laugh　you　to
  scorn；　and　will　pretend　that　he　knows　nothing　of　mirrors　and
  streams；　or　of　sight　at　all；　he　will　say　that　he　is　asking　about　an
  idea。
  Theaet。　What　can　he　mean？
  Str。　The　common　notion　pervading　all　these　objects；　which　you
  speak　of　as　many；　and　yet　call　by　the　single　name　of　image；　as
  though　it　were　the　unity　under　which　they　were　all　included。　How
  will　you　maintain　your　ground　against　him？
  Theaet。　How。　Stranger；　can　I　describe　an　image　except　as　something
  fashioned　in　the　likeness　of　the　true？
  Str。　And　do　you　mean　this　something　to　be　some　other　true　thing；
  or　what　do　you　mean？
  Theaet。　Certainly　not　another　true　thing；　but　only　a　resemblance。
  Str。　And　you　mean　by　true　that　which　really　is？
  Theaet。　Yes。
  Str。　And　the　not　true　is　that　which　is　the　opposite　of　the　true？
  Theaet。　Exactly。
  Str。　A　resemblance；　then；　is　not　really　real；　if；　as　you　say；　not
  true？
  Theaet。　Nay；　but　it　is　in　a　certain　sense。
  Str。　You　mean　to　say；　not　in　a　true　sense？
  Theaet。　Yes；　it　is　in　reality　only　an　image。
  Str。　Then　what　we　call　an　image　is　in　reality　really　unreal。
  Theaet。　In　what　a　strange　complication　of　being　and
  not…being　we　are
  involved！
  Str。　Strange！　I　should　think　so。　See　how；　by　his　reciprocation　of
  opposites；　the　many…headed　Sophist　has　compelled　us；　quite
  against　our
  will；　to　admit　the　existence　of　not…being。
  Theaet。　Yes；　indeed；　I　see。
  Str。　The　difficulty　is　how　to　define　his　art　without　falling　into
  a　contradiction。
  Theaet。　How　do　you　mean？　And　where　does　the　danger　lie？
  Str。　When　we　say　that　he　deceives　us　with　an　illusion；　and　that
  his　art　is　illusory；　do　we　mean　that　our　soul　is　led　by　his　art　to
  think　falsely；　or　what　do　we　mean？
  Theaet。　There　is　nothing　else　to　be　said。
  Str。　Again；　false　opinion　is　that　form　of　opinion　which　thinks　the
  opposite　of　the　truth：…You　would　assent？
  Theaet。　Certainly。
  Str。　You　mean　to　say　that　false　opinion　thinks　what　is　not？
  Theaet。　Of　course。
  Str。　Does　false　opinion　think　that　things　which　are　not　are　not；
  or　that　in　a　certain　sense　they　are？
  Theaet。　Things　that　are　not　must　be　imagined　to　exist　in　a　certain
  sense；　if　any　degree　of　falsehood　is　to　be　possible。
  Str。　And　does　not　false　opinion　also　think　that　things　which　most
  certainly　exist　do　not　exist　at　all？
  Theaet。　Yes。
  Str。　And　here；　again；　is　falsehood？
  Theaet。　Falsehood…yes。
  Str。　And　in　like　manner；　a　false　proposition　will　be　deemed　to　be
  one　which　are；　the　nonexistence　of　things　which　are；　and　the
  existence
  of　things　which　are　not。
  Theaet。　There　is　no　other　way　in　which　a　false　proposition　can
  arise。
  Str。　There　is　not；　but　the　Sophist　will　deny　these　statements。　And
  indeed　how　can　any　rational　man　assent　to　them；　when　the　very
  expressions　which　we　have　just　used　were　before　acknowledged　by　us
  to　be　unutterable；　unspeakable；　indescribable；　unthinkable？
  Do　you　see
  his　point；　Theaetetus？
  Theaet。　Of　course　he　will　say　that　we　are　contradicting　ourselves
