sophist-第4章

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！


from　refutation　learns　modesty；　he　must　be　purged　of　his　prejudices

first　and　made　to　think　that　he　knows　only　what　he　knows；　

and　no　more。

　　Theaet。　That　is　certainly　the　best　and　wisest　state　of　mind。

　　Str。　For　all　these　reasons；　Theaetetus；　we　must　admit　that

refutation　is　the　greatest　and　chiefest　of　purifications；　and　he　who

has　not　been　refuted；　though　he　be　the　Great　King　himself；　is　in　an

awful　state　of　impurity；　he　is　uninstructed　and　deformed　in　those

things　in　which　he　who　would　be　truly　blessed　ought　to　be　fairest

and　purest。

　　Theaet。　Very　true。

　　Str。　And　who　are　the　ministers　of　this　art？

I　am　afraid　to　say　the　Sophists。

　　Theaet。　Why？

　　Str。　Lest　we　should　assign　to　them　too　high　a　prerogative。

　　Theaet。　Yet　the　Sophist　has　a　certain　likeness　to　our　minister　of

purification。

　　Str。　Yes；　the　same　sort　of　likeness　which　a　wolf；　who　is　the

fiercest　of　animals；　has　to　a　dog；　who　is　the　gentlest。　But　he　who

would　not　be　found　tripping；　ought　to　be　very　careful　in　this　matter

of　comparisons；　for　they　are　most　slippery　things。　Nevertheless；　let

us　assume　that　the　Sophists　are　the　men。　I　say　this　

provisionally；　for

I　think　that　the　line　which　divides　them　will　be　marked　enough　if

proper　care　is　taken。

　　Theaet。　Likely　enough。

　　Str。　Let　us　grant；　then；　that　from　the　discerning　art　comes

purification；　and　from　purification　let　there　be　separated　off　a

part　which　is　concerned　with　the　soul；　of　this　mental　purification

instruction　is　a　portion；　and　of　instruction　education；　and　of

education；　that　refutation　of　vain　conceit　which　has　been　discovered

in　the　present　argument；　and　let　this　be　called　by　you　and　me　the

nobly…descended　art　of　Sophistry。

　　Theaet。　Very　well；　and　yet；　considering　the　number　of　

forms　in　which

he　has　presented　himself；　I　begin　to　doubt　how　I　can　with　

any　truth　or

confidence　describe　the　real　nature　of　the　Sophist。

　　Str。　You　naturally　feel　perplexed；　and　yet　I　think　that　he　must　be

still　more　perplexed　in　his　attempt　to　escape　us；　for　as　the　proverb

says；　when　every　way　is　blocked；　there　is　no　escape；　now；　

then；　is　the

time　of　all　others　to　set　upon　him。

　　Theaet。　True。

　　Str。　First　let　us　wait　a　moment　and　recover　breath；　and　

while　we　are

resting；　we　may　reckon　up　in　how　many　forms　he　has　appeared。　In　the

first　place；　he　was　discovered　to　be　a　paid　hunter　after　wealth　and

youth。

　　Theaet。　Yes。

　　Str。　In　the　second　place；　he　was　a　merchant　in　the　goods　of　the

soul。

　　Theaet。　Certainly。

　　Str。　In　the　third　place；　he　has　turned　out　to　be　a　retailer　of　the

same　sort　of　wares。

　　Theaet。　Yes；　and　in　the　fourth　place；　he　himself　manufactured　the

learned　wares　which　he　sold。

　　Str。　Quite　right；　I　will　try　and　remember　the　fifth　myself。　He

belonged　to　the　fighting　class；　and　was　further　distinguished　as　a

hero　of　debate；　who　professed　the　eristic　art。

　　Theaet。　True。

　　Str。　The　sixth　point　was　doubtful；　and　yet　we　at　last　

agreed　that　he

was　a　purger　of　souls；　who　cleared　away　notions　obstructive　to

knowledge。

　　Theaet。　Very　true。

　　Str。　Do　you　not　see　that　when　the　professor　of　any　art　has　one

name　and　many　kinds　of　knowledge；　there　must　be　something　wrong？　The

multiplicity　of　names　which　is　applied　to　him　shows　that　the　common

principle　to　which　all　these　branches　of　knowledge　are　

tending；　is　not

understood。

　　Theaet。　I　should　imagine　this　to　be　the　case。

　　Str。　At　any　rate　we　will　understand　him；　and　no　indolence　shall

prevent　us。　Let　us　begin　again；　then；　and　re…examine　some　of　our

statements　concerning　the　Sophist；　there　was　one　thing　which

appeared　to　me　especially　characteristic　of　him。

　　Theaet。　To　what　are　you　referring？

　　Str。　We　were　saying　of　him；　if　I　am　not　mistaken；　that　he　was　a

disputer？

　　Theaet。　We　were。

　　Str。　And　does　he　not　also　teach　others　the　art　of　disputation？

　　Theaet。　Certainly　he　does。

　　Str。　And　about　what　does　he　profess　that　he　teaches　men　to

dispute？　To　begin　at　the　beginning…Does　he　make　them　able　to　dispute

about　divine　things；　which　are　invisible　to　men　in　general？

　　Theaet。　At　any　rate；　he　is　said　to　do　so。

　　Str。　And　what　do　you　say　of　the　visible　things　in　heaven　and

earth；　and　the　like？

　　Theaet。　Certainly　he　disputes；　and　teaches　to　dispute　about　them。

　　Str。　Then；　again；　in　private　conversation；　when　any　universal

assertion　is　made　about　generation　and　essence；　we　know　that　such

persons　are　tremendous　argufiers；　and　are　able　to　impart　their　own

skill　to　others。

