Page:Theaetetus, Philebus (H. F. Carlill, 1906).pdf/74

THEAETETUS 50

S. What you say is very reasonable. And as for the problem, do we not know what it is of old? The ancients concealed it for the most part in a poetic guise, saying that the parents of all things are Oceanus and Tethys, moving floods, and that nothing stands still; and later seers, being wiser, no doubt, have declared it openly, so that even cobblers may understand their wisdom when they hear it, and no longer imagine vainly that some things in the world stand still and others move, but know that everything moves, and honour their teachers accordingly. I was nearly forgetting too, Theodorus, that there are others who uphold just the opposite view, that, for example, “ motionless is that to which in its entirety we give the name of Being,” and the rest of the principles that a Melissus or a Parmenides !maintains against all the other school, namely, that all things are one, and the whole stands still and self-contained, having no space wherein to move. With all these theorists, my friend, how are we to deal? For in our gradual progress we have fallen unawares between the two parties ; and unless we find some way of warding them off and making our escape, we shall pay the penalty, like the players at the line in the wrestling school when they are caught by both sides and pulled in opposite directions. It seems to me, then, that we must begin with those whom we first. propose to discuss, the professors of instability; and if we find their views reasonable we will help them to pull us over to their side, and try to get away from the others ; but if the partisans of “the Whole” seem to be nearer the truth, we will make our escape to them away from those who would “move what should be left unmoved.” But if neither party’s doctrine turns out to be satisfactory, we shall make a very ridiculous appearance, thinking our worthless selves to be right and presuming to depreciate ancient sages of renown! Consider then, Theodorus, whether it is worth 41 On Parmenides and the Eleatics, see J. Burnet’s Early Greek Philosophy (London, 1892), pp. 180-206 and 322-347; on Parmenides especially, J. F. Ferrier’s Lectures on Greek Philosophy(new edition, Edinburgh, 1888), pp. 88-102, to which Dr Reich has called my attention. The Eleatic philosophy will have to be considered in connection with the Sophist and the Parmenides.

®” See the Introduction, page xvii.