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

182 SOC. Then just examine this point of their doctrine. Did we not find that they say that heat or whiteness or anything you please arises in some such way as this, namely that each of these moves simultaneously with perception between the active and the passive element, and the passive becomes percipient, but not perception, and the active becomes, not a quality, but endowed with a quality? Now perhaps quality seems an extraordinary word, and you do not understand it when used with general application, so let me give particular examples. For the active element becomes neither heat nor whiteness, but hot or white, and other things in the same way; you probably remember that this was what we said earlier in our discourse, that nothing is in itself unvaryingly one, neither the active nor the passive, but from the union of the two with one another the perceptions and the perceived give birth and the latter become things endowed with some quality while the former become percipient.

182 THEO. I remember, of course.

182 SOC. Let us then pay no attention to other matters, whether they teach one thing or another; but let us attend strictly to this only, which is the object of our discussion. Let us ask them, Are all things, according to your doctrine, in motion and flux? Is that so?

182 THEO. Yes.

182 SOC. Have they then both kinds of motion which we distinguished? Are they moving in space and also undergoing alteration?

182 THEO. Of course; that is, if they are to be in perfect motion.

182 SOC. Then if they moved only in space, but did not undergo alteration, we could perhaps say what qualities belong to those moving things which are in flux, could we not?

182 THEO. That is right.

182 SOC. But since not even this remains fixed—that the thing in flux flows white, but changes, so that there is a flux of the very whiteness, and a change of color, that it may not in that way be convicted of remaining fixed, is it possible to give any name to a color, and yet to speak accurately?

← Previous 66 / 109 Next →

Şifre Yenileme