Θεαίτητος

Lines

142 – 143 143 – 143 144 – 144 144 – 145 145 – 145 146 – 146 146 – 147 147 – 147 148 – 148 148 – 149 149 – 150 150 – 150 150 – 150 151 – 151 151 – 152 152 – 153 153 – 153 153 – 154 154 – 155 155 – 155 155 – 156 156 – 156 157 – 157 157 – 158 158 – 158 158 – 159 159 – 160 160 – 160 160 – 161 161 – 161 161 – 161 162 – 162 162 – 163 163 – 164 164 – 164 164 – 165 165 – 165 166 – 166 167 – 167 168 – 168 168 – 169 169 – 169 169 – 170 170 – 171 171 – 171 171 – 172 172 – 172 172 – 172 173 – 173 173 – 174 174 – 174 174 – 174 175 – 175 175 – 175 176 – 176 176 – 176 176 – 177 177 – 178 178 – 178 178 – 179 179 – 179 180 – 180 180 – 180 181 – 181 181 – 182 182 – 182 182 – 183 183 – 183 184 – 184 184 – 185 185 – 185 185 – 186 186 – 187 187 – 187 188 – 188 188 – 189 189 – 189 190 – 190 190 – 191 191 – 191 192 – 192 192 – 193 193 – 193 193 – 194 194 – 194 195 – 195 195 – 196 196 – 196 197 – 197 197 – 198 198 – 199 199 – 199 199 – 200 200 – 200 201 – 201 201 – 201 202 – 202 202 – 203 203 – 204 204 – 204 204 – 205 205 – 206 206 – 207 207 – 207 207 – 208 208 – 208 208 – 209 209 – 210 210 – 210

İngilizce Yunanca

205 SOC. Do you remember, then, my friend, that we admitted a little while ago, on what we considered good grounds, that there can be no rational explanation of the primary elements of which other things are composed, because each of them, when taken by itself, is not composite, and we could not properly apply to such an element even the expression be or this, because these terms are different and alien, and for this reason it is irrational and unknowable?

205 THEAET. I remember.

205 SOC. And is not this the sole reason why it is single in form and indivisible? I can see no other.

205 THEAET. There is no other to be seen.

205 SOC. Then the syllable falls into the same class with the letter, if it has no parts and is a single form?

205 THEAET. Yes, unquestionably.

205 SOC. If, then, the syllable is a plurality of letters and is a whole of which the letters are parts, the syllables and the letters are equally knowable and expressible, if all the parts were found to be the same as the whole.

205 THEAET. Certainly.

205 SOC. But if one and indivisible, then syllable and likewise letter are equally irrational and unknowable; for the same cause will make them so.

205 THEAET. I cannot dispute it.

205 SOC. Then we must not accept the statement of any one who says that the syllable is knowable and expressible, but the letter is not.

205 THEAET. No, not if we are convinced by our argument.

206 SOC. But would you not rather accept the opposite belief, judging by your own experience when you were learning to read?

206 THEAET. What experience?

206 SOC. In learning, you were merely constantly trying to distinguish between the letters both by sight and by hearing, keeping each of them distinct from the rest, that you might not be disturbed by their sequence when they were spoken or written.

206 THEAET. That is very true.

206 SOC. And in the music school was not perfect attainment the ability to follow each note and tell which string produced it; and everyone would agree that the notes are the elements of music?

206 THEAET. Yes, that is all true.

← Previous 102 / 109 Next →

Şifre Yenileme