agreed　that　he
  was　a　purger　of　souls；　who　cleared　away　notions　obstructive　to
  knowledge。
  Theaet。　Very　true。
  Str。　Do　you　not　see　that　when　the　professor　of　any　art　has　one
  name　and　many　kinds　of　knowledge；　there　must　be　something　wrong？　The
  multiplicity　of　names　which　is　applied　to　him　shows　that　the　common
  principle　to　which　all　these　branches　of　knowledge　are
  tending；　is　not
  understood。
  Theaet。　I　should　imagine　this　to　be　the　case。
  Str。　At　any　rate　we　will　understand　him；　and　no　indolence　shall
  prevent　us。　Let　us　begin　again；　then；　and　re…examine　some　of　our
  statements　concerning　the　Sophist；　there　was　one　thing　which
  appeared　to　me　especially　characteristic　of　him。
  Theaet。　To　what　are　you　referring？
  Str。　We　were　saying　of　him；　if　I　am　not　mistaken；　that　he　was　a
  disputer？
  Theaet。　We　were。
  Str。　And　does　he　not　also　teach　others　the　art　of　disputation？
  Theaet。　Certainly　he　does。
  Str。　And　about　what　does　he　profess　that　he　teaches　men　to
  dispute？　To　begin　at　the　beginning…Does　he　make　them　able　to　dispute
  about　divine　things；　which　are　invisible　to　men　in　general？
  Theaet。　At　any　rate；　he　is　said　to　do　so。
  Str。　And　what　do　you　say　of　the　visible　things　in　heaven　and
  earth；　and　the　like？
  Theaet。　Certainly　he　disputes；　and　teaches　to　dispute　about　them。
  Str。　Then；　again；　in　private　conversation；　when　any　universal
  assertion　is　made　about　generation　and　essence；　we　know　that　such
  persons　are　tremendous　argufiers；　and　are　able　to　impart　their　own
  skill　to　others。
  Theaet。　Undoubtedly。
  Str。　And　do　they　not　profess　to　make　men　able　to　dispute　about　law
  and　about　politics　in　general？
  Theaet。　Why；　no　one　would　have　anything　to　say　to　them；　if　they
  did　not　make　these　professions。
  Str。　In　all　and　every　art；　what　the　craftsman　ought　to　say
  in　answer
  to　any　question　is　written　down　in　a　popular　form；　and　he　who　likes
  may　learn。
  Theaet。　I　suppose　that　you　are　referring　to　the　precepts　of
  Protagoras　about　wrestling　and　the　other　arts？
  Str。　Yes；　my　friend；　and　about　a　good　many　other　things。　In　a
  word；　is　not　the　art　of　disputation　a　power　of　disputing　about　all
  things？
  Theaet。　Certainly；　there　does　not　seem　to　be　much　which　is
  left　out。
  Str。　But　oh！　my　dear　youth；　do　you　suppose　this　possible？　for
  perhaps　your　young　eyes　may　see　things　which　to　our　duller　sight　do
  not　appear。
  Theaet。　To　what　are　you　alluding？　I　do　not　think　that　I　understand
  your　present　question。
  Str。　I　ask　whether　anybody　can　understand　all　things。
  Theaet。　Happy　would　mankind　be　if　such　a　thing　were　possible！
  Soc。　But　how　can　any　one　who　is　ignorant　dispute　in　a　rational
  manner　against　him　who　knows？
  Theaet。　He　cannot。
  Str。　Then　why　has　the　sophistical　art　such　a　mysterious　power？
  Theaet。　To　what　do　you　refer？
  Str。　How　do　the　Sophists　make　young　men　believe　in　their
  supreme　and
  universal　wisdom？　For　if　they　neither　disputed　nor　were　thought　to
  dispute　rightly；　or　being　thought　to　do　so　were　deemed　no　wiser　for
  their　controversial　skill；　then；　to　quote　your　own
  observation；　no　one
  would　give　them　money　or　be　willing　to　learn　their　art。
  Theaet。　They　certainly　would　not。
  Str。　But　they　are　willing。
  Theaet。　Yes；　they　are。
  Str。　Yes；　and　the　reason；　as　I　should　imagine；　is　that　they　are
  supposed　to　have　knowledge　of　those　things　about　which　they　dispute？
  Theaet。　Certainly。
  Str。　And　they　dispute　about　all　things？
  Theaet。　True。
  Str。　And　therefore；　to　their　disciples；　they　appear　to　be　all…wise？
  Theaet。　Certainly。
  Str。　But　they　are　not；　for　that　was　shown　to　be　impossible。
  Theaet。　Impossible；　of　course。
  Str。　Then　the　Sophist　has　been　shown　to　have　a　sort　of　conjectural
  or　apparent　knowledge　only　of　all　things；　which　is　not　the　truth？
  Theaet。　Exactly；　no　better　description　of　him　could　be　given。
  Str。　Let　us　now　take　an　illustration；　which　will　still　more
  clearly　explain　his　nature。
  Theaet。　What　is　it？
  Str。　I　will　tell　you；　and　you　shall　answer　me；　giving　your　very
  closest　attention。　Suppose　that　a　person　were　to　profess；　not　that
  he　could　speak　or　dispute；　but　that　he　knew　how　to　make　and　do　all
  things；　by　a　single　art。
  Theaet。　All　things？
  Str。　I　see　that　you　do　not　understand　the　first　word　that　I　utter；
  for　you　do　not　understand　the　meaning　of　〃all。〃
  Theaet。　No；　I　do　not。
  Str。　Under　all　things；　I　include　you　and　me；　and　also　animals　and
  trees。
  Theaet。　What　do　you　mean？
  Str。　Suppose　a　person　to　say　that　he　will　make　you　and　me；　and　all
  creatures。
