sophist   

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.