PERSONSOFTHEDIALOGUE:CEPHALUS;ADEIMANTUS;GLAUCON;ANTIPHON;
PYTHODORUS;SOCRATES;ZENO;PARMENIDES;ARISTOTELES。CephalusrehearsesadialoguewhichissupposedtohavebeennarratedinhispresencebyAntiphon，thehalf—brotherofAdeimantusandGlaucon，tocertainClazomenians。
WehadcomefromourhomeatClazomenaetoAthens，andmetAdeimantusandGlauconintheAgora。Welcome，Cephalus，saidAdeimantus，takingmebythehand;isthereanythingwhichwecandoforyouinAthens？
Yes;thatiswhyIamhere;Iwishtoaskafavourofyou。
Whatmaythatbe？hesaid。
Iwantyoutotellmethenameofyourhalfbrother，whichIhaveforgotten;hewasamerechildwhenIlastcamehitherfromClazomenae，butthatwasalongtimeago;hisfather\'sname，ifI
rememberrightly，wasPyrilampes？
Yes，hesaid，andthenameofourbrother，Antiphon;butwhydoyouask？
Letmeintroducesomecountrymenofmine，Isaid;theyareloversofphilosophy，andhaveheardthatAntiphonwasintimatewithacertainPythodorus，afriendofZeno，andremembersaconversationwhichtookplacebetweenSocrates，Zeno，andParmenidesmanyyearsago，Pythodorushavingoftenrecitedittohim。
Quitetrue。
Andcouldwehearit？Iasked。
Nothingeasier，hereplied;whenhewasayouthhemadeacarefulstudyofthepiece;atpresenthisthoughtsruninanotherdirection;likehisgrandfatherAntiphonheisdevotedtohorses。But，ifthatiswhatyouwant，letusgoandlookforhim;hedwellsatMelita，whichisquitenear，andhehasonlyjustleftustogohome。
Accordinglywewenttolookforhim;hewasathome，andintheactofgivingabridletoasmithtobefitted。Whenhehaddonewiththesmith，hisbrotherstoldhimthepurposeofourvisit;andhesalutedmeasanacquaintancewhomherememberedfrommyformervisit，andweaskedhimtorepeatthedialogue。Atfirsthewasnotverywilling，andcomplainedofthetrouble，butatlengthheconsented。HetoldusthatPythodorushaddescribedtohimtheappearanceofParmenidesandZeno;theycametoAthens，ashesaid，atthegreatPanathenaea;theformerwas，atthetimeofhisvisit，about65
yearsold，verywhitewithage，butwellfavoured。Zenowasnearly40yearsofage，tallandfairtolookupon;inthedaysofhisyouthhewasreportedtohavebeenbelovedbyParmenides。HesaidthattheylodgedwithPythodorusintheCeramicus，outsidethewall，whitherSocrates，thenaveryyoungman，cametoseethem，andmanyotherswithhim;theywantedtohearthewritingsofZeno，whichhadbeenbroughttoAthensforthefirsttimeontheoccasionoftheirvisit。TheseZenohimselfreadtothemintheabsenceofParmenides，andhadverynearlyfinishedwhenPythodorusentered，andwithhimParmenidesandAristoteleswhowasafterwardsoneoftheThirty，andheardthelittlethatremainedofthedialogue。PythodorushadheardZenorepeatthembefore。
Whentherecitationwascompleted，Socratesrequestedthatthefirstthesisofthefirstargumentmightbereadoveragain，andthishavingbeendone，hesaid:Whatisyourmeaning，Zeno？Doyoumaintainthatifbeingismany，itmustbebothlikeandunlike，andthatthisisimpossible，forneithercanthelikebeunlike，northeunlikelike—isthatyourposition？
Justso，saidZeno。
Andiftheunlikecannotbelike，orthelikeunlike，thenaccordingtoyou，beingcouldnotbemany;forthiswouldinvolveanimpossibility。Inallthatyousayhaveyouanyotherpurposeexcepttodisprovethebeingofthemany？andisnoteachdivisionofyourtreatiseintendedtofurnishaseparateproofofthis，therebeinginallasmanyproofsofthenot—beingofthemanyasyouhavecomposedarguments？Isthatyourmeaning，orhaveImisunderstoodyou？
No，saidZeno;youhavecorrectlyunderstoodmygeneralpurpose。
