Dialogues

question would understand from our answer the nature of “clay,” merely because we added “of the image-makers,” or of any other workers. How can a man understand the name of anything, when he does not know the nature of it? Theaetetus He cannot. Socrates Then he who does not know what science or knowledge is, has no knowledge of the art or science of making shoes? Theaetetus None. Socrates Nor of any other science? Theaetetus No. Socrates And when a man is asked what science or knowledge is, to give in answer the name of some art or science is ridiculous; for the question is, “What is knowledge?” and he replies, “A knowledge of this or that.” Theaetetus True. Socrates Moreover, he might answer shortly and simply, but he makes an enormous circuit. For example, when asked about the clay, he might have said simply, that clay is moistened earth⁠—what sort of clay is not to the point. Theaetetus Yes, Socrates, there is no difficulty as you put the question. You mean, if I am not mistaken, something like what occurred to me and to my friend here, your namesake Socrates, in a recent discussion. Socrates What was that, Theaetetus? Theaetetus Theodorus was writing out for us something about roots, such as the roots of three or five, showing that they are incommensurable by the unit: he selected other examples up to seventeen⁠—there he stopped. Now as there are innumerable roots, the notion occurred to us of attempting to include them all under one name or class. Socrates And did you find such a class? Theaetetus I think that we did; but I should like to have your opinion. Socrates Let me hear. Theaetetus We divided all numbers into two classes: those which are made up of equal factors multiplying into one another, which we compared to square figures and called square or equilateral numbers;⁠—that was one class. Socrates Very good. Theaetetus The intermediate numbers, such as three and five, and every other number which is made up of unequal factors, either of a greater multiplied by a less, or of a less multiplied by a greater, and when regarded as a figure, is contained in unequal sides;⁠—all these we compared to oblong figures, and called them oblong numbers. Socrates Capital; and what followed? Theaetetus The lines, or sides, which have for their squares the equilateral plane numbers, were called by us lengths or magnitudes; and the lines which are the roots of (or whose squares are equal to) the oblong numbers, were called powers or roots; the reason of this latter name being, that they are commensurable with the former [i.e., with the so-called lengths or magnitudes] not in linear measurement, but in the value of the superficial content of their squares; and the same about solids. Socrates Excellent, my boys; I think that you fully justify the praises of Theodorus, and that he will not be found guilty of false witness. Theaetetus But I am unable, Socrates, to give you a similar answer about knowledge, which is what you appear to want; and therefore Theodorus is a deceiver after all. Socrates Well, but if someone were to praise you for running, and to say that he never met your equal among boys, and afterwards you were beaten in a race by a grown-up man, who was a great runner⁠—would the praise be any the less true? Theaetetus Certainly not. Socrates And is the discovery of the nature of knowledge so small a matter, as just now said? Is it not one which would task the powers of men perfect in every way? Theaetetus By heaven, they should be the top of all perfection! Socrates Well, then, be of good cheer; do not say that Theodorus was mistaken about you, but do your best to ascertain the true nature of knowledge, as well as of other things. Theaetetus I am eager enough, Socrates, if that would bring to light the truth. Socrates Come, you made a good beginning just now; let your own answer about roots be your model, and as you comprehended them all in one class, try and bring the many sorts of knowledge under one definition. Theaetetus I can assure you, Socrates, that I have tried very often, when the report of questions asked by you was brought to me; but I can neither persuade myself that I have a satisfactory answer to give, nor hear of anyone who answers as you would have him; and I cannot shake off a feeling of anxiety. Socrates These are the pangs of labour, my dear Theaetetus; you have something within you which you are bringing to the birth. Theaetetus I do not know, Socrates; I only say what I feel. Socrates And have you never heard, simpleton, that I am the son of a midwife, brave and burly, whose name was Phaenarete? Theaetetus Yes, I have. Socrates And that I myself practise midwifery? Theaetetus No, never. Socrates Let me tell you that I do though, my friend: but you must not reveal the secret, as the world in general have not found me out; and therefore they only say of me, that I am the strangest of mortals and drive men to their wits’ end. Did you ever hear that too? Theaetetus Yes. Socrates Shall I tell you the reason? Theaetetus By all means. Socrates Bear in mind the whole business of the midwives, and then you will see my meaning better:⁠—No woman, as you are probably aware, who is still able to conceive and bear, attends other women, but only those who are past bearing. Theaetetus Yes, I know. Socrates The reason of this is said to be that Artemis⁠—the goddess of childbirth⁠—is not a mother, and she honours those who are like herself; but she could not allow the barren to be midwives, because human nature cannot know the mystery of an art without experience; and therefore she assigned this office to those who are too old to bear. Theaetetus I dare say. Socrates And I dare say too, or rather I am absolutely certain, that the midwives know better than others who is pregnant and who is not? Theaetetus Very true. Socrates And by the use of