592 Dr WHEWELL, ON PLATO'S NOTION OF DIALECTIC. 



It is of no consequence to our present purpose whether either of the discourses of Socrates 

 in the Phoedrus, or the two together, as is here assumed, do contain a just division and subdi- 

 vision of that part of the human soul which is distinguishable from Reason, and do thus 

 exhibit, in its true relations, the affection of Love. It is evident that division and subdivision 

 of this kind is here presented as, in Plato's opinion, a most valuable method; and those who 

 could successfully practise this method are those whom he admires as dialectical men. This 

 is here his Dialectic. 



(Sophistes.) We are naturally led to ask whether this method of dividing a subject as the 

 best way of examining it, be in any other part of the Platonic Dialogues more fully explained 

 than it is in the Phaedrus ; or whether any rules are given for this kind of Dialectic. 



To this we may reply, that in the Dialogue entitled The Sophist, a method of dividing a 

 subject, in order to examine it, is explained and exemplified with extraordinary copiousness and 

 ingenuity. The object proposed in that Dialogue is, to define what a Sophist is; and with 

 that view, the principal speaker, (who is represented as an Eleatic stranger,) begins by first 

 exemplifying what is his method of framing a definition, and by applying it to define an Angler. 

 The course followed, though it now reads like a burlesque of philosophical methods, appears to 

 have been at that time a bona fide attempt to be philosophical and methodical. It proceeds thus: 



" We have to inquire concerning Angling. Is it an Art ? It is. Now what kind of 

 art? All art is an art of making or an art of getting: (Poietic or Ktetic.) It is Ktetic. 

 Now the art of getting, is the art of getting by exchange or by capture : (Metabletic or 

 Chirotic.) Getting by capture is by contest or by chase : (Agonistic or Thereutic.) Getting 

 by chase is a chase of lifeless or of living things : (the first has no name, the second is 

 Zootheric.) The chase of living things is the chase of land animals or of water animals. 

 (Pexotheric or Enygrotheric.) Chase of water animals is of birds or offish : (Ornithothereutic 

 and Halieutic.) Chase offish is by inclosing or by striking them : {Hercotheric or Plectic.) 

 We strike them by day with pointed instruments, or by night, using torches : (hence the 

 division Ankistreutic and Pyreutic.) Of Ankistreutic, one kind consists in spearing the fish 

 downwards from above, the other in twitching them upwards from below : (these two arts are 

 Triodontic and Aspalieutic.) And thus we have, what we sought, the notion and the descrip- 

 tion of angling: namely that it is a Ktetic, Chirotic, Thereutic, Zootheric, Enygrotheric, 

 Halieutic, Plectic, Ankistreutic, Aspalieutic Art." 



Several other examples are given of this ingenious mode of definition, but they are all 

 introduced with reference to the definition of the Sophist. And it will further illustrate this 

 method to shew how, according to it, the Sophist is related to the Angler. 



The Sophistical Art is an art of getting, by capture, living things, namely men. It is thus 

 a Ktetic, Chirotic, Thereutic art, and so far agrees with that of the Angler. But here the two 

 arts diverge, since that of the Sophist is Pezotheric, that of the Angler Enygrotheric. To 

 determine the Sophist still more exactly, observe that the chase of land animals is either of tame 

 animals (including man) or of wild animals : (Hemerotheric and Agriotheric.) The chase of 

 tame animals is either by violence, (as kidnapping, tyranny, and war in general,) or by 

 persuasion, (as by the arts of speech ;) that is, it is Biaiotheric or Pithanurgic. The 

 art of persuasion is a private or a public proceeding : (Idiothereutic or Demosiothereutic.) 