  Theaet。　What　would　he　mean　by　〃making〃？　He　cannot　be　a
  husbandman；…for　you　said　that　he　is　a　maker　of　animals。
  Str。　Yes；　and　I　say　that　he　is　also　the　maker　of　the　sea；　and　the
  earth；　and　the　heavens；　and　the　gods；　and　of　all　other　things；　and；
  further；　that　he　can　make　them　in　no　time；　and　sell　them　for　a　few
  pence。
  Theaet。　That　must　be　a　jest。
  Str。　And　when　a　man　says　that　he　knows　all　things；　and　can　teach
  them　to　another　at　a　small　cost；　and　in　a　short　time；　is　not　that　a
  jest？
  Theaet。　Certainly。
  Str。　And　is　there　any　more　artistic　or　graceful　form　of　jest　than
  imitation？
  Theaet。　Certainly　not；　and　imitation　is　a　very　comprehensive　term；
  which　includes　under　one　class　the　most　diverse　sorts　of　things。
  Str。　We　know；　of　course；　that　he　who　professes　by　one　art　to　make
  all　things　is　really　a　painter；　and　by　the　painter's　art　makes
  resemblances　of　real　things　which　have　the　same　name　with
  them；　and　he
  can　deceive　the　less　intelligent　sort　of　young　children；　to　whom　he
  shows　his　pictures　at　a　distance；　into　the　belief　that　he　has　the
  absolute　power　of　making　whatever　he　likes。
  Theaet。　Certainly。
  Str。　And　may　there　not　be　supposed　to　be　an　imitative　art　of
  reasoning？　Is　it　not　possible　to　enchant　the　hearts　of　young　men　by
  words　poured　through　their　ears；　when　they　are　still　at　a　distance
  from　the　truth　of　facts；　by　exhibiting　to　them　fictitious　arguments；
  and　making　them　think　that　they　are　true；　and　that　the　speaker　is
  the　wisest　of　men　in　all　things？
  Theaet。　Yes；　why　should　there　not　be　another　such　art？
  Str。　But　as　time　goes　on；　and　their　hearers　advance　in　years；　and
  come　into　closer　contact　with　realities；　and　have　learnt　by　sad
  experience　to　see　and　feel　the　truth　of　things；　are　not　the　greater
  part　of　them　compelled　to　change　many　opinions　which　they　formerly
  entertained；　so　that　the　great　appears　small　to　them；　and　the　easy
  difficult；　and　all　their　dreamy　speculations　are　overturned　by　the
  facts　of　life？
  Theaet。　That　is　my　view；　as　far　as　I　can　judge；　although；
  at　my　age；
  I　may　be　one　of　those　who　see　things　at　a　distance　only。
  Str。　And　the　wish　of　all　of　us；　who　are　your　friends；　is　and
  always　will　be　to　bring　you　as　near　to　the　truth　as　we　can
  without　the
  sad　reality。　And　now　I　should　like　you　to　tell　me；　whether
  the　Sophist
  is　not　visibly　a　magician　and　imitator　of　true　being；　or　are　we
  still　disposed　to　think　that　he　may　have　a　true　knowledge　of　the
  various　matters　about　which　he　disputes？
  Theaet。　But　how　can　he；　Stranger？　Is　there　any　doubt；
  after　what　has
  been　said；　that　he　is　to　be　located　in　one　of　the　divisions　of
  children's　play？
  Str。　Then　we　must　place　him　in　the　class　of　magicians　and　mimics。
  Theaet。　Certainly　we　must。
  Str。　And　now　our　business　is　not　to　let　the　animal　out；　for　we
  have　got　him　in　a　sort　of　dialectical　net；　and　there　is　one　thing
  which　he　decidedly　will　not　escape。
  Theaet。　What　is　that？
  Str。　The　inference　that　he　is　a　juggler。
  Theaet。　Precisely　my　own　opinion　of　him。
  Str。　Then；　clearly；　we　ought　as　soon　as　possible　to　divide　the
  image…making　art；　and　go　down　into　the　net；　and；　if　the　Sophist　does
  not　run　away　from　us；　to　seize　him　according　to　orders　and
  deliver　him
  over　to　reason；　who　is　the　lord　of　the　hunt；　and　proclaim　the
  capture　of　him；　and　if　he　creeps　into　the　recesses　of　the　imitative
  art；　and　secretes　himself　in　one　of　them；　to　divide　again　and　follow
  him　up　until　in　some　sub…section　of　imitation　he　is　caught。　For　our
  method　of　tackling　each　and　all　is　one　which　neither　he　nor　any
  other　creature　will　ever　escape　in　triumph。
  Theaet。　Well　said；　and　let　us　do　as　you　propose。
  Str。　Well；　then；　pursuing　the　same　analytic　method　as　before；　I
  think　that　I　can　discern　two　divisions　of　the　imitative　art；　but　I
  am　not　as　yet　able　to　see　in　which　of　them　the　desired　form　is　to　be
  found。
  Theaet。　Will　you　tell　me　first　what　are　two　divisions　of　which　you
  are　speaking？
  Str。　One　is　the　art　of　likeness…making；…generally　a　likeness　of
  anything　is　made　by　producing　a　copy　which　is　executed　according　to
  the　proportions　of　the　original；　similar　in　length　and　breadth　and
  depth；　each　thing　receiving　also　its　appropriate　colour。
  Theaet。　Is　not　this　always　the　aim　of　imitation？
  Str。　Not　always；　in　works　either　of　sculpture　or　of　painting；
  which　are　of　any　magnitude；　there　is　a　certain　degree　of　deception；
  …for　artists　were　to　give　the　true　proportions　of　their　fair　works；
  the　upper　part；　which　is　farther　off