238–239
Stranger
Str. And again a little while ago I said it was inexpressible, unspeakable, irrational. Do you follow me?
Theaetetus
Theaet. Yes, of course.
Stranger
Str. Then when I undertook to attach the verb to be to not-being I was contradicting what I said before.
Theaetetus
Theaet. Evidently.
Stranger
Str. Well, then; when I attached this verb to it, did I not address it in the singular?
Stranger
Str. And when I called it irrational, inexpressible, and unspeakable, I addressed my speech to it as singular.
5
Theaetetus
Theaet. Of course you did.
Stranger
Str. But we say that, if one is to speak correctly, one must not define it as either singular or plural, and must not even call it it at all; for even by this manner of referring to it one would be giving it the form of the singular.
Theaetetus
Theaet. Certainly.
Stranger
Str. But poor me, what can anyone say of me any longer? For you would find me now, as always before, defeated in the refutation of not-being. So, as I said before, we must not look to me for correctness of speech about not-being. But come now, let us look to you for it.
Theaetetus
Theaet. What do you mean?
10
Stranger
Str. Come, I beg of you, make a sturdy effort, young man as you are, and try with might and main to say something correctly about not-being, without attributing to it either existence or unity or plurality.
Theaetetus
Theaet. But I should be possessed of great and absurd eagerness for the attempt, if I were to undertake it with your experience before my eyes.