  when　we　hazard　the　assertion；　that　falsehood　exists　in　opinion　and
  in　words；　for　in　maintaining　this；　we　are　compelled　over　and　over
  again　to　assert　being　of　not…being；　which　we　admitted　just　now　to　be
  an　utter　impossibility。
  Str。　How　well　you　remember！　And　now　it　is　high　time　to　hold　a
  consultation　as　to　what　we　ought　to　do　about　the　Sophist；　for　if　we
  persist　in　looking　for　him　in　the　class　of　false　workers　and
  magicians；　you　see　that　the　handles　for　objection　and　the
  difficulties
  which　will　arise　are　very　numerous　and　obvious。
  Theaet。　They　are　indeed。
  Str。　We　have　gone　through　but　a　very　small　portion　of
  them；　and　they
  are　really　infinite。
  Theaet。　If　that　is　the　case；　we　cannot　possibly　catch　the　Sophist。
  Str。　Shall　we　then　be　so　faint…hearted　as　to　give　him　up？
  Theaet。　Certainly　not；　I　should　say；　if　we　can　get　the　slightest
  hold　upon　him。
  Str。　Will　you　then　forgive　me；　and；　as　your　words　imply；　not　be
  altogether　displeased　if　I　flinch　a　little　from　the　grasp　of　such　a
  sturdy　argument？
  Theaet。　To　be　sure　I　will。
  Str。　I　have　a　yet　more　urgent　request　to　make。
  Theaet。　Which　is…？
  Str。　That　you　will　promise　not　to　regard　me　as　a　parricide。
  Theaet。　And　why？
  Str。　Because；　in　self…defence；　I　must　test　the　philosophy　of　my
  father　Parmenides；　and　try　to　prove　by　main　force；　that　in　a　certain
  sense　not…being　is；　and　that　being；　on　the　other　hand；　is　not。
  Theaet。　Some　attempt　of　the　kind　is　clearly　needed。
  Str。　Yes；　a　blind　man；　as　they　say；　might　see　that；　and；　unless
  these　questions　are　decided　in　one　way　or　another；　no　one　when　he
  speaks　false　words；　or　false　opinion；　or　idols；　or　images　or
  imitations　or　appearances；　or　about　the　arts　which　are　concerned
  with　them；　can　avoid　falling　into　ridiculous　contradictions。
  Theaet。　Most　true。
  Str。　And　therefore　I　must　venture　to　lay　hands　on　my　father's
  argument；　for　if　I　am　to　be　over…scrupulous；　I　shall　have　to　give
  the　matter　up。
  Theaet。　Nothing　in　the　world　should　ever　induce　us　to　do　so。
  Str。　I　have　a　third　little　request　which　I　wish　to　make。
  Theaet。　What　is　it？
  Str。　You　heard　me…say　what…I　have　always　felt　and　still　feel…that
  I　have　no　heart　for　this　argument？
  Theaet。　I　did。
  Str。　I　tremble　at　the　thought　of　what　I　have　said；　and　expect　that
  you　will　deem　me　mad；　when　you　hear　of　my　sudden　changes　and
  shiftings；　let　me　therefore　observe；　that　I　am　examining　the
  question　entirely　out　of　regard　for　you。
  Theaet。　There　is　no　reason　for　you　to　fear　that　I　shall　impute　any
  impropriety　to　you；　if　you　attempt　this　refutation　and　proof；　take
  heart；　therefore；　and　proceed。
  Str。　And　where　shall　I　begin　the　perilous　enterprise？　I　think　that
  the　road　which　I　must　take　is…
  Theaet。　Which？…Let　me　hear。
  Str。　I　think　that　we　had　better；　first　of　all；　consider　the　points
  which　at　present　are　regard　as　self…evident；　lest　we　may　have　fallen
  into　some　confusion；　and　be　too　ready　to　assent　to　one　another；
  fancying　that　we　are　quite　clear　about　them。
  Theaet。　Say　more　distinctly　what　you　mean。
