sophist   

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?