THEAET. What experience?
ΘΕΑΙ. τὸ ποῖον δή;
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 method than the one we followed a while ago.
ΣΩ. τὸ δοξάζειν τινὰ ψευδῆ. σκοπῶ δὴ καὶ νῦν ἔτι διστάζων, πότερον ἐάσωμεν αὐτὸ ἢ ἐπισκεψώμεθα ἄλλον τρόπον ἢ ὀλίγον πρότερον.
THEAET. Why not, Socrates, if there seems to be the least need of it? For just now, in talking about leisure, you and Theodorus said very truly that there is no hurry in discussions of this sort.
ΘΕΑΙ. τί μήν, ὦ Σώκρατες, εἴπερ γε καὶ ὁπῃτιοῦν φαίνεται δεῖν; ἄρτι γὰρ οὐ κακῶς γε σὺ καὶ Θεόδωρος ἐλέγετε σχολῆς πέρι, ὡς οὐδὲν ἐν τοῖς τοιοῖσδε κατεπείγει.
SOC. You are right in reminding me. For perhaps this is a good time to retrace our steps. For it is better to finish a little task well than a great deal imperfectly.
ΣΩ. ὀρθῶς ὑπέμνησας· ἴσως γὰρ οὐκ ἀπὸ καιροῦ πάλιν ὥσπερ ἴχνος μετελθεῖν. κρεῖττον γάρ που σμικρὸν εὖ ἢ πολὺ μὴ ἱκανῶς περᾶναι.
THEAET. Of course.
ΘΕΑΙ. τί μήν;
SOC. How, then, shall we set about it? What is it that we do say? Do we say that in every case of opinion there is a false opinion, and one of us has a false, and another a true opinion, because, as we believe, it is in the nature of things that this should be so?
ΣΩ. πῶς οὖν; τί δὴ καὶ λέγομεν; ψευδῆ φαμεν ἑκάστοτε εἶναι δόξαν, καί τινα ἡμῶν δοξάζειν ψευδῆ, τὸν δʼ αὖ ἀληθῆ, ὡς φύσει οὕτως ἐχόντων;
THEAET. Yes, we do.
ΘΕΑΙ. φαμὲν γὰρ δή.
188. SOC. Then this, at any rate, is possible for us, is it not, regarding all things collectively and each thing separately, either to know or not to know them? For learning and forgetting, as intermediate stages, I leave out of account for the present, for just now they have no bearing upon our argument.
188. ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν τόδε γʼ ἔσθʼ ἡμῖν περὶ πάντα καὶ καθʼ ἕκαστον, ἤτοι εἰδέναι ἢ μὴ εἰδέναι; μανθάνειν γὰρ καὶ ἐπιλανθάνεσθαι μεταξὺ τούτων ὡς ὄντα χαίρειν λέγω ἐν τῷ παρόντι· νῦν γὰρ ἡμῖν πρὸς λόγον ἐστὶν οὐδέν.
THEAET. Certainly, Socrates, nothing is left in any particular case except knowing or not knowing it.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἀλλὰ μήν, ὦ Σώκρατες, ἄλλο γʼ οὐδὲν λείπεται περὶ ἕκαστον πλὴν εἰδέναι ἢ μὴ εἰδέναι.
SOC. Then he who forms opinion must form opinion either about what he knows or about what he does not know?
ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν ἤδη ἀνάγκη τὸν δοξάζοντα δοξάζειν ἢ ὧν τι οἶδεν ἢ μὴ οἶδεν;
THEAET. Necessarily.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἀνάγκη.
SOC. And it is surely impossible that one who knows a thing does not know it, or that one who does not know it knows it.
ΣΩ. καὶ μὴν εἰδότα γε μὴ εἰδέναι τὸ αὐτὸ ἢ μὴ εἰδότα εἰδέναι ἀδύνατον.
THEAET. Certainly.
ΘΕΑΙ. πῶς δʼ οὔ;
SOC. Then does he who forms false opinions think that the things which he knows are not these things, but some others of the things he knows, and so, knowing both, is he ignorant of both?
ΣΩ. ἆρʼ οὖν ὁ τὰ ψευδῆ δοξάζων, ἃ οἶδε, ταῦτα οἴεται οὐ ταῦτα εἶναι ἀλλὰ ἕτερα ἄττα ὧν οἶδε, καὶ ἀμφότερα εἰδὼς ἀγνοεῖ αὖ ἀμφότερα;
THEAET. That is impossible, Socrates.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἀλλʼ ἀδύνατον, ὦ Σώκρατες.
SOC. Well then, does he think that the things he does not know are other things which he does not know—which is as if a man who knows neither Theaetetus nor Socrates should conceive the idea that Socrates is Theaetetus or Theaetetus Socrates?
ΣΩ. ἀλλʼ ἆρα, ἃ μὴ οἶδεν, ἡγεῖται αὐτὰ εἶναι ἕτερα ἄττα ὧν μὴ οἶδε, καὶ τοῦτʼ ἔστι τῷ μήτε Θεαίτητον μήτε Σωκράτη εἰδότι εἰς τὴν διάνοιαν λαβεῖν ὡς ὁ Σωκράτης Θεαίτητος ἢ [ὁ] Θεαίτητος Σωκράτης;
THEAET. That is impossible.
ΘΕΑΙ. καὶ πῶς ἄν;
SOC. But surely a man does not think that the things he knows are the things he does not know, or again that the things he does not know are the things he knows.
ΣΩ. ἀλλʼ οὐ μήν, ἅ γέ τις οἶδεν, οἴεταί που ἃ μὴ οἶδεν αὐτὰ εἶναι, οὐδʼ αὖ ἃ μὴ οἶδεν, ἃ οἶδεν.
THEAET. That would be a monstrous absurdity.
ΘΕΑΙ. τέρας γὰρ ἔσται.
SOC. Then how could he still form false opinions? For inasmuch as all things are either known or unknown to us, it is impossible, I imagine, to form opinions outside of these alternatives, and within them it is clear that there is no place for fake opinion.
ΣΩ. πῶς οὖν ἂν ἔτι ψευδῆ δοξάσειεν; ἐκτὸς γὰρ τούτων ἀδύνατόν που δοξάζειν, ἐπείπερ πάντʼ ἢ ἴσμεν ἢ οὐκ ἴσμεν, ἐν δὲ τούτοις οὐδαμοῦ φαίνεται δυνατὸν ψευδῆ δοξάσαι.
THEAET. Very true.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἀληθέστατα.
SOC. Had we, then, better look for what we are seeking, not by this method of knowing and not knowing, but by that of being and not being?
ΣΩ. ἆρʼ οὖν οὐ ταύτῃ σκεπτέον ὃ ζητοῦμεν, κατὰ τὸ εἰδέναι καὶ μὴ εἰδέναι ἰόντας, ἀλλὰ κατὰ τὸ εἶναι καὶ μή;
THEAET. What do you mean?
ΘΕΑΙ. πῶς λέγεις;
SOC. We may simply assert that he who on any subject holds opinions which are not, will certainly think falsely, no matter what the condition of his mind may be in other respects.
ΣΩ. μὴ ἁπλοῦν ᾖ ὅτι ὁ τὰ μὴ ὄντα περὶ ὁτουοῦν δοξάζων οὐκ ἔσθʼ ὡς οὐ ψευδῆ δοξάσει, κἂν ὁπωσοῦν ἄλλως τὰ τῆς διανοίας ἔχῃ.
THEAET. That, again, is likely, Socrates.
ΘΕΑΙ. εἰκός γʼ αὖ, ὦ Σώκρατες.
SOC. Well then, what shall we say, Theaetetus, if anyone asks us, “Is that which is assumed in common speech possible at all, and can any human being hold an opinion which is not, whether it be concerned with any of the things which are, or be entirely independent of them?” We, I fancy, shall reply, “Yes, when, in thinking, he thinks what is not true,” shall we not?
ΣΩ. πῶς οὖν; τί ἐροῦμεν, ὦ Θεαίτητε, ἐάν τις ἡμᾶς ἀνακρίνῃ· δυνατὸν δὲ ὁτῳοῦν ὃ λέγεται, καί τις ἀνθρώπων τὸ μὴ ὂν δοξάσει, εἴτε περὶ τῶν ὄντων του εἴτε αὐτὸ καθʼ αὑτό; καὶ ἡμεῖς δή, ὡς ἔοικεν, πρὸς ταῦτα φήσομεν· ὅταν γε μὴ ἀληθῆ οἴηται οἰόμενος· ἢ πῶς ἐροῦμεν;
SOC. And is the same sort of thing possible in any other field?
ΣΩ. ἦ οὖν καὶ ἄλλοθί που τὸ τοιοῦτόν ἐστιν;
THEAET. What sort of thing?
ΘΕΑΙ. τὸ ποῖον;
SOC. For instance, that a man sees something, but sees nothing.
ΣΩ. εἴ τις ὁρᾷ μέν τι, ὁρᾷ δὲ οὐδέν.
THEAET. How can he?
ΘΕΑΙ. καὶ πῶς;
SOC. Yet surely if a man sees any one thing, he sees something that is. Or do you, perhaps, think “one” is among the things that are not?
ΣΩ. ἀλλὰ μὴν εἰ ἕν γέ τι ὁρᾷ, τῶν ὄντων τι ὁρᾷ. ἢ σὺ οἴει ποτὲ τὸ ἓν ἐν τοῖς μὴ οὖσιν εἶναι;
THEAET. No, I do not.
ΘΕΑΙ. οὐκ ἔγωγε.
SOC. Then he who sees any one thing, sees something that is.
ΣΩ. ὁ ἄρα ἕν γέ τι ὁρῶν ὄν τι ὁρᾷ.
THEAET. That is clear.
ΘΕΑΙ. φαίνεται.
189. SOC. And therefore he who hears anything, hears some one thing and therefore hears what is.
189. ΣΩ. καὶ ὁ ἄρα τι ἀκούων ἕν γέ τι ἀκούει καὶ ὂν [ἀκούει].
