Plato's Theory of Knowledge

Francis MacDonald Cornford

• Publisher: Taylor & Francis
• Year: 2013
• Print ISBN: 9780415225199
• eBook ISBN: 9781317830207
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Philosophy
• Subtopic: Philosophy History & Theory

This is Volume V of ten on a series on Ancient Philosophy that includes the works of Aristotle, Plato and the history of Greek philosophy. Originally published in 1935, this study looks 'the 'Theaetetus' and the 'Sophist' of Plato translated with a running commentary.

The Sophist

216A-218D. Introductory Conversation

THE introductory conversation announces the subject of the discussion begun in this dialogue and continued in the Statesman: How are the Sophist and the Statesman to be defined and distinguished (if they are to be distinguished) from the Philosopher? A second purpose is to describe the philosophic position of the Stranger from Elea, who here takes Socrates' place as leader of the conversation.

THEODORUS. sOCRATES. A STRANGER FROM ELEA. THEAETETUS

216.

THEODORUS. Here we are, Socrates, faithful to our appointment of yesterday; and, what is more, we have brought a guest with us. Our friend here is a native of Elea; he belongs to the school of Parmenides and Zeno, and is devoted to philosophy.

B.

SOCRATES. Perhaps, Theodoras, it is no ordinary guest but some god that you have brought us unawares. Homer¹ tells us that gods attend upon the goings of men of mercy and justice; and not least among them the God of Strangers comes to mark the orderly or lawless doings of mankind. Your companion may be one of those higher powers, who intends to observe and expose our weakness in philosophic discourse, like a very spirit of refutation.

C.

THEOD. That is not our friend's way, Socrates; he is more reasonable than the devotees of verbal dispute. I should not call him a god by any means; but there is something divine about him: I would say that of any philosopher. Socr. And rightly, my friend; but one might almost say that the type you mention is hardly easier to discern than the god. Such men—the genuine, not the sham philosophers—as they go from city to city surveying from a height the life beneath them, appear, owing to the world's blindness, to wear all sorts of shapes. To some they seem of no account, to others above all worth; now they wear the guise of statesmen, now of sophists; and sometimes they may give the impression of simply being mad. But if our guest will allow me, I should like to ask him what his countrymen thought and how they used these names.

D.

216D.

217.

THEOD. What names?

SOCR. Sophist, Statesman, Philosopher.

THEOD. What is your question exactly? What sort of difficulty about these names have you in mind?

SOCR. This: did they think of all these as a single type, or as two, or did they distinguish three types and attach one of the three corresponding names to each?

THEOD. I imagine you are quite welcome to the information. Is not that so, sir?

B.

STRANGER. Yes, Theodorus, perfectly welcome; and the answer is not difficult. They thought of them as three different types; but it is not so short and easy a task to define each one of them clearly.

THEOD. As luck would have it, Socrates, you have hit upon a subject closely allied to one on which we were pressing him with questions before we came here. He tried to put us off with the same excuse he has just made to you, though he admits he has been thoroughly instructed and has not forgotten what he heard.

C.

SOCR. Do not deny us, then, the first favour we ask. Tell us this much¹: which do you commonly prefer—to discourse at length by yourself on any matter you wish to make clear, or to use the method of asking questions, as Parmenides himself did on one occasion in developing some magnificent arguments in my presence, when I was young and he quite an elderly man?²

D.

STR. When the other party to the conversation is tractable and gives no trouble, to address him is the easier course; otherwise, to speak by oneself.

SOCR. Then you may choose any of the company you will; they will all follow you and respond amenably. But if you take my advice, you will choose one of the younger men— Theaetetus here or any other you may prefer.

STR. I feel some shyness, Socrates, at the notion that, at my first meeting with you and your friends, instead of exchanging our ideas in the give and take of ordinary conversation, I should spin out a long discourse by myself or even address it to another, as if I were giving a display of eloquence.¹ For indeed the question you have just raised is not so easy a matter as one might suppose, on hearing it so simply put, but it calls for a very long discussion. On the other hand, to refuse you and your friends a request, especially one put to me in such terms as you have used, strikes me as a breach of civility in a guest.² That Theaetetus should be the other party to our conversation is a proposal which my earlier talk with him, as well as your recommendation, makes exceedingly welcome.

217E.

218.

THEAETETUS. Then do as you say, sir; you will, as Socrates said, be conferring a favour on us all.

Str. On that point, Theaetetus, no more need be said; the discussion from now onwards must, it seems, be carried on with you. But if the long task should after all weigh heavy on you, your friends here, not I, must bear the blarne.

B.

THEAET. I do not feel at this moment as if I should sink under it; but should something of that sort happen, we will call in Socrates' namesake here, who is of my own age and shares my pursuits. He is quite used to working out most questions with me.

C.

STR. A good suggestion: that shall be for you to consider as our conversation goes forward. What now concerns us both is our joint inquiry. We had better, I think, begin by studying the Sophist and try to bring his nature to light in a clear formula. At present, you see, all that you and I possess in common is the name. The thing to which each of us gives that name we may perhaps have privately before our minds³; but it is always desirable to have reached an agreement about the thing itself by means of explicit statements, rather than be content to use the same word without formulating what it means. It is not so easy to comprehend this group we intend to examine or to say what it means to be a sophist. However, when some great task is to be properly carried through, everyone has long since found it a good rule to take something comparatively small and easy and practise on that, before attempting the big thing itself. That is the course I recommend for us now, Theaetetus. Judging the Sophist to be a very troublesome sort of creature to hunt down, let us first practise the method of tracking him on some easier quarry—unless you have some readier means to sug...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Dedication
• PREFACE
• Contents
• INTRODUCTION
• THE THEAETETUS
• THE SOPHIST
• INDEX