按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
the wisest of men in all things？
Theaet。 Yes； why should there not be another such art？
Str。 But as time goes on； and their hearers advance in years； and
come into closer contact with realities； and have learnt by sad
experience to see and feel the truth of things； are not the greater
part of them compelled to change many opinions which they formerly
entertained； so that the great appears small to them； and the easy
difficult； and all their dreamy speculations are overturned by the
facts of life？
Theaet。 That is my view； as far as I can judge； although；
at my age；
I may be one of those who see things at a distance only。
Str。 And the wish of all of us； who are your friends； is and
always will be to bring you as near to the truth as we can
without the
sad reality。 And now I should like you to tell me； whether
the Sophist
is not visibly a magician and imitator of true being； or are we
still disposed to think that he may have a true knowledge of the
various matters about which he disputes？
Theaet。 But how can he； Stranger？ Is there any doubt；
after what has
been said； that he is to be located in one of the divisions of
children's play？
Str。 Then we must place him in the class of magicians and mimics。
Theaet。 Certainly we must。
Str。 And now our business is not to let the animal out； for we
have got him in a sort of dialectical net； and there is one thing
which he decidedly will not escape。
Theaet。 What is that？
Str。 The inference that he is a juggler。
Theaet。 Precisely my own opinion of him。
Str。 Then； clearly； we ought as soon as possible to divide the
image…making art； and go down into the net； and； if the Sophist does
not run away from us； to seize him according to orders and
deliver him
over to reason； who is the lord of the hunt； and proclaim the
capture of him； and if he creeps into the recesses of the imitative
art； and secretes himself in one of them； to divide again and follow
him up until in some sub…section of imitation he is caught。 For our
method of tackling each and all is one which neither he nor any
other creature will ever escape in triumph。
Theaet。 Well said； and let us do as you propose。
Str。 Well； then； pursuing the same analytic method as before； I
think that I can discern two divisions of the imitative art； but I
am not as yet able to see in which of them the desired form is to be
found。
Theaet。 Will you tell me first what are two divisions of which you
are speaking？
Str。 One is the art of likeness…making；…generally a likeness of
anything is made by producing a copy which is executed according to
the proportions of the original； similar in length and breadth and
depth； each thing receiving also its appropriate colour。
Theaet。 Is not this always the aim of imitation？
Str。 Not always； in works either of sculpture or of painting；
which are of any magnitude； there is a certain degree of deception；
…for artists were to give the true proportions of their fair works；
the upper part； which is farther off； would appear to be out of
proportion in comparison with the lower； which is nearer； and so
they give up the truth in their images and make only the proportions
which appear to be beautiful； disregarding the real ones。
Theaet。 Quite true。
Str。 And that which being other is also like； may we not
fairly call
a likeness or image？
Theaet。 Yes。
Str。 And may we not； as I did just now； call that part of the
imitative art which is concerned with making such images the art of
likeness making？
Theaet。 Let that be the name。
Str。 And what shall we call those resemblances of the beautiful；
which appear such owing to the unfavourable position of the
spectator；
whereas if a person had the power of getting a correct view of works
of such magnitude； they would appear not even like that to which
they profess to be like？ May we not call these 〃appearances；〃 since
they appear only and are not really like？
Theaet。 Certainly。
Str。 There is a great deal of this kind of thing in
painting； and in
all imitation。
Theaet。 Of course。
Str。 And may we not fairly call the sort of art； which produces an
appearance and not an image； phantastic art？
Theaet。 Most fairly。
Str。 These then are the two kinds of image making…the art of
making likenesses； and phantastic or the art of making appearances？
Theaet。 True。
Str。 I was doubtful before in which of them I should place the
Sophist； nor am I even now able to see clearly； verily he is a
wonderful and inscrutable creature。 And now in the cleverest
manner he
has got into an impossible place。
Theaet。 Yes； he has。
Str。 Do you speak advisedly； or are you carried away at the moment
by the habit of assenting into giving a hasty answer？
Theaet。 May I ask to what you are referring？
Str。 My dear friend； we are engaged in a very difficult
speculation…there can be no doubt of that； for how a thing can
appear and seem； and not be； or how a man can say a thing
which is not
true； has always been and still remains a very perplexing question。
Can any one say or think that falsehood really exists； and
avoid being
caught in a contradiction？ Indeed； Theaetetus； the task is a
difficult
one。
Theaet。 Why？
Str。 He who says that falsehood exists has the audacity to assert
the being of not…being； for this is implied in the possibility of
falsehood。 But； my boy； in the days when I was a boy； the great
Parmenides protested against this doctrine； and to the end
of his life
he continued to inculcate the same lesson…always repeating both in
verse and out of verse：
Keep your mind from this way of enquiry； for never will you show
that not…being is
Such is his testimony； which is confirmed by the very expression
when sifted a little。 Would you object to begin with the
consideration
of the words themselves？
Theaet。 Never mind about me； I am only desirous that you should
carry on the argument in the best way； and that you should take me
with you。
Str。 Very good； and now say； do we venture to utter the forbidden
word 〃not…being〃？
Theaet。 Certainly we do。
Str。 Let us be serious then； and consider the question neither in
strife nor play： suppose that one of the hearers of Parmenides was
asked； 〃To is the term 'not…being' to be applied？〃…do you know what
sort of object he would single out in reply； and what answer he
would make to the enquirer？
Theaet。 That is a difficult question； and one not to be answered
at all by a person like myself。
Str。 There is at any rate no difficulty in seeing that the
predicate
〃not…being〃 is not applicable to any being。
Theaet。 None； certainly。
Str。 And if not to being； then not to something。
Theaet。 Of course not。
Str。 It is also plain； that in speaking of something we speak of
being； for to speak of an abstract something naked and isolated from
all being is impossible。
Theaet。 Impossible。
Str。 You mean by assenting to imply that he who says something
must say some one thing？
Theaet。 Yes。
Str。 Some in t