238
Stranger
Str. How then could a man either utter in speech or even so much as conceive in his mind things which are not, or not-being, apart from number?
Theaetetus
Theaet. Tell me how number is involved in such conceptions.
Stranger
Str. When we say things which are not, do we not attribute plurality to them?
Theaetetus
Theaet. Certainly.
Stranger
Str. And in saying a thing which is not, do we not equally attribute the singular number?
15
Theaetetus
Theaet. Obviously.
Stranger
Str. And yet we assert that it is neither right nor fair to undertake to attribute being to not-being.
Theaetetus
Theaet. Very true.
Stranger
Str. Do you see, then, that it is impossible rightly to utter or to say or to think of not-being without any attribute, but it is a thing inconceivable, inexpressible, unspeakable, irrational?
Theaetetus
Theaet. Absolutely.
20
Stranger
Str. Then was I mistaken just now in saying that the difficulty I was going to speak of was the greatest in our subject.
Theaetetus
Theaet. But is there a still greater one that we can mention?
Stranger
Str. Why, my dear fellow, don’t you see, by the very arguments we have used, that not-being reduces him who would refute it to such difficulties that when he attempts to refute it he is forced to contradict himself?
Theaetetus
Theaet. What do you mean? Speak still more clearly.
Stranger
Str. You must not look for more clearness in me; for although I maintained that not-being could have nothing to do with either the singular or the plural number, I spoke of it just now, and am still speaking of it, as one; for I say that which is not. You understand surely?
25