　　Theaet。　Undoubtedly。

　　Str。　And　do　they　not　profess　to　make　men　able　to　dispute　about　law

and　about　politics　in　general？

　　Theaet。　Why；　no　one　would　have　anything　to　say　to　them；　if　they

did　not　make　these　professions。

　　Str。　In　all　and　every　art；　what　the　craftsman　ought　to　say　

in　answer

to　any　question　is　written　down　in　a　popular　form；　and　he　who　likes

may　learn。

　　Theaet。　I　suppose　that　you　are　referring　to　the　precepts　of

Protagoras　about　wrestling　and　the　other　arts？

　　Str。　Yes；　my　friend；　and　about　a　good　many　other　things。　In　a

word；　is　not　the　art　of　disputation　a　power　of　disputing　about　all

things？

　　Theaet。　Certainly；　there　does　not　seem　to　be　much　which　is　

left　out。

　　Str。　But　oh！　my　dear　youth；　do　you　suppose　this　possible？　for

perhaps　your　young　eyes　may　see　things　which　to　our　duller　sight　do

not　appear。

　　Theaet。　To　what　are　you　alluding？　I　do　not　think　that　I　understand

your　present　question。

　　Str。　I　ask　whether　anybody　can　understand　all　things。

　　Theaet。　Happy　would　mankind　be　if　such　a　thing　were　possible！

　　Soc。　But　how　can　any　one　who　is　ignorant　dispute　in　a　rational

manner　against　him　who　knows？

　　Theaet。　He　cannot。

　　Str。　Then　why　has　the　sophistical　art　such　a　mysterious　power？

　　Theaet。　To　what　do　you　refer？

　　Str。　How　do　the　Sophists　make　young　men　believe　in　their　

supreme　and

universal　wisdom？　For　if　they　neither　disputed　nor　were　thought　to

dispute　rightly；　or　being　thought　to　do　so　were　deemed　no　wiser　for

their　controversial　skill；　then；　to　quote　your　own　

observation；　no　one

would　give　them　money　or　be　willing　to　learn　their　art。

　　Theaet。　They　certainly　would　not。

　　Str。　But　they　are　willing。

　　Theaet。　Yes；　they　are。

　　Str。　Yes；　and　the　reason；　as　I　should　imagine；　is　that　they　are

supposed　to　have　knowledge　of　those　things　about　which　they　dispute？

　　Theaet。　Certainly。

　　Str。　And　they　dispute　about　all　things？

　　Theaet。　True。

　　Str。　And　therefore；　to　their　disciples；　they　appear　to　be　all…wise？

　　Theaet。　Certainly。

　　Str。　But　they　are　not；　for　that　was　shown　to　be　impossible。

　　Theaet。　Impossible；　of　course。

　　Str。　Then　the　Sophist　has　been　shown　to　have　a　sort　of　conjectural

or　apparent　knowledge　only　of　all　things；　which　is　not　the　truth？

　　Theaet。　Exactly；　no　better　description　of　him　could　be　given。

　　Str。　Let　us　now　take　an　illustration；　which　will　still　more

clearly　explain　his　nature。

　　Theaet。　What　is　it？

　　Str。　I　will　tell　you；　and　you　shall　answer　me；　giving　your　very

closest　attention。　Suppose　that　a　person　were　to　profess；　not　that

he　could　speak　or　dispute；　but　that　he　knew　how　to　make　and　do　all

things；　by　a　single　art。

　　Theaet。　All　things？

　　Str。　I　see　that　you　do　not　understand　the　first　word　that　I　utter；

for　you　do　not　understand　the　meaning　of　〃all。〃

　　Theaet。　No；　I　do　not。

　　Str。　Under　all　things；　I　include　you　and　me；　and　also　animals　and

trees。

　　Theaet。　What　do　you　mean？

　　Str。　Suppose　a　person　to　say　that　he　will　make　you　and　me；　and　all

creatures。

　　Theaet。　What　would　he　mean　by　〃making〃？　He　cannot　be　a

husbandman；…for　you　said　that　he　is　a　maker　of　animals。

　　Str。　Yes；　and　I　say　that　he　is　also　the　maker　of　the　sea；　and　the

earth；　and　the　heavens；　and　the　gods；　and　of　all　other　things；　and；

further；　that　he　can　make　them　in　no　time；　and　sell　them　for　a　few

pence。

　　Theaet。　That　must　be　a　jest。

　　Str。　And　when　a　man　says　that　he　knows　all　things；　and　can　teach

them　to　another　at　a　small　cost；　and　in　a　short　time；　is　not　that　a

jest？

　　Theaet。　Certainly。

　　Str。　And　is　there　any　more　artistic　or　graceful　form　of　jest　than

imitation？

　　Theaet。　Certainly　not；　and　imitation　is　a　very　comprehensive　term；

which　includes　under　one　class　the　most　diverse　sorts　of　things。

　　Str。　We　know；　of　course；　that　he　who　professes　by　one　art　to　make

all　things　is　really　a　painter；　and　by　the　painter's　art　makes

resemblances　of　real　things　which　have　the　same　name　with　

them；　and　he

can　deceive　the　less　intelligent　sort　of　young　children；　to　whom　he

shows　his　pictures　at　a　distance；　into　the　belief　that　he　has　the

absolute　power　of　making　whatever　he　likes。

　　Theaet。　Certainly。

　　Str。　And　may　there　not　be　supposed　to　be　an　imitative　art　of

reasoning？　Is　it　not　possible　to　enchant　the　hearts　of　young　men　by

words　poured　through　their　ears；　when　they　are　still　at　a　distance

from　the　truth　of　facts；　by　exhibiting　to　them　fictitious　arguments；

and　making　them　think　that　they　are　true；　and　that　the　speaker　is

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