Isee，Parmenides，saidSocrates，thatZenowouldliketobenotonlyonewithyouinfriendshipbutyoursecondselfinhiswritingstoo;heputswhatyousayinanotherway，andwouldfainmakebelievethatheistellingussomethingwhichisnew。Foryou，inyourpoems，sayTheAllisone，andofthisyouadduceexcellentproofs;
andheontheotherhandsaysThereisnomany;andonbehalfofthisheoffersoverwhelmingevidence。Youaffirmunity，hedeniesplurality。Andsoyoudeceivetheworldintobelievingthatyouaresayingdifferentthingswhenreallyyouaresayingmuchthesame。Thisisastrainofartbeyondthereachofmostofus。
Yes，Socrates，saidZeno。ButalthoughyouareaskeenasaSpartanhoundinpursuingthetrack，youdonotfullyapprehendthetruemotiveofthecomposition，whichisnotreallysuchanartificialworkasyouimagine;forwhatyouspeakofwasanaccident;therewasnopretenceofagreatpurpose;noranyseriousintentionofdeceivingtheworld。Thetruthis，thatthesewritingsofmineweremeanttoprotecttheargumentsofParmenidesagainstthosewhomakefunofhimandseektoshowthemanyridiculousandcontradictoryresultswhichtheysupposetofollowfromtheaffirmationoftheone。Myanswerisaddressedtothepartisansofthemany，whoseattackIreturnwithinterestbyretortinguponthemthattheirhypothesisofthebeingofmany，ifcarriedout，appearstobestillmoreridiculousthanthehypothesisofthebeingofone。Zealformymasterledmetowritethebookinthedaysofmyyouth，butsomeonestolethecopy;andthereforeIhadnochoicewhetheritshouldbepublishedornot;themotive，however，ofwriting，wasnottheambitionofanelderman，butthepugnacityofayoungone。Thisyoudonotseemtosee，Socrates;thoughinotherrespects，asIwassaying，yournotionisaveryjustone。
Iunderstand，saidSocrates，andquiteacceptyouraccount。Buttellme，Zeno，doyounotfurtherthinkthatthereisanideaoflikenessinitself，andanotherideaofunlikeness，whichistheoppositeoflikeness，andthatinthesetwo，youandIandallotherthingstowhichweapplythetermmany，participate—thingswhichparticipateinlikenessbecomeinthatdegreeandmannerlike;andsofarastheyparticipateinunlikenessbecomeinthatdegreeunlike，orbothlikeandunlikeinthedegreeinwhichtheyparticipateinboth？Andmaynotallthingspartakeofbothopposites，andbebothlikeandunlike，byreasonofthisparticipation？—Whereisthewonder？Nowifapersoncouldprovetheabsoluteliketobecomeunlike，ortheabsoluteunliketobecomelike，that，inmyopinion，wouldindeedbeawonder;butthereisnothingextraordinary，Zeno，inshowingthatthethingswhichonlypartakeoflikenessandunlikenessexperienceboth。Nor，again，ifapersonweretoshowthatallisonebypartakingofone，andatthesametimemanybypartakingofmany，wouldthatbeveryastonishing。Butifheweretoshowmethattheabsoluteonewasmany，ortheabsolutemanyone，Ishouldbetrulyamazed。Andsoofalltherest:Ishouldbesurprisedtohearthatthenaturesorideasthemselveshadtheseoppositequalities;butnotifapersonwantedtoproveofmethatIwasmanyandalsoone。WhenhewantedtoshowthatIwasmanyhewouldsaythatIhavearightandaleftside，andafrontandaback，andanupperandalowerhalf，forIcannotdenythatIpartakeofmultitude;when，ontheotherhand，hewantstoprovethatIamone，hewillsay，thatwewhoarehereassembledareseven，andthatIamoneandpartakeoftheone。Inbothinstancesheproveshiscase。Soagain，ifapersonshowsthatsuchthingsaswood，stones，andthelike，beingmanyarealsoone，weadmitthatheshowsthecoexistencetheoneandmany，buthedoesnotshowthatthemanyareoneortheonemany;heisutteringnotaparadoxbutatruism。Ifhowever，asIjustnowsuggested，someoneweretoabstractsimplenotionsoflike，unlike，one，many，rest，motion，andsimilarideas，andthentoshowthattheseadmitofadmixtureandseparationinthemselves，Ishouldbeverymuchastonished。Thispartoftheargumentappearstobetreatedