SOCRATES: Well, let’s look at a third case, the astronomer, whose skill you think you know better
than the previous two skills. Is this so, Hippias?
HIPPIAS: Yes.
SOCRATES: Do the same arguments apply also in the case of astronomy?
HIPPIAS: Quite likely, Socrates.
SOCRATES: Then, in astronomy too, if anyone is indeed false, the good astronomer, having the
power to speak falsely, will be false, and not the person who lacks this power, for he is
ignorant.
HIPPIAS: Apparently so.
SOCRATES: So, in astronomy too, the same person will be both true and false.
HIPPIAS: So it seems.
SOCRATES: Come on then, Hippias, consider all branches of knowledge and whether or not this
applies generally. You are surely the wisest of all men in most subjects, as I once heard you
boasting while proclaiming your own extensive and enviable wisdom at the tables in the
marketplace. You said that once when you arrived at Olympia, everything you were wearing
about your person was entirely of your own making. Firstly, the ring you are wearing – you
began with that – was your own handiwork, proving that you know how to engrave rings.
And another seal was also your own work, as was a strigil,
4
and a flask which you yourself
had fashioned. Then you said that you had cut from leather the very sandals you had on,
and had woven your cloak and tunic. But what seemed most unusual to everyone, and a
demonstration of your superior wisdom, was when you said that the belt of your tunic, the
very one you are wearing, was just like those very expensive Persian belts, and that you
had woven this yourself. What’s more, you said you had brought poems with you, epics,
tragedies, and dithyrambs, and lots of speeches in prose, in great variety. There you were,
superior to everyone else in the subjects I just mentioned, and in correctness in rhythms,
harmonies and letters, and many other matters besides these, as I seem to recall. And, indeed,
I had forgotten your skill in memory, as it seems, in which you believe yourself to be most
brilliant, and I suspect that I have overlooked many other examples. But what I am asking
is that you look at your own skills – there are enough of them – and those of others, and let
me know if you can somehow find, as you and I have agreed, a situation where the true
person and the false person are distinct people and not the same person. Look for this in
any wisdom or in any cunning you like, call it what you like, but you will not find it, my
friend, for there is no such thing. So, please respond.
HIPPIAS: I can’t, Socrates, not offhand anyway.
SOCRATES: Nor, I believe, will you ever be able to. But if I am speaking the truth, Hippias, you
remember what we concluded from our argument.
HIPPIAS: I don’t fully understand what you mean, Socrates.
SOCRATES: Perhaps you are not using your skill in memory at the moment, for you obviously think
you don’t need it. But I’ll remind you. You know that you said that Achilles was true, while
Odysseus was false and wily?
HIPPIAS: Yes.
SOCRATES: Do you now, then, realise, the false person and the true have proved to be the same, so
that if Odysseus was false, he also turns out to be true, and if Achilles was true, he also
turns out to be false, and these men are not even different from one another, let alone oppo-
sites; they are, rather, alike?
HIPPIAS: Socrates, you are always weaving arguments of this sort, picking the most difficult aspect
of the argument, latching onto that in minute detail, and failing to tackle the overall subject
that the argument is concerned with. So now, if you wish, based upon much evidence, I’ll
744 | HIPPIAS MINOR – 368a–369c
368 a
368 b
368 c
368 d
368 e
369 a
369 b
369 c
Hippias Minor, David Horan translation, 10 Nov 25