐσίας γὰρ καὶ ἀληθείας ἐνταῦθα μέν, ὡς ἔοικε, δυνατὸν ἅψασθαι, ἐκεῖ δὲ ἀδύνατον. [¶130] THEAET. So it seems. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. φαίνεται. [¶131] SOC. Then will you call the two by the same name, when there are so great differences between them? > Greek: ΣΩ. ἦ οὖν ταὐτὸν ἐκεῖνό τε καὶ τοῦτο καλεῖς, τοσαύτας διαφορὰς ἔχοντε; [¶132] THEAET. No, that would certainly not be right. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. οὔκουν δὴ δίκαιόν γε. [¶133] SOC. What name will you give, then, to the one which includes seeing, hearing, smelling, being cold, and being hot? > Greek: ΣΩ. τί οὖν δὴ ἐκείνῳ ἀποδίδως ὄνομα, τῷ ὁρᾶν ἀκούειν ὀσφραίνεσθαι ψύχεσθαι θερμαίνεσθαι; [¶134] THEAET. Perceiving. What other name can I give it? > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. αἰσθάνεσθαι ἔγωγε· τί γὰρ ἄλλο; [¶135] SOC. Collectively you call it, then, perception? > Greek: ΣΩ. σύμπαν ἄρʼ αὐτὸ καλεῖς αἴσθησιν; [¶136] THEAET. Of course. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. ἀνάγκη. [¶137] SOC. By which, we say, we are quite unable to apprehend truth, since we cannot apprehend being, either. > Greek: ΣΩ. ὧι γε, φαμέν, οὐ μέτεστιν ἀληθείας ἅψασθαι· οὐδὲ γὰρ οὐσίας. [¶138] THEAET. No; certainly not. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. οὐ γὰρ οὖν. [¶139] SOC. Nor knowledge either, then. > Greek: ΣΩ. οὐδʼ ἄρʼ ἐπιστήμης. [¶140] THEAET. No. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. οὐ γάρ. [¶141] SOC. Then, Theaetetus, perception and knowledge could never be the same. > Greek: ΣΩ. οὐκ ἄρʼ ἂν εἴη ποτέ, ὦ Θεαίτητε, αἴσθησίς τε καὶ ἐπιστήμη ταὐτόν. [¶142] THEAET. Evidently not, Socrates; and indeed now at last it has been made perfectly clear that knowledge is something different from perception. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. οὐ φαίνεται, ὦ Σώκρατες. καὶ μάλιστά γε νῦν καταφανέστατον γέγονεν ἄλλο ὂν αἰσθήσεως ἐπιστήμη. [¶143] 187. SOC. But surely we did not begin our conversation in order to find out what knowledge is not, but what it is. However, we have progressed so far, at least, as not to seek for knowledge in perception at all, but in some function of the soul, whatever name is given to it when it alone and by itself is engaged directly with realities. > Greek: 187. ΣΩ. ἀλλʼ οὔ τι μὲν δὴ τούτου γε ἕνεκα ἠρχόμεθα διαλεγόμενοι, ἵνα εὕρωμεν τί ποτʼ οὐκ ἔστʼ ἐπιστήμη, ἀλλὰ τί ἔστιν. ὅμως δὲ τοσοῦτόν γε προβεβήκαμεν, ὥστε μὴ ζητεῖν αὐτὴν ἐν αἰσθήσει τὸ παράπαν ἀλλʼ ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ ὀνόματι, ὅτι ποτʼ ἔχει ἡ ψυχή, ὅταν αὐτὴ καθʼ αὑτὴν πραγματεύηται περὶ τὰ ὄντα. [¶144] THEAET. That, Socrates, is, I suppose, called having opinion. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. ἀλλὰ μὴν τοῦτό γε καλεῖται, ὦ Σώκρατες, ὡς ἐγᾦμαι, δοξάζειν. [¶145] SOC. You suppose rightly, my friend. Now begin again at the beginning. Wipe out all we said before, and see if you have any clearer vision, now that you have advanced to this point. Say once more what knowledge is. > Greek: ΣΩ. ὀρθῶς γὰρ οἴει, ὦ φίλε. καὶ ὅρα δὴ νῦν πάλιν ἐξ ἀρχῆς, πάντα τὰ πρόσθεν ἐξαλείψας, εἴ τι μᾶλλον καθορᾷς, ἐπειδὴ ἐνταῦθα προελήλυθας. καὶ λέγε αὖθις τί ποτʼ ἐστὶν ἐπιστήμη. [¶146] THEAET. To say that all opinion is knowledge is impossible, Socrates, for there is also false opinion; but true opinion probably is knowledge. Let that be my answer. For if it is proved to be wrong as we proceed, I will try to give another, just as I have given this. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. δόξαν μὲν πᾶσαν εἰπεῖν, ὦ Σώκρατες, ἀδύνατον, ἐπειδὴ καὶ ψευδής ἐστι δόξα· κινδυνεύει δὲ ἡ ἀληθὴς δόξα ἐπιστήμη εἶναι, καί μοι τοῦτο ἀποκεκρίσθω. ἐὰν γὰρ μὴ φανῇ προϊοῦσιν ὥσπερ τὸ νῦν, ἄλλο τι πειρασόμεθα λέγειν. [¶147] 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 inclined to 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? Assuming that there are two kinds of opinion, one true and the other false, do you define knowledge as the true opinion? > Greek: ΣΩ. οὕτω μέντοι χρή, ὦ Θεαίτητε, λέγειν προθύμως μᾶλλον, ἢ ὡς τὸ πρῶτον ὤκνεις ἀποκρίνεσθαι. ἐὰν γὰρ οὕτω δρῶμεν, δυοῖν θάτερα, ἢ εὑρήσομεν ἐφʼ ὃ ἐρχόμεθα, ἢ ἧττον οἰησόμεθα εἰδέναι ὃ μηδαμῇ ἴσμεν· καίτοι οὐκ ἂν εἴη μεμπτὸς μισθὸς ὁ τοιοῦτος. καὶ δὴ καὶ νῦν τί φῄς; δυοῖν ὄντοιν ἰδέαιν δόξης, τοῦ μὲν ἀληθινοῦ, ψευδοῦς δὲ τοῦ ἑτέρου, τὴν ἀληθῆ δόξαν ἐπιστήμην ὁρίζῃ; [¶148] THEAET. Yes. That now seems to me to be correct. > Greek: ΘΕΑΙ. ἔγωγε· τοῦτο γὰρ αὖ νῦν μοι φαίνεται. [¶149] SOC. Is it, then, still worth while, in regard to opinion, to take up again—? THEAET. What point do you refer to? > Greek: ΣΩ. ἆρʼ οὖν ἔτʼ ἄξιον περὶ δόξης ἀναλαβεῖν πάλιν— ΘΕΑΙ. τὸ ποῖον δὴ λέγεις; [¶150] 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. > Greek: ΣΩ. θράττει μέ πως νῦν τε καὶ ἄλλοτε δὴ πολλάκις, ὥστʼ ἐν ἀπορίᾳ πολλῇ πρὸς ἐμαυτὸν καὶ πρὸς ἄλλον γεγονέναι, οὐκ ἔχοντα εἰπεῖν τί ποτʼ ἐστὶ τοῦτο τὸ πάθος παρʼ ἡμῖν καὶ τίνα τρόπον ἐγγιγνόμενον.