SOC. And he who touches anything, touches some one thing, which is, since it is one?
ΣΩ. καὶ ὁ ἁπτόμενος δή του ἑνός γέ του ἅπτεται καὶ ὄντος, εἴπερ ἑνός;
THEAET. That also is true.
ΘΕΑΙ. καὶ τοῦτο.
SOC. So, then, does not he who holds an opinion hold an opinion of some one thing?
ΣΩ. ὁ δὲ δὴ δοξάζων οὐχ ἕν γέ τι δοξάζει;
THEAET. He must do so.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἀνάγκη.
SOC. And does not he who holds an opinion of some one thing hold an opinion of something that is?
ΣΩ. ὁ δʼ ἕν τι δοξάζων οὐκ ὄν τι;
THEAET. I agree.
ΘΕΑΙ. συγχωρῶ.
SOC. Then he who holds an opinion of what is not holds an opinion of nothing.
ΣΩ. ὁ ἄρα μὴ ὂν δοξάζων οὐδὲν δοξάζει.
THEAET. Evidently.
ΘΕΑΙ. οὐ φαίνεται.
SOC. Well then, he who holds an opinion of nothing, holds no opinion at all.
ΣΩ. ἀλλὰ μὴν ὅ γε μηδὲν δοξάζων τὸ παράπαν οὐδὲ δοξάζει.
THEAET. That is plain, apparently.
ΘΕΑΙ. δῆλον, ὡς ἔοικεν.
SOC. Then it is impossible to hold an opinion of that which is not, either in relation to things that are, or independently of them.
ΣΩ. οὐκ ἄρα οἷόν τε τὸ μὴ ὂν δοξάζειν, οὔτε περὶ τῶν ὄντων οὔτε αὐτὸ καθʼ αὑτό.
THEAET. Evidently.
ΘΕΑΙ. οὐ φαίνεται.
SOC. Then holding false opinion is something different from holding an opinion of that which is not?
ΣΩ. ἄλλο τι ἄρʼ ἐστὶ τὸ ψευδῆ δοξάζειν τοῦ τὰ μὴ ὄντα δοξάζειν.
THEAET. So it seems.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἄλλο ἔοικεν.
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.
ΣΩ. οὔτʼ ἄρʼ οὕτως οὔτε ὡς ὀλίγον πρότερον ἐσκοποῦμεν, ψευδής ἐστι δόξα ἐν ἡμῖν.
THEAET. No, it certainly is not.
ΘΕΑΙ. οὐ γὰρ οὖν δή.
SOC. But does not that which we call by that name arise after the following manner?
ΣΩ. ἀλλʼ ἆρα ὧδε γιγνόμενον τοῦτο προσαγορεύομεν;
THEAET. After what manner?
ΘΕΑΙ. πῶς;
SOC. We say that false opinion is a kind of interchanged 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.
ΣΩ. ἀλλοδοξίαν τινὰ οὖσαν ψευδῆ φαμεν εἶναι δόξαν, ὅταν τίς ⟨τι⟩ τῶν ὄντων ἄλλο αὖ τῶν ὄντων ἀνταλλαξάμενος τῇ διανοίᾳ φῇ εἶναι. οὕτω γὰρ ὂν μὲν ἀεὶ δοξάζει, ἕτερον δὲ ἀνθʼ ἑτέρου, καὶ ἁμαρτάνων οὗ ἐσκόπει δικαίως ἂν καλοῖτο ψευδῆ δοξάζων.
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.
ΘΕΑΙ. ὀρθότατά μοι νῦν δοκεῖς εἰρηκέναι. ὅταν γάρ τις ἀντὶ καλοῦ αἰσχρὸν ἢ ἀντὶ αἰσχροῦ καλὸν δοξάζῃ, τότε ὡς ἀληθῶς δοξάζει ψευδῆ.
SOC. Evidently, Theaetetus, you feel contempt of me, and not fear.
ΣΩ. δῆλος εἶ, ὦ Θεαίτητε, καταφρονῶν μου καὶ οὐ δεδιώς.
THEAET. Why in the world do you say that?
ΘΕΑΙ. τί μάλιστα;
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 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?
ΣΩ. οὐκ ἂν οἶμαι σοὶ δοκῶ τοῦ ἀληθῶς ψευδοῦς ἀντιλαβέσθαι, ἐρόμενος εἰ οἷόν τε ταχὺ βραδέως ἢ κοῦφον βαρέως ἢ ἄλλο τι ἐναντίον μὴ κατὰ τὴν αὑτοῦ φύσιν ἀλλὰ κατὰ τὴν τοῦ ἐναντίου γίγνεσθαι ἑαυτῷ ἐναντίως. τοῦτο μὲν οὖν, ἵνα μὴ μάτην θαρρήσῃς, ἀφίημι. ἀρέσκει δέ, ὡς φῄς, τὸ τὰ ψευδῆ δοξάζειν ἀλλοδοξεῖν εἶναι;
THEAET. I am.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἔμοιγε.
SOC. It is, then, in your opinion, possible for the mind to regard one thing as another and not as what it is.
ΣΩ. ἔστιν ἄρα κατὰ τὴν σὴν δόξαν ἕτερόν τι ὡς ἕτερον καὶ μὴ ὡς ἐκεῖνο τῇ διανοίᾳ τίθεσθαι.
THEAET. Yes, it is.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἔστι μέντοι.
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?
ΣΩ. ὅταν οὖν τοῦθʼ ἡ διάνοιά του δρᾷ, οὐ καὶ ἀνάγκη αὐτὴν ἤτοι ἀμφότερα ἢ τὸ ἕτερον διανοεῖσθαι;
THEAET. Yes, it must; either of both at the same time or in succession.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἀνάγκη μὲν οὖν· ἤτοι ἅμα γε ἢ ἐν μέρει.
SOC. Excellent. And do you define thought as I do?
ΣΩ. κάλλιστα. τὸ δὲ διανοεῖσθαι ἆρʼ ὅπερ ἐγὼ καλεῖς;
THEAET. How do you define it?
ΘΕΑΙ. τί καλῶν;
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.
ΣΩ. λόγον ὃν αὐτὴ πρὸς αὑτὴν ἡ ψυχὴ διεξέρχεται περὶ ὧν ἂν σκοπῇ. ὥς γε μὴ εἰδώς σοι ἀποφαίνομαι. τοῦτο γάρ μοι ἰνδάλλεται διανοουμένη οὐκ ἄλλο τι ἢ διαλέγεσθαι, αὐτὴ ἑαυτὴν ἐρωτῶσα καὶ ἀποκρινομένη, καὶ φάσκουσα καὶ οὐ φάσκουσα.
190. 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 opinion as 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.
190. ὅταν δὲ ὁρίσασα, εἴτε βραδύτερον εἴτε καὶ ὀξύτερον ἐπᾴξασα, τὸ αὐτὸ ἤδη φῇ καὶ μὴ διστάζῃ, δόξαν ταύτην τίθεμεν αὐτῆς. ὥστʼ ἔγωγε τὸ δοξάζειν λέγειν καλῶ καὶ τὴν δόξαν λόγον εἰρημένον, οὐ μέντοι πρὸς ἄλλον οὐδὲ φωνῇ, ἀλλὰ σιγῇ πρὸς αὑτόν· σὺ δὲ τί;ΘΕΑΙ. κἀγώ.
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.
ΣΩ. ὅταν ἄρα τις τὸ ἕτερον ἕτερον δοξάζῃ, καὶ φησίν, ὡς ἔοικε, τὸ ἕτερον ἕτερον εἶναι πρὸς ἑαυτόν.
THEAET. Certainly.
ΘΕΑΙ. τί μήν;
SOC. Now call to mind whether you have ever said to yourself that 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 that sort.
ΣΩ. ἀναμιμνῄσκου δὴ εἰ πώποτʼ εἶπες πρὸς σεαυτὸν ὅτι παντὸς μᾶλλον τό τοι καλὸν αἰσχρόν ἐστιν ἢ τὸ ἄδικον δίκαιον. ἢ καί, τὸ πάντων κεφάλαιον, σκόπει εἴ ποτʼ ἐπεχείρησας σεαυτὸν πείθειν ὡς παντὸς μᾶλλον τὸ ἕτερον ἕτερόν ἐστιν, ἢ πᾶν τοὐναντίον οὐδʼ ἐν ὕπνῳ πώποτε ἐτόλμησας εἰπεῖν πρὸς σεαυτὸν ὡς παντάπασιν ἄρα τὰ περιττὰ ἄρτιά ἐστιν ἤ τι ἄλλο τοιοῦτον.
THEAET. You are right.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἀληθῆ λέγεις.
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?
ΣΩ. ἄλλον δέ τινα οἴει ὑγιαίνοντα ἢ μαινόμενον τολμῆσαι σπουδῇ πρὸς ἑαυτὸν εἰπεῖν ἀναπείθοντα αὑτὸν ὡς ἀνάγκη τὸν βοῦν ἵππον εἶναι ἢ τὰ δύο ἕν;
THEAET. No, by Zeus, I do not.
ΘΕΑΙ. μὰ Δίʼ οὐκ ἔγωγε.
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.
ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν εἰ τὸ λέγειν πρὸς ἑαυτὸν δοξάζειν ἐστίν, οὐδεὶς ἀμφότερά γε λέγων καὶ δοξάζων [καὶ] ἐφαπτόμενος ἀμφοῖν τῇ ψυχῇ εἴποι ἂν καὶ δοξάσειεν ὡς τὸ ἕτερον ἕτερόν ἐστιν. ἐατέον δὲ καὶ σοὶ τὸ ῥῆμα [περὶ τοῦ ἑτέρου]· λέγω γὰρ αὐτὸ τῇδε, μηδένα δοξάζειν ὡς τὸ αἰσχρὸν καλὸν ἢ ἄλλο τι τῶν τοιούτων.
THEAET. Well, Socrates, I do give it up; and I agree with you in what you say.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἀλλʼ, ὦ Σώκρατες, ἐῶ τε καί μοι δοκεῖ ὡς λέγεις.
SOC. You agree, therefore, that he who holds an opinion of both things cannot hold the opinion that one is the other.
ΣΩ. ἄμφω μὲν ἄρα δοξάζοντα ἀδύνατον τό γε ἕτερον ἕτερον δοξάζειν.
THEAET. So it seems.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἔοικεν.
SOC. But surely he who holds an opinion of one only, and not of the other at all, will never hold the opinion that one is the other.
ΣΩ. ἀλλὰ μὴν τὸ ἕτερόν γε μόνον δοξάζων, τὸ δὲ ἕτερον μηδαμῇ, οὐδέποτε δοξάσει τὸ ἕτερον ἕτερον εἶναι.
THEAET. You are right; for he would be forced to apprehend also that of which he holds no opinion.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἀληθῆ λέγεις· ἀναγκάζοιτο γὰρ ἂν ἐφάπτεσθαι καὶ οὗ μὴ δοξάζει.
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 opinion found to exist in us.
ΣΩ. οὔτʼ ἄρʼ ἀμφότερα οὔτε τὸ ἕτερον δοξάζοντι ἐγχωρεῖ ἀλλοδοξεῖν. ὥστʼ εἴ τις ὁριεῖται δόξαν εἶναι ψευδῆ τὸ ἑτεροδοξεῖν, οὐδὲν ἂν λέγοι· οὔτε γὰρ ταύτῃ οὔτε κατὰ τὰ πρότερα φαίνεται ψευδὴς ἐν ἡμῖν οὖσα δόξα.
THEAET. Apparently not.
ΘΕΑΙ. οὐκ ἔοικεν.
SOC. But yet, Theaetetus, if this is found not to exist, we shall be forced to admit many absurdities.
ΣΩ. ἀλλὰ μέντοι, ὦ Θεαίτητε, εἰ τοῦτο μὴ φανήσεται ὄν, πολλὰ ἀναγκασθησόμεθα ὁμολογεῖν καὶ ἄτοπα.
THEAET. What absurdities?
ΘΕΑΙ. τὰ ποῖα δή;
SOC. I will not tell you until I have tried to consider the matter in every way. For I should be ashamed of us, if, in our perplexity, we were forced to make such admissions as those to which I refer. But if we find the object of our quest, and are set free from perplexity, then, and not before, we will speak of others as involved in those absurdities, and we ourselves shall stand free from ridicule.
ΣΩ. οὐκ ἐρῶ σοι πρὶν ἂν πανταχῇ πειραθῶ σκοπῶν. αἰσχυνοίμην γὰρ ἂν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν, ἐν ᾧ ἀποροῦμεν, ἀναγκαζομένων ὁμολογεῖν οἷα λέγω.
191. 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.
191. ἀλλʼ ἐὰν εὕρωμεν καὶ ἐλεύθεροι γενώμεθα, τότʼ ἤδη περὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἐροῦμεν ὡς πασχόντων αὐτὰ ἐκτὸς τοῦ γελοίου ἑστῶτες· ἐὰν δὲ πάντῃ ἀπορήσωμεν, ταπεινωθέντες οἶμαι τῷ λόγῳ παρέξομεν ὡς ναυτιῶντες πατεῖν τε καὶ χρῆσθαι ὅτι ἂν βούληται. ᾗ οὖν ἔτι πόρον τινὰ εὑρίσκω τοῦ ζητήματος ἡμῖν, ἄκουε.ΘΕΑΙ. λέγε μόνον.
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.
ΣΩ. οὐ φήσω ἡμᾶς ὀρθῶς ὁμολογῆσαι, ἡνίκα ὡμολογήσαμεν ἅ τις οἶδεν, ἀδύνατον δοξάσαι ἃ μὴ οἶδεν εἶναι αὐτὰ καὶ ψευσθῆναι· ἀλλά πῃ δυνατόν.
THEAET. Do you mean what I myself suspected when we made the statement to which you refer, that sometimes I, though I know Socrates, saw at a distance someone whom I did not know, and thought it was Socrates whom I do know? In such a case false opinion does arise.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἆρα λέγεις ὃ καὶ ἐγὼ τότε ὑπώπτευσα, ἡνίκʼ αὐτὸ ἔφαμεν τοιοῦτον εἶναι, ὅτι ἐνίοτʼ ἐγὼ γιγνώσκων Σωκράτη, πόρρωθεν δὲ ὁρῶν ἄλλον ὃν οὐ γιγνώσκω, ᾠήθην εἶναι Σωκράτη ὃν οἶδα; γίγνεται γὰρ δὴ ἐν τῷ τοιούτῳ οἷον λέγεις.
SOC. But did not we reject that, because it resulted in our knowing and not knowing the things which we know?
ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν ἀπέστημεν αὐτοῦ, ὅτι ἃ ἴσμεν ἐποίει ἡμᾶς εἰδότας μὴ εἰδέναι;
THEAET. Certainly we did.
ΘΕΑΙ. πάνυ μὲν οὖν.
SOC. Let us, then, not make that assumption, but another; perhaps it will turn out well for us, perhaps the opposite. But we are in such straits that we must turn every argument round and test it from all sides. Now see if this is sensible: Can a man who did not know a thing at one time learn it later?
ΣΩ. μὴ γὰρ οὕτω τιθῶμεν, ἀλλʼ ὧδε· ἴσως πῃ ἡμῖν συγχωρήσεται, ἴσως δὲ ἀντιτενεῖ. ἀλλὰ γὰρ ἐν τοιούτῳ ἐχόμεθα, ἐν ᾧ ἀνάγκη πάντα μεταστρέφοντα λόγον βασανίζειν. σκόπει οὖν εἰ τὶ λέγω. ἆρα ἔστιν μὴ εἰδότα τι πρότερον ὕστερον μαθεῖν;
THEAET. To be sure he can.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἔστι μέντοι.
SOC. Again, then, can he learn one thing after another?
ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν καὶ αὖθις ἕτερον καὶ ἕτερον;
THEAET. Why not?
ΘΕΑΙ. τί δʼ οὔ;
SOC. Please assume, then, for the sake of argument, that there is in our souls a block of wax, in one case larger, in another smaller, in one case the wax is purer, in another more impure and harder, in some cases softer, and in some of proper quality.
ΣΩ. θὲς δή μοι λόγου ἕνεκα ἐν ταῖς ψυχαῖς ἡμῶν ἐνὸν κήρινον ἐκμαγεῖον, τῷ μὲν μεῖζον, τῷ δʼ ἔλαττον, καὶ τῷ μὲν καθαρωτέρου κηροῦ, τῷ δὲ κοπρωδεστέρου, καὶ σκληροτέρου, ἐνίοις δὲ ὑγροτέρου, ἔστι δʼ οἷς μετρίως ἔχοντος.
THEAET. I assume all that.
ΘΕΑΙ. τίθημι.
SOC. Let us, then, say that this is the gift of Memory, the mother of the Muses, and that whenever we wish to remember anything we see or hear or think of in our own minds, we hold this wax under the perceptions and thoughts and imprint them upon it, just as we make impressions from seal rings; and whatever is imprinted we remember and know as long as its image lasts, but whatever is rubbed out or cannot be imprinted we forget and do not know.
ΣΩ. δῶρον τοίνυν αὐτὸ φῶμεν εἶναι τῆς τῶν Μουσῶν μητρὸς Μνημοσύνης, καὶ εἰς τοῦτο ὅτι ἂν βουληθῶμεν μνημονεῦσαι ὧν ἂν ἴδωμεν ἢ ἀκούσωμεν ἢ αὐτοὶ ἐννοήσωμεν, ὑπέχοντας αὐτὸ ταῖς αἰσθήσεσι καὶ ἐννοίαις, ἀποτυποῦσθαι, ὥσπερ δακτυλίων σημεῖα ἐνσημαινομένους· καὶ ὃ μὲν ἂν ἐκμαγῇ, μνημονεύειν τε καὶ ἐπίστασθαι ἕως ἂν ἐνῇ τὸ εἴδωλον αὐτοῦ· ὃ δʼ ἂν ἐξαλειφθῇ ἢ μὴ οἷόν τε γένηται ἐκμαγῆναι, ἐπιλελῆσθαί τε καὶ μὴ ἐπίστασθαι.
THEAET. Let us assume that.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἔστω οὕτως.
SOC. Now take a man who knows the things which he sees and hears, and is considering some one of them; observe whether he may not gain a false opinion in the following manner.
ΣΩ. ὁ τοίνυν ἐπιστάμενος μὲν αὐτά, σκοπῶν δέ τι ὧν ὁρᾷ ἢ ἀκούει, ἄθρει εἰ ἄρα τοιῷδε τρόπῳ ψευδῆ ἂν δοξάσαι.
THEAET. In what manner?
ΘΕΑΙ. ποίῳ δή τινι;
SOC. By thinking that the things which he knows are sometimes things which he knows and sometimes things which he does not know. For we were wrong before in agreeing that this is impossible.
ΣΩ. ἃ οἶδεν, οἰηθεὶς εἶναι τοτὲ μὲν ἃ οἶδε, τοτὲ δὲ ἃ μή. ταῦτα γὰρ ἐν τοῖς πρόσθεν οὐ καλῶς ὡμολογήσαμεν ὁμολογοῦντες ἀδύνατα.
THEAET. What do you say about it now?
ΘΕΑΙ. νῦν δὲ πῶς λέγεις;
192. SOC. We must begin our discussion of the matter by making the following distinctions: It is impossible for anyone to think that one thing which he knows and of which he has received a memorial imprint in 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 he 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 something else 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 of which he has an imprint which accords with the perception is another thing which he knows and perceives and of which he has an imprint which accords with the perception. And he cannot think that what he knows and perceives and of which he has a correct memorial imprint is another thing which he knows; nor that a thing which he knows and perceives and of which he has such an imprint is another thing which he perceives; nor again that a thing which he neither knows nor perceives is another thing which he neither knows nor perceives; nor that a thing which he neither knows nor perceives is another thing which he does not know; nor that a thing which he neither knows nor perceives is 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 possibility that it may arise remains, if anywhere, in the following cases.
192. ΣΩ. δεῖ ὧδε λέγεσθαι περὶ αὐτῶν ἐξ ἀρχῆς διοριζομένους ὅτι ὃ μέν τις οἶδεν, σχὼν αὐτοῦ μνημεῖον ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ, αἰσθάνεται δὲ αὐτὸ μή, οἰηθῆναι ἕτερόν τι ὧν οἶδεν, ἔχοντα καὶ ἐκείνου τύπον, αἰσθανόμενον δὲ μή, ἀδύνατον. καὶ ὅ γε οἶδεν αὖ, οἰηθῆναι εἶναι ὃ μὴ οἶδε μηδʼ ἔχει αὐτοῦ σφραγῖδα· καὶ ὃ μὴ οἶδεν, ὃ μὴ οἶδεν αὖ· καὶ ὃ μὴ οἶδεν, ὃ οἶδε· καὶ ὃ αἰσθάνεταί γε, ἕτερόν τι ὧν αἰσθάνεται οἰηθῆναι εἶναι· καὶ ὃ αἰσθάνεται, ὧν τι μὴ αἰσθάνεται· καὶ ὃ μὴ αἰσθάνεται, ὧν μὴ αἰσθάνεται· καὶ ὃ μὴ αἰσθάνεται, ὧν αἰσθάνεται. καὶ ἔτι γε αὖ καὶ ὃ οἶδε καὶ αἰσθάνεται καὶ ἔχει τὸ σημεῖον κατὰ τὴν αἴσθησιν, οἰηθῆναι αὖ ἕτερόν τι ὧν οἶδε καὶ αἰσθάνεται καὶ ἔχει αὖ καὶ ἐκείνου τὸ σημεῖον κατὰ τὴν αἴσθησιν, ἀδυνατώτερον ἔτι ἐκείνων, εἰ οἷόν τε. καὶ ὃ οἶδε καὶ [ὃ] αἰσθάνεται ἔχων τὸ μνημεῖον ὀρθῶς, ὃ οἶδεν οἰηθῆναι ἀδύνατον· καὶ ὃ οἶδε καὶ αἰσθάνεται ἔχων κατὰ ταὐτά, ὃ αἰσθάνεται· καὶ ὃ αὖ μὴ οἶδε μηδὲ αἰσθάνεται, ὃ μὴ οἶδε μηδὲ αἰσθάνεται· καὶ ὃ μὴ οἶδε μηδὲ αἰσθάνεται, ὃ μὴ οἶδε· καὶ ὃ μὴ οἶδε μηδὲ αἰσθάνεται, ὃ μὴ αἰσθάνεται· πάντα ταῦτα ὑπερβάλλει ἀδυναμίᾳ τοῦ ἐν αὐτοῖς ψευδῆ τινα δοξάσαι. λείπεται δὴ ἐν τοῖς τοιοῖσδε, εἴπερ που ἄλλοθι, τὸ τοιοῦτον γενέσθαι.
THEAET. What cases are they? I hope they may help me to understand better; for now I cannot follow you.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἐν τίσι δή; ἐὰν ἄρα ἐξ αὐτῶν τι μᾶλλον μάθω· νῦν μὲν γὰρ οὐχ ἕπομαι.
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.
ΣΩ. ἐν οἷς οἶδεν, οἰηθῆναι αὐτὰ ἕτερʼ ἄττα εἶναι ὧν οἶδε καὶ αἰσθάνεται· ἢ ὧν μὴ οἶδεν, αἰσθάνεται δέ· ἢ ὧν οἶδε καὶ αἰσθάνεται, ὧν οἶδεν αὖ καὶ αἰσθάνεται.
THEAET. Now I am even more out of the running than before.
ΘΕΑΙ. νῦν πολὺ πλέον ἀπελείφθην ἢ τότε.
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, sometimes I touch them, sometimes not, sometimes I hear them or perceive them through some other sense, and sometimes I have no perception of you at all, but I remember you none the less and know you in my own mind. Is it not so?
ΣΩ. ὧδε δὴ ἀνάπαλιν ἄκουε. ἐγὼ εἰδὼς Θεόδωρον καὶ ἐν ἐμαυτῷ μεμνημένος οἷός ἐστι, καὶ Θεαίτητον κατὰ ταὐτά, ἄλλο τι ἐνίοτε μὲν ὁρῶ αὐτούς, ἐνίοτε δὲ οὔ, καὶ ἅπτομαί ποτʼ αὐτῶν, τοτὲ δʼ οὔ, καὶ ἀκούω ἤ τινα ἄλλην αἴσθησιν αἰσθάνομαι, τοτὲ δʼ αἴσθησιν μὲν οὐδεμίαν ἔχω περὶ ὑμῶν, μέμνημαι δὲ ὑμᾶς οὐδὲν ἧττον καὶ ἐπίσταμαι αὐτὸς ἐν ἐμαυτῷ;
THEAET. Certainly.
ΘΕΑΙ. πάνυ μὲν οὖν.
SOC. This, then, is the first of the points which I wish to make clear. Note that one may perceive or not perceive that which one knows.
ΣΩ. τοῦτο τοίνυν πρῶτον μάθε ὧν βούλομαι δηλῶσαι, ὅτι ἔστι μὲν ἃ οἶδε μὴ αἰσθάνεσθαι, ἔστιν δὲ αἰσθάνεσθαι.
THEAET. That is true.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἀληθῆ.
SOC. So, too, with that which he does not know—he may often not even perceive it, and often he may merely perceive it?
ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν καὶ ἃ μὴ οἶδε, πολλάκις μὲν ἔστι μηδὲ αἰσθάνεσθαι, πολλάκις δὲ αἰσθάνεσθαι μόνον;
THEAET. That too is possible.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἔστι καὶ τοῦτο.
SOC. See if you follow me better now. If Socrates knows Theodorus and Theaetetus, but sees neither of them and has no other perception of them, he never could have the opinion within himself that Theaetetus is Theodorus.
ΣΩ. ἰδὲ δὴ ἐάν τι μᾶλλον νῦν ἐπίσπῃ. Σωκράτης εἰ γιγνώσκει Θεόδωρον καὶ Θεαίτητον, ὁρᾷ δὲ μηδέτερον, μηδὲ ἄλλη αἴσθησις αὐτῷ πάρεστι περὶ αὐτῶν, οὐκ ἄν ποτε ἐν ἑαυτῷ δοξάσειεν ὡς ὁ Θεαίτητός ἐστι Θεόδωρος.
193. Am I right or wrong?THEAET. You are right.
193. λέγω τὶ ἢ οὐδέν;ΘΕΑΙ. ναί, ἀληθῆ γε.
SOC. Now that was the first of the cases of which I spoke.
ΣΩ. τοῦτο μὲν τοίνυν ἐκείνων πρῶτον ἦν ὧν ἔλεγον.
THEAET. Yes, it was.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἦν γάρ.
SOC. The second is this: knowing one of you and not knowing the other, and not perceiving either of you, I never could think that the one whom I know is the one whom I do not know.
ΣΩ. δεύτερον τοίνυν, ὅτι τὸν μὲν γιγνώσκων ὑμῶν, τὸν δὲ μὴ γιγνώσκων, αἰσθανόμενος δὲ μηδέτερον, οὐκ ἄν ποτε αὖ οἰηθείην ὃν οἶδα εἶναι ὃν μὴ οἶδα.
THEAET. Right.
ΘΕΑΙ. ὀρθῶς.
SOC. And this is the third case: not knowing and not perceiving either of you, I could not think that he whom I do not know is someone else whom I do not know. And imagine that you have heard all the other cases again in succession, in which I could never form false opinions about you and Theodorus, either when I know or do not know both of you, or when I know one and not the other; and the same is true if we say “perceive” instead of “know.” Do you follow me?
ΣΩ. τρίτον δέ, μηδέτερον γιγνώσκων μηδὲ αἰσθανόμενος οὐκ ἂν οἰηθείην ὃν μὴ οἶδα ἕτερόν τινʼ εἶναι ὧν μὴ οἶδα. καὶ τἆλλα τὰ πρότερα πάνθʼ ἑξῆς νόμιζε πάλιν ἀκηκοέναι, ἐν οἷς οὐδέποτʼ ἐγὼ περὶ σοῦ καὶ Θεοδώρου τὰ ψευδῆ δοξάσω, οὔτε γιγνώσκων οὔτε ἀγνοῶν ἄμφω, οὔτε τὸν μέν, τὸν δʼ οὐ γιγνώσκων· καὶ περὶ αἰσθήσεων κατὰ ταὐτά, εἰ ἄρα ἕπῃ.
THEAET. I follow you.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἕπομαι.
SOC. Then the possibility of forming false opinion remains in the following case: when, for example, knowing you and Theodorus, and having on that block of wax the imprint of both of you, as if you were signet-rings, but seeing you both at a distance and indistinctly, I hasten to assign the proper imprint of each of you to the proper vision, and to make it fit, as it were, its own footprint, with the purpose of causing recognition; but I may fail in this by interchanging them, and put the vision of one upon the imprint of the other, as people put a shoe on the wrong foot; or, again, I may be affected as the sight is affected when we use a mirror and the sight as it flows makes a change from right to left, and thus make a mistake; it is in such cases, then, that interchanged opinion occurs and the forming of false opinion arises.
ΣΩ. λείπεται τοίνυν τὰ ψευδῆ δοξάσαι ἐν τῷδε, ὅταν γιγνώσκων σὲ καὶ Θεόδωρον, καὶ ἔχων ἐν ἐκείνῳ τῷ κηρίνῳ ὥσπερ δακτυλίων σφῷν ἀμφοῖν τὰ σημεῖα, διὰ μακροῦ καὶ μὴ ἱκανῶς ὁρῶν ἄμφω προθυμηθῶ, τὸ οἰκεῖον ἑκατέρου σημεῖον ἀποδοὺς τῇ οἰκείᾳ ὄψει, ἐμβιβάσας προσαρμόσαι εἰς τὸ ἑαυτῆς ἴχνος, ἵνα γένηται ἀναγνώρισις, εἶτα τούτων ἀποτυχὼν καὶ ὥσπερ οἱ ἔμπαλιν ὑποδούμενοι παραλλάξας προσβάλω τὴν ἑκατέρου ὄψιν πρὸς τὸ ἀλλότριον σημεῖον, ἢ καὶ οἷα τὰ ἐν τοῖς κατόπτροις τῆς ὄψεως πάθη, δεξιὰ εἰς ἀριστερὰ μεταρρεούσης, ταὐτὸν παθὼν διαμάρτω· τότε δὴ συμβαίνει ἡ ἑτεροδοξία καὶ τὸ ψευδῆ δοξάζειν.
THEAET. I think it does, Socrates. You describe what happens to opinion marvelously well.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἔοικε γάρ, ὦ Σώκρατες. θαυμασίως ὡς λέγεις τὸ τῆς δόξης πάθος.
SOC. There is still the further case, when, knowing both of you, I perceive one in addition to knowing him, but do not perceive the other, and the knowledge which I have of that other is not in accord with my perception. This is the case I described in this way before, and at that time you did not understand me.
ΣΩ. ἔτι τοίνυν καὶ ὅταν ἀμφοτέρους γιγνώσκων τὸν μὲν πρὸς τῷ γιγνώσκειν αἰσθάνωμαι, τὸν δὲ μή, τὴν δὲ γνῶσιν τοῦ ἑτέρου μὴ κατὰ τὴν αἴσθησιν ἔχω, ὃ ἐν τοῖς πρόσθεν οὕτως ἔλεγον καί μου τότε οὐκ ἐμάνθανες.
THEAET. No, I did not.
ΘΕΑΙ. οὐ γὰρ οὖν.
SOC. This is what I meant, that if anyone knows and perceives one of you, and has knowledge of him which accords with the perception, he will never think that he is someone else whom he knows and perceives and his knowledge of whom accords with the perception. That was the case, was it not?
ΣΩ. τοῦτο μὴν ἔλεγον, ὅτι γιγνώσκων τὸν ἕτερον καὶ αἰσθανόμενος, καὶ τὴν γνῶσιν κατὰ τὴν αἴσθησιν αὐτοῦ ἔχων, οὐδέποτε οἰήσεται εἶναι αὐτὸν ἕτερόν τινα ὃν γιγνώσκει τε καὶ αἰσθάνεται καὶ τὴν γνῶσιν αὖ καὶ ἐκείνου ἔχει κατὰ τὴν αἴσθησιν. ἦν γὰρ τοῦτο;
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 this which is called error or deception.
ΣΩ. παρελείπετο δέ γέ που τὸ νῦν λεγόμενον, ἐν ᾧ δή φαμεν τὴν ψευδῆ δόξαν γίγνεσθαι τὸ ἄμφω γιγνώσκοντα καὶ ἄμφω ὁρῶντα ἤ τινα ἄλλην αἴσθησιν ἔχοντα ἀμφοῖν τὼ σημείω μὴ κατὰ τὴν αὐτοῦ αἴσθησιν ἑκάτερον ἔχειν, ἀλλʼ οἷον τοξότην φαῦλον ἱέντα παραλλάξαι τοῦ σκοποῦ καὶ ἁμαρτεῖν, ὃ δὴ καὶ ψεῦδος ἄρα ὠνόμασται.
194. THEAET. And properly so.
194. ΘΕΑΙ. εἰκότως γε.
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 fairly and squarely upon one another, and false when it applies them sideways and aslant.
ΣΩ. καὶ ὅταν τοίνυν τῷ μὲν παρῇ αἴσθησις τῶν σημείων, τῷ δὲ μή, τὸ δὲ τῆς ἀπούσης αἰσθήσεως τῇ παρούσῃ προσαρμόσῃ, πάντῃ ταύτῃ ψεύδεται ἡ διάνοια. καὶ ἑνὶ λόγῳ, περὶ ὧν μὲν μὴ οἶδέ τις μηδʼ ἐπῄσθετο πώποτε, οὐκ ἔστιν, ὡς ἔοικεν, οὔτε ψεύδεσθαι οὔτε ψευδὴς δόξα, εἴ τι νῦν ἡμεῖς ὑγιὲς λέγομεν· περὶ δὲ ὧν ἴσμεν τε καὶ αἰσθανόμεθα, ἐν αὐτοῖς τούτοις στρέφεται καὶ ἑλίττεται ἡ δόξα ψευδὴς καὶ ἀληθὴς γιγνομένη, καταντικρὺ μὲν καὶ κατὰ τὸ εὐθὺ τὰ οἰκεῖα συνάγουσα ἀποτυπώματα καὶ τύπους ἀληθής, εἰς πλάγια δὲ καὶ σκολιὰ ψευδής.
THEAET. Well, then, Socrates, is that view not a good one?
ΘΕΑΙ. οὐκοῦν καλῶς, ὦ Σώκρατες, λέγεται;
SOC. After you have heard the rest, you will be still more inclined to say so. For to hold a true opinion is a good thing, but to be deceived is a disgrace.
ΣΩ. ἔτι τοίνυν καὶ τάδε ἀκούσας μᾶλλον αὐτὸ ἐρεῖς. τὸ μὲν γὰρ τἀληθὲς δοξάζειν καλόν, τὸ δὲ ψεύδεσθαι αἰσχρόν.
THEAET. Certainly.
ΘΕΑΙ. πῶς δʼ οὔ;
SOC. They say the cause of these variations is as follows: When the wax in the soul of a man is deep and abundant and smooth and properly kneaded, the images that come through the perceptions are imprinted upon this heart of the soul—as Homer calls it in allusion to its similarity to wax —; when this is the case, and in such men, the imprints, being clear and of sufficient depth, are also lasting. And men of this kind are in the first place quick to learn, and secondly they have retentive memories, and moreover they do not interchange the imprints of their perceptions, but they have true opinions. For the imprints are clear and have plenty of room, so that such men quickly assign them to their several moulds, which are called realities; and these men, then, are called wise. Or do you not agree?
ΣΩ. ταῦτα τοίνυν φασὶν ἐνθένδε γίγνεσθαι. ὅταν μὲν ὁ κηρός του ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ βαθύς τε καὶ πολὺς καὶ λεῖος καὶ μετρίως ὠργασμένος ᾖ, τὰ ἰόντα διὰ τῶν αἰσθήσεων, ἐνσημαινόμενα εἰς τοῦτο τὸ τῆς ψυχῆς κέαρ, ὃ ἔφη Ὅμηρος αἰνιττόμενος τὴν τοῦ κηροῦ ὁμοιότητα, τότε μὲν καὶ τούτοις καθαρὰ τὰ σημεῖα ἐγγιγνόμενα καὶ ἱκανῶς τοῦ βάθους ἔχοντα πολυχρόνιά τε γίγνεται καὶ εἰσὶν οἱ τοιοῦτοι πρῶτον μὲν εὐμαθεῖς, ἔπειτα μνήμονες, εἶτα οὐ παραλλάττουσι τῶν αἰσθήσεων τὰ σημεῖα ἀλλὰ δοξάζουσιν ἀληθῆ. σαφῆ γὰρ καὶ ἐν εὐρυχωρίᾳ ὄντα ταχὺ διανέμουσιν ἐπὶ τὰ αὑτῶν ἕκαστα ἐκμαγεῖα, ἃ δὴ ὄντα καλεῖται, καὶ σοφοὶ δὴ οὗτοι καλοῦνται. ἢ οὐ δοκεῖ σοι;
THEAET. Most emphatically.
ΘΕΑΙ. ὑπερφυῶς μὲν οὖν.
SOC. Now when the heart of anyone is shaggy (a condition which the all-wise poet commends), or when it is unclean or of impure wax, or very soft or hard, those whose wax is soft are quick to learn, but forgetful, and those in whom it is hard are the reverse. But those in whom it is shaggy and rough and stony, infected with earth or dung which is mixed in it, receive indistinct imprints from the moulds. SO.So also do those whose wax is hard; for the imprints lack depth. And imprints in soft wax are also indistinct, because they melt together and quickly become blurred; but if besides all this they are crowded upon one another through lack of room, in some mean little soul, they are still more indistinct.
ΣΩ. ὅταν τοίνυν λάσιόν του τὸ κέαρ ᾖ, ὃ δὴ ἐπῄνεσεν ὁ πάσσοφος ποιητής, ἢ ὅταν κοπρῶδες καὶ μὴ καθαροῦ τοῦ κηροῦ, ἢ ὑγρὸν σφόδρα ἢ σκληρόν, ὧν μὲν ὑγρὸν εὐμαθεῖς μέν, ἐπιλήσμονες δὲ γίγνονται, ὧν δὲ σκληρόν, τἀναντία. οἱ δὲ δὴ λάσιον καὶ τραχὺ λιθῶδές τι ἢ γῆς ἢ κόπρου συμμιγείσης ἔμπλεων ἔχοντες ἀσαφῆ τὰ ἐκμαγεῖα ἴσχουσιν.ΣΩ. ἀσαφῆ δὲ καὶ οἱ τὰ σκληρά· βάθος γὰρ οὐκ ἔνι. ἀσαφῆ δὲ καὶ οἱ τὰ ὑγρά·
195. So all these men are likely to have false opinions. For when they see or hear or think of anything, they cannot quickly assign things to the right imprints, but are slow about it, and because they assign them wrongly they usually see and hear and think amiss. These men, in turn, are accordingly said to be deceived about realities and ignorant.THEAET. You are right as right could be, Socrates.
195. ὑπὸ γὰρ τοῦ συγχεῖσθαι ταχὺ γίγνεται ἀμυδρά. ἐὰν δὲ πρὸς πᾶσι τούτοις ἐπʼ ἀλλήλων συμπεπτωκότα ᾖ ὑπὸ στενοχωρίας, ἐάν του σμικρὸν ᾖ τὸ ψυχάριον, ἔτι ἀσαφέστερα ἐκείνων. πάντες οὖν οὗτοι γίγνονται οἷοι δοξάζειν ψευδῆ. ὅταν γάρ τι ὁρῶσιν ἢ ἀκούωσιν ἢ ἐπινοῶσιν, ἕκαστα ἀπονέμειν ταχὺ ἑκάστοις οὐ δυνάμενοι βραδεῖς τέ εἰσι καὶ ἀλλοτριονομοῦντες παρορῶσί τε καὶ παρακούουσι καὶ παρανοοῦσι πλεῖστα, καὶ καλοῦνται αὖ οὗτοι ἐψευσμένοι τε δὴ τῶν ὄντων καὶ ἀμαθεῖς.ΘΕΑΙ. ὀρθότατα ἀνθρώπων λέγεις, ὦ Σώκρατες.
SOC. Shall we, then, say that false opinions exist in us?
ΣΩ. φῶμεν ἄρα ἐν ἡμῖν ψευδεῖς δόξας εἶναι;
THEAET. Assuredly.
ΘΕΑΙ. σφόδρα γε.
SOC. And true opinions, no doubt?
ΣΩ. καὶ ἀληθεῖς δή;
THEAET. And true ones also.
ΘΕΑΙ. καὶ ἀληθεῖς.
SOC. Then now at last we think we have reached a valid agreement, that these two kinds of opinion incontestably exist?
ΣΩ. ἤδη οὖν οἰόμεθα ἱκανῶς ὡμολογῆσθαι ὅτι παντὸς μᾶλλον ἐστὸν ἀμφοτέρα τούτω τὼ δόξα;
THEAET. Most emphatically.
ΘΕΑΙ. ὑπερφυῶς μὲν οὖν.
SOC. Truly, Theaetetus, a garrulous man is a strange and unpleasant creature!
ΣΩ. δεινόν τε, ὦ Θεαίτητε, ὡς ἀληθῶς κινδυνεύει καὶ ἀηδὲς εἶναι ἀνὴρ ἀδολέσχης.
THEAET. Eh? What makes you say that?
ΘΕΑΙ. τί δέ; πρὸς τί τοῦτʼ εἶπες;
SOC. Vexation at my own stupidity and genuine garrulity. For what else could you call it when a man drags his arguments up and down because he is so stupid that he cannot be convinced, and is hardly to be induced to give up any one of them?
ΣΩ. τὴν ἐμαυτοῦ δυσμαθίαν δυσχεράνας καὶ ὡς ἀληθῶς ἀδολεσχίαν. τί γὰρ ἄν τις ἄλλο θεῖτο ὄνομα, ὅταν ἄνω κάτω τοὺς λόγους ἕλκῃ τις ὑπὸ νωθείας οὐ δυνάμενος πεισθῆναι, καὶ ᾖ δυσαπάλλακτος ἀφʼ ἑκάστου λόγου;
THEAET. But you, why are you vexed?
ΘΕΑΙ. σὺ δὲ δὴ τί δυσχεραίνεις;
SOC. I am not merely vexed, I am actually afraid; for I do not know what answer to make if anyone asks me: “Socrates, have you found out, I wonder, that false opinion exists neither in the relations of the perceptions to one another nor in the thoughts, but in the combination of perception with thought?” I shall say “yes,” I suppose, and put on airs, as if we had made a fine discovery.
ΣΩ. οὐ δυσχεραίνω μόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ δέδοικα ὅτι ἀποκρινοῦμαι ἄν τις ἔρηταί με· ὦ Σώκρατες, ηὕρηκας δὴ ψευδῆ δόξαν, ὅτι οὔτε ἐν ταῖς αἰσθήσεσίν ἐστι πρὸς ἀλλήλας οὔτʼ ἐν ταῖς διανοίαις ἀλλʼ ἐν τῇ συνάψει αἰσθήσεως πρὸς διάνοιαν; φήσω δὲ ἐγὼ οἶμαι καλλωπιζόμενος ὥς τι ηὑρηκότων ἡμῶν καλόν.
THEAET. It seems to me, Socrates, that the result we have now brought out is not half bad.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἔμοιγε δοκεῖ, ὦ Σώκρατες, οὐκ αἰσχρὸν εἶναι τὸ νῦν ἀποδεδειγμένον.
SOC. “Do you go on and assert, then,” he will say, “that we never could imagine that the man whom we merely think of, but do not see, is a horse which also we do not see or touch or perceive by any other sense, but merely think of?” I suppose I shall say that I do make that assertion.
ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν, φησί, λέγεις ὅτι αὖ τὸν ἄνθρωπον ὃν διανοούμεθα μόνον, ὁρῶμεν δʼ οὔ, ἵππον οὐκ ἄν ποτε οἰηθείημεν εἶναι, ὃν αὖ οὔτε ὁρῶμεν οὔτε ἁπτόμεθα, διανοούμεθα δὲ μόνον καὶ ἄλλʼ οὐδὲν αἰσθανόμεθα περὶ αὐτοῦ; ταῦτα οἶμαι φήσω λέγειν.
THEAET. Yes, and you will be right.
ΘΕΑΙ. καὶ ὀρθῶς γε.
SOC. “Then,” he will say, “according to that, could we ever imagine that the number eleven which is merely thought of, is the number twelve which also is merely thought of?” Come now, it is for you to answer.
ΣΩ. τί οὖν, φησί, τὰ ἕνδεκα ἃ μηδὲν ἄλλο ἢ διανοεῖταί τις, ἄλλο τι ἐκ τούτου τοῦ λόγου οὐκ ἄν ποτε οἰηθείη δώδεκα εἶναι ἃ μόνον αὖ διανοεῖται; ἴθι οὖν δή, σὺ ἀποκρίνου.
THEAET. Well, my answer will be that a man might imagine the eleven that he sees or touches to be twelve, but that he could never have that opinion concerning the eleven that he has in his mind.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἀλλʼ ἀποκρινοῦμαι ὅτι ὁρῶν μὲν ἄν τις ἢ ἐφαπτόμενος οἰηθείη τὰ ἕνδεκα δώδεκα εἶναι, ἃ μέντοι ἐν τῇ διανοίᾳ ἔχει, οὐκ ἄν ποτε περὶ αὐτῶν ταῦτα δοξάσειεν οὕτως.
SOC. Well, then, do you think that anyone ever considered in his own mind five and seven,— I do not mean by setting before his eyes seven men and five men and considering them, or anything of that sort, but seven and five in the abstract, which we say are imprints in the block of wax, and in regard to which we deny the possibility of forming false opinions—taking these by themselves, do you imagine that anybody in the world has ever considered them, talking to himself and asking himself what their sum is, and that one person has said and thought eleven, and another twelve, or do all say and think that it is twelve?
ΣΩ. τί οὖν; οἴει τινὰ πώποτε αὐτὸν ἐν αὑτῷ πέντε καὶ ἑπτά, λέγω δὲ μὴ ἀνθρώπους ἑπτὰ καὶ πέντε προθέμενον σκοπεῖν μηδʼ ἄλλο τοιοῦτον, ἀλλʼ αὐτὰ πέντε καὶ ἑπτά, ἅ φαμεν ἐκεῖ μνημεῖα ἐν τῷ ἐκμαγείῳ εἶναι καὶ ψευδῆ ἐν αὐτοῖς οὐκ εἶναι δοξάσαι, ταῦτα αὐτὰ εἴ τις ἀνθρώπων ἤδη πώποτε ἐσκέψατο λέγων πρὸς αὑτὸν καὶ ἐρωτῶν πόσα ποτʼ ἐστίν, καὶ ὁ μέν τις εἶπεν οἰηθεὶς ἕνδεκα αὐτὰ εἶναι, ὁ δὲ δώδεκα, ἢ πάντες λέγουσί τε καὶ οἴονται δώδεκα αὐτὰ εἶναι;
196. THEAET. No, by Zeus; many say eleven, and if you take a larger number for consideration, there is greater likelihood of error. For I suppose you are speaking of any number rather than of these only.
196. ΘΕΑΙ. οὐ μὰ τὸν Δία, ἀλλὰ πολλοὶ δὴ καὶ ἕνδεκα· ἐὰν δέ γε ἐν πλείονι ἀριθμῷ τις σκοπῆται, μᾶλλον σφάλλεται. οἶμαι γάρ σε περὶ παντὸς [μᾶλλον] ἀριθμοῦ λέγειν.
SOC. You are right in supposing so; and consider whether in that instance the abstract twelve in the block of wax is not itself imagined to be eleven.
ΣΩ. ὀρθῶς γὰρ οἴει· καὶ ἐνθυμοῦ μή τι τότε γίγνεται ἄλλο ἢ αὐτὰ τὰ δώδεκα τὰ ἐν τῷ ἐκμαγείῳ ἕνδεκα οἰηθῆναι.
THEAET. It seems so.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἔοικέ γε.
SOC. Have we not, then, come back again to the beginning of our talk? For the man who is affected in this way imagines that one thing which he knows is another thing which he knows. This we said was impossible, and by this very argument we were forcing false opinion out of existence, that the same man might not be forced to know and not know the same things at the same time.
ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν εἰς τοὺς πρώτους πάλιν ἀνήκει λόγους; ὁ γὰρ τοῦτο παθών, ὃ οἶδεν, ἕτερον αὐτὸ οἴεται εἶναι ὧν αὖ οἶδεν, ὃ ἔφαμεν ἀδύνατον, καὶ τούτῳ αὐτῷ ἠναγκάζομεν μὴ εἶναι ψευδῆ δόξαν, ἵνα μὴ τὰ αὐτὰ ὁ αὐτὸς ἀναγκάζοιτο εἰδὼς μὴ εἰδέναι ἅμα.
THEAET. Very true.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἀληθέστατα.
SOC. Then we must show that forming false opinion is something or other different from the interchange of thought and perception. For if it were that, we should never be deceived in abstract thoughts. But as the case now stands, either there is no false opinion or it is possible for a man not to know that which he knows. Which alternative will you choose?
ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν ἄλλʼ ὁτιοῦν δεῖ ἀποφαίνειν τὸ τὰ ψευδῆ δοξάζειν ἢ διανοίας πρὸς αἴσθησιν παραλλαγήν. εἰ γὰρ τοῦτʼ ἦν, οὐκ ἄν ποτε ἐν αὐτοῖς τοῖς διανοήμασιν ἐψευδόμεθα. νῦν δὲ ἤτοι οὐκ ἔστι ψευδὴς δόξα, ἢ ἅ τις οἶδεν, οἷόν τε μὴ εἰδέναι. καὶ τούτων πότερα αἱρῇ;
THEAET. There is no possible choice, Socrates.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἄπορον αἵρεσιν προτίθης, ὦ Σώκρατες.
SOC. And yet the argument is not likely to admit both. But still, since we must not shrink from any risk, what if we should try to do a shameless deed?
ΣΩ. ἀλλὰ μέντοι ἀμφότερά γε κινδυνεύει ὁ λόγος οὐκ ἐάσειν. ὅμως δέ—πάντα γὰρ τολμητέον—τί εἰ ἐπιχειρήσαιμεν ἀναισχυντεῖν;
THEAET. What is it?
ΘΕΑΙ. πῶς;
SOC. To undertake to tell what it really is to know.
ΣΩ. ἐθελήσαντες εἰπεῖν ποῖόν τί ποτʼ ἐστὶ τὸ ἐπίστασθαι.
THEAET. And why is that shameless?
ΘΕΑΙ. καὶ τί τοῦτο ἀναίσχυντον;
SOC. You seem not to remember that our whole talk from the beginning has been a search for knowledge, because we did not know what it is.
ΣΩ. ἔοικας οὐκ ἐννοεῖν ὅτι πᾶς ἡμῖν ἐξ ἀρχῆς ὁ λόγος ζήτησις γέγονεν ἐπιστήμης ὡς οὐκ εἰδόσι τί ποτʼ ἐστίν.
THEAET. Oh yes, I remember.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἐννοῶ μὲν οὖν.
SOC. Then is it not shameless to proclaim what it is to know, when we are ignorant of knowledge? But really, Theaetetus, our talk has been badly tainted with unclearness all along; for we have said over and over again “we know” and “we do not know” and “we have knowledge” and “we have no knowledge,” as if we could understand each other, while we were still ignorant of knowledge; and at this very moment, if you please, we have again used the terms “be ignorant” and “understand,” as though we had any right to use them if we are deprived of knowledge.
ΣΩ. ἔπειτʼ οὐκ ἀναιδὲς δοκεῖ μὴ εἰδότας ἐπιστήμην ἀποφαίνεσθαι τὸ ἐπίστασθαι οἷόν ἐστιν; ἀλλὰ γάρ, ὦ Θεαίτητε, πάλαι ἐσμὲν ἀνάπλεῳ τοῦ μὴ καθαρῶς διαλέγεσθαι. μυριάκις γὰρ εἰρήκαμεν τὸ γιγνώσκομεν καὶ οὐ γιγνώσκομεν, καὶ ἐπιστάμεθα καὶ οὐκ ἐπιστάμεθα, ὥς τι συνιέντες ἀλλήλων ἐν ᾧ ἔτι ἐπιστήμην ἀγνοοῦμεν· εἰ δὲ βούλει, καὶ νῦν ἐν τῷ παρόντι κεχρήμεθʼ αὖ τῷ ἀγνοεῖν τε καὶ συνιέναι, ὡς προσῆκον αὐτοῖς χρῆσθαι εἴπερ στερόμεθα ἐπιστήμης.
THEAET. But how will you converse, Socrates, if you refrain from these words?
ΘΕΑΙ. ἀλλὰ τίνα τρόπον διαλέξῃ, ὦ Σώκρατες, τούτων ἀπεχόμενος;
197. 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.
197. ΣΩ. οὐδένα ὤν γε ὃς εἰμί, εἰ μέντοι ἦ ἀντιλογικός· οἷος ἀνὴρ εἰ καὶ νῦν παρῆν, τούτων τʼ ἂν ἔφη ἀπέχεσθαι καὶ ἡμῖν σφόδρʼ ἂν ἃ ἐγὼ λέγω ἐπέπληττεν. ἐπειδὴ οὖν ἐσμεν φαῦλοι, βούλει τολμήσω εἰπεῖν οἷόν ἐστι τὸ ἐπίστασθαι; φαίνεται γάρ μοι προὔργου τι ἂν γενέσθαι.
THEAET. Venture it then, by Zeus. You shall have full pardon for not refraining from those terms.
ΘΕΑΙ. τόλμα τοίνυν νὴ Δία. τούτων δὲ μὴ ἀπεχομένῳ σοι ἔσται πολλὴ συγγνώμη.
SOC. Have you heard what they say nowadays that knowing is?
ΣΩ. ἀκήκοας οὖν ὃ νῦν λέγουσιν τὸ ἐπίστασθαι;
THEAET. Perhaps; however, I don’t remember just at this moment.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἴσως· οὐ μέντοι ἔν γε τῷ παρόντι μνημονεύω.
SOC. They say it is having knowledge.
ΣΩ. ἐπιστήμης που ἕξιν φασὶν αὐτὸ εἶναι.
THEAET. True.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἀληθῆ.
SOC. Let us make a slight change and say possessing knowledge.
ΣΩ. ἡμεῖς τοίνυν σμικρὸν μεταθώμεθα καὶ εἴπωμεν ἐπιστήμης κτῆσιν.
THEAET. Why, how will you claim that the one differs from the other?
ΘΕΑΙ. τί οὖν δὴ φήσεις τοῦτο ἐκείνου διαφέρειν;
SOC. Perhaps it doesn’t; but first hear how it seems to me to differ, and then help me to test my view.
ΣΩ. ἴσως μὲν οὐδέν· ὃ δʼ οὖν δοκεῖ ἀκούσας συνδοκίμαζε.
THEAET. I will if I can.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἐάνπερ γε οἷός τʼ ὦ.
SOC. Well, then, having does not seem to me the same as possessing. For instance, if a man bought a cloak and had it under his control, but did not wear it, we should certainly say, not that he had it, but that he possessed it.
ΣΩ. οὐ τοίνυν μοι ταὐτὸν φαίνεται τῷ κεκτῆσθαι τὸ ἔχειν. οἷον ἱμάτιον πριάμενός τις καὶ ἐγκρατὴς ὢν μὴ φορῶν, ἔχειν μὲν οὐκ ἂν αὐτὸν αὐτό, κεκτῆσθαί γε μὴν φαῖμεν.
THEAET. And rightly.
ΘΕΑΙ. ὀρθῶς γε.
SOC. Now see whether it is possible in the same way for one who possesses knowledge not to have it, as, for instance, if a man should catch wild birds—pigeons or the like—and should arrange an aviary at home and keep them in it, we might in a way assert that he always has them because he possesses them, might we not?
ΣΩ. ὅρα δὴ καὶ ἐπιστήμην εἰ δυνατὸν οὕτω κεκτημένον μὴ ἔχειν, ἀλλʼ ὥσπερ εἴ τις ὄρνιθας ἀγρίας, περιστερὰς ἤ τι ἄλλο, θηρεύσας οἴκοι κατασκευασάμενος περιστερεῶνα τρέφοι, τρόπον μὲν [γὰρ] ἄν πού τινα φαῖμεν αὐτὸν αὐτὰς ἀεὶ ἔχειν, ὅτι δὴ κέκτηται. ἦ γάρ;
SOC. And yet in another way that he has none of them, but that he has acquired power over them, since he has brought them under his control in his own enclosure, to take them and hold them whenever he likes, by catching whichever bird he pleases, and to let them go again; and he can do this as often as be sees fit.
ΣΩ. τρόπον δέ γʼ ἄλλον οὐδεμίαν ἔχειν, ἀλλὰ δύναμιν μὲν αὐτῷ περὶ αὐτὰς παραγεγονέναι, ἐπειδὴ ἐν οἰκείῳ περιβόλῳ ὑποχειρίους ἐποιήσατο, λαβεῖν καὶ σχεῖν ἐπειδὰν βούληται, θηρευσαμένῳ ἣν ἂν ἀεὶ ἐθέλῃ, καὶ πάλιν ἀφιέναι, καὶ τοῦτο ἐξεῖναι ποιεῖν ὁποσάκις ἂν δοκῇ αὐτῷ.
THEAET. That is true.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἔστι ταῦτα.
SOC. Once more, then, just as a while ago we contrived some sort of a waxen figment in the soul, so now let us make in each soul an aviary stocked 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.
ΣΩ. πάλιν δή, ὥσπερ ἐν τοῖς πρόσθεν κήρινόν τι ἐν ταῖς ψυχαῖς κατεσκευάζομεν οὐκ οἶδʼ ὅτι πλάσμα, νῦν αὖ ἐν ἑκάστῃ ψυχῇ ποιήσωμεν περιστερεῶνά τινα παντοδαπῶν ὀρνίθων, τὰς μὲν κατʼ ἀγέλας οὔσας χωρὶς τῶν ἄλλων, τὰς δὲ κατʼ ὀλίγας, ἐνίας δὲ μόνας διὰ πασῶν ὅπῃ ἂν τύχωσι πετομένας.
THEAET. Consider it done. What next?
ΘΕΑΙ. πεποιήσθω δή. ἀλλὰ τί τοὐντεῦθεν;
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 acquires and shuts up in the enclosure, we must say that he has learned or discovered the thing of which this is the knowledge, and that just this is knowing.
ΣΩ. παιδίων μὲν ὄντων φάναι χρὴ εἶναι τοῦτο τὸ ἀγγεῖον κενόν, ἀντὶ δὲ τῶν ὀρνίθων ἐπιστήμας νοῆσαι· ἣν δʼ ἂν ἐπιστήμην κτησάμενος καθείρξῃ εἰς τὸν περίβολον, φάναι αὐτὸν μεμαθηκέναι ἢ ηὑρηκέναι τὸ πρᾶγμα οὗ ἦν αὕτη ἡ ἐπιστήμη, καὶ τὸ ἐπίστασθαι τοῦτʼ εἶναι.
THEAET. So be it.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἔστω.
198. SOC. Consider then what expressions are needed for the process of recapturing and taking and holding and letting go again whichever he please of the kinds of knowledge, whether they are the same expressions as those needed for the original acquisition, or others. But you will understand better by an illustration. You admit that there is an art of arithmetic?
198. ΣΩ. τὸ τοίνυν πάλιν ἣν ἂν βούληται τῶν ἐπιστημῶν θηρεύειν καὶ λαβόντα ἴσχειν καὶ αὖθις ἀφιέναι σκόπει τίνων δεῖται ὀνομάτων, εἴτε τῶν αὐτῶν ὧν τὸ πρῶτον ὅτε ἐκτᾶτο εἴτε ἑτέρων. μαθήσῃ δʼ ἐνθένδε σαφέστερον τί λέγω. ἀριθμητικὴν μὲν γὰρ λέγεις τέχνην;
SOC. Now suppose this to be a hunt after the kinds of knowledge, or sciences, of all odd and even numbers.
ΣΩ. ταύτην δὴ ὑπόλαβε θήραν ἐπιστημῶν ἀρτίου τε καὶ περιττοῦ παντός.
THEAET. I do so.
ΘΕΑΙ. ὑπολαμβάνω.
SOC. Now it is by this art, I imagine, that a man has the sciences of numbers under his own control and also that any man who transmits them to another does this.
ΣΩ. ταύτῃ δὴ οἶμαι τῇ τέχνῃ αὐτός τε ὑποχειρίους τὰς ἐπιστήμας τῶν ἀριθμῶν ἔχει καὶ ἄλλῳ παραδίδωσιν ὁ παραδιδούς.
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.
ΣΩ. καὶ καλοῦμέν γε παραδιδόντα μὲν διδάσκειν, παραλαμβάνοντα δὲ μανθάνειν, ἔχοντα δὲ δὴ τῷ κεκτῆσθαι ἐν τῷ περιστερεῶνι ἐκείνῳ ἐπίστασθαι.
THEAET. Certainly.
ΘΕΑΙ. πάνυ μὲν οὖν.
SOC. Now pay attention to what follows from this. Does not the perfect arithmetician understand all numbers; for he has the sciences of all numbers in his mind?
ΣΩ. τῷ δὲ δὴ ἐντεῦθεν ἤδη πρόσσχες τὸν νοῦν. ἀριθμητικὸς γὰρ ὢν τελέως ἄλλο τι πάντας ἀριθμοὺς ἐπίσταται; πάντων γὰρ ἀριθμῶν εἰσιν αὐτῷ ἐν τῇ ψυχῇ ἐπιστῆμαι.
THEAET. To be sure.
ΘΕΑΙ. τί μήν;
SOC. Then would such a man ever count anything—either any abstract numbers in his head, or any such external objects as possess number?
ΣΩ. ἦ οὖν ὁ τοιοῦτος ἀριθμοῖ ἄν ποτέ τι ἢ αὐτὸς πρὸς αὑτὸν αὐτὰ ἢ ἄλλο τι τῶν ἔξω ὅσα ἔχει ἀριθμόν;
THEAET. Of course, SOC. But we shall affirm that counting is the same thing as considering how great any number in question is.
ΘΕΑΙ. πῶς γὰρ οὔ;ΣΩ. τὸ δὲ ἀριθμεῖν γε οὐκ ἄλλο τι θήσομεν τοῦ σκοπεῖσθαι πόσος τις ἀριθμὸς τυγχάνει ὤν.
THEAET. We shall.
ΘΕΑΙ. οὕτως.
SOC. Then he who by our previous admission knows all number is found to be considering that which he knows as if he did not know it. You have doubtless heard of such ambiguities.
ΣΩ. ὃ ἄρα ἐπίσταται, σκοπούμενος φαίνεται ὡς οὐκ εἰδώς, ὃν ὡμολογήκαμεν ἅπαντα ἀριθμὸν εἰδέναι. ἀκούεις γάρ που τὰς τοιαύτας ἀμφισβητήσεις.
THEAET. Yes, I have.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἔγωγε.
SOC. Continuing, then, our comparison with the acquisition and hunting of the pigeons, we shall say that the hunting is of two kinds, one before the acquisition for the sake of possessing, the other carried on by the possessor for the sake of taking and holding in his hands what he had acquired long before. And just so when a man long since by learning came to possess knowledge of certain things, and knew them, he may have these very things afresh by taking up again the knowledge of each of them separately and holding it—the knowledge which he had acquired long before, but had not at hand in his mind?
ΣΩ. οὐκοῦν ἡμεῖς ἀπεικάζοντες τῇ τῶν περιστερῶν κτήσει τε καὶ θήρᾳ ἐροῦμεν ὅτι διττὴ ἦν ἡ θήρα, ἡ μὲν πρὶν ἐκτῆσθαι τοῦ κεκτῆσθαι ἕνεκα, ἡ δὲ κεκτημένῳ τοῦ λαβεῖν καὶ ἔχειν ἐν ταῖς χερσὶν ἃ πάλαι ἐκέκτητο. οὕτως δὲ καὶ ὧν πάλαι ἐπιστῆμαι ἦσαν αὐτῷ μαθόντι καὶ ἠπίστατο αὐτά, πάλιν ἔστι καταμανθάνειν ταὐτὰ ταῦτα ἀναλαμβάνοντα τὴν ἐπιστήμην ἑκάστου καὶ ἴσχοντα, ἣν ἐκέκτητο μὲν πάλαι, πρόχειρον δʼ οὐκ εἶχε τῇ διανοίᾳ;
THEAET. That is true.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἀληθῆ.
SOC. This, then, was my question just now: How 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?
ΣΩ. τοῦτο δὴ ἄρτι ἠρώτων, ὅπως χρὴ τοῖς ὀνόμασι χρώμενον λέγειν περὶ αὐτῶν, ὅταν ἀριθμήσων ἴῃ ὁ ἀριθμητικὸς ἤ τι ἀναγνωσόμενος ὁ γραμματικός, ὡς ἐπιστάμενος ἄρα ἐν τῷ τοιούτῳ πάλιν ἔρχεται μαθησόμενος παρʼ ἑαυτοῦ ἃ ἐπίσταται;
THEAET. But that is extraordinary, Socrates.
ΘΕΑΙ. ἀλλʼ ἄτοπον, ὦ Σώκρατες.
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?
ΣΩ. ἀλλʼ ἃ οὐκ ἐπίσταται φῶμεν αὐτὸν ἀναγνώσεσθαι καὶ ἀριθμήσειν, δεδωκότες αὐτῷ πάντα μὲν γράμματα πάντα δὲ ἀριθμὸν ἐπίστασθαι;
199. THEAET. But that too is absurd.
199. ΘΕΑΙ. ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῦτʼ ἄλογον.
SOC. Shall we then say that words are nothing to us, if it amuses anyone to drag the expressions “know” and “learn” one way and another, but since we set up the distinction that it is one thing to possess knowledge and another thing to have it, we affirm that it is impossible not to possess what one possesses, so that it never happens that a man does not know that which he knows, but that it is 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 kinds fly about, he makes a mistake and catches one instead of another; so in one example he thought eleven was twelve, because he caught the knowledge of twelve, which was within him, instead of that of eleven, caught a ringdove, as it were, instead of a pigeon.
ΣΩ. βούλει οὖν λέγωμεν ὅτι τῶν μὲν ὀνομάτων οὐδὲν ἡμῖν μέλει, ὅπῃ τις χαίρει ἕλκων τὸ ἐπίστασθαι καὶ μανθάνειν, ἐπειδὴ δὲ ὡρισάμεθα ἕτερον μέν τι τὸ κεκτῆσθαι τὴν ἐπιστήμην, ἕτερον δὲ τὸ ἔχειν, ὃ μέν τις ἔκτηται μὴ κεκτῆσθαι ἀδύνατόν φαμεν εἶναι, ὥστε οὐδέποτε συμβαίνει ὅ τις οἶδεν μὴ εἰδέναι, ψευδῆ μέντοι δόξαν οἷόν τʼ εἶναι περὶ αὐτοῦ λαβεῖν;ΣΩ. μὴ γὰρ ἔχειν τὴν ἐπιστήμην τούτου οἷόν τε, ἀλλʼ ἑτέραν ἀντʼ ἐκείνης, ὅταν θηρεύων τινά πού ποτʼ ἐπιστήμην διαπετομένων ἀνθʼ ἑτέρας ἑτέραν ἁμαρτὼν λάβῃ, τότε ἄρα τὰ ἕνδεκα δώδεκα ᾠήθη εἶναι, τὴν τῶν ἕνδεκα ἐπιστήμην ἀντὶ τῆς τῶν δώδεκα λαβὼν τὴν ἐν ἑαυτῷ οἷον φάτταν ἀντὶ περιστερᾶς.