  Str。　I　think　that　Parmenides；　and　all　ever　yet　undertook　to
  determine　the　number　and　nature　of　existences；　talked　to　us　in
  rather　a　light　and　easy　strain。
  Theaet。　How？
  Str。　As　if　we　had　been　children；　to　whom　they　repeated　each　his
  own　mythus　or　story；…one　said　that　there　were　three　principles；　and
  that　at　one　time　there　was　war　between　certain　of　them；　and
  then　again
  there　was　peace；　and　they　were　married　and　begat　children；
  and　brought
  them　up；　and　another　spoke　of　two　principles；…a　moist　and　a　dry；　or
  a　hot　and　a　cold；　and　made　them　marry　and　cohabit。　The　Eleatics；
  however；　in　our　part　of　the　world；　say　that　things　are　many　in　name；
  but　in　nature　one；　this　is　their　mythus；　which　goes　back　to
  Xenophanes；　and　is　even　older。　Then　there　are　Ionian；　and　in　more
  recent　times　Sicilian　muses；　who　have　arrived　at　the　conclusion　that
  to　unite　the　two　principles　is　safer；　and　to　say　that　being
  is　one　and
  many；　and　that　these　are　held　together　by　enmity　and　friendship；
  ever　parting；　ever　meeting；　as　the…severer　Muses　assert；　while　the
  gentler　ones　do　not　insist　on　the　perpetual　strife　and　peace；　but
  admit　a　relaxation　and　alternation　of　them；　peace　and　unity
  sometimes　prevailing　under　the　sway　of　Aphrodite；　and　then　again
  plurality　and　war；　by　reason　of　a　principle　of　strife。　Whether　any
  of　them　spoke　the　truth　in　all　this　is　hard　to　determine；　besides；
  antiquity　and　famous　men　should　have　reverence；　and　not　be　liable　to
  accusations；　so　serious；　Yet　one　thing　may　be　said　of　them　without
  offence…
  Theaet。　What　thing？
  Str。　That　they　went　on　their　several　ways　disdaining　to　notice
  people　like　ourselves；　they　did　not　care　whether　they　took　us　with
  them；　or　left　us　behind　them。
  Theaet。　How　do　you　mean？
  Str。　I　mean　to　say；　that　when　they　talk　of　one；　two；　or　more
  elements；　which　are　or　have　become　or　are　becoming；　or　again　of　heat
  mingling　with　cold；　assuming　in　some　other　part　of　their　works
  separations　and　mixtures；…tell　me；　Theaetetus；　do　you　understand
  what　they　mean　by　these　expressions？　When　I　was　a　younger　man；　I
  used　to　fancy　that　I　understood　quite　well　what　was　meant　by　the
  term　〃not…being；〃　which　is　our　present　subject　of　dispute；
  and　now　you
  see　in　what　a　fix　we　are　about　it。
  Theaet。　I　see。
  Str。　And　very　likely　we　have　been　getting　into　the　same　perplexity
  about　〃being；〃　and　yet　may　fancy　that　when　anybody　utters
  the　word；　we
  understand　him　quite　easily；　although　we　do　not　know　about
  not…being。　But　we　may　be；　equally　ignorant　of　both。
  Theaet。　I　dare　say。
  Str。　And　the　same　may　be　said　of　all　the　terms　just　mentioned。
  Theaet。　True。
  Str。　The　consideration　of　most　of　them　may　be　deferred；　but　we　had
  better　now　discuss　the　chief　captain　and　leader　of　them。
  Theaet。　Of　what　are　you　speaking？　You　clearly　think　that　we　must
  first　investigate　what　people　mean　by　the　word　〃being。〃
  Str。　You　follow　close　at　heels；　Theaetetus。　For　the　right　method；
  I　conceive；　will　be　to　call　into　our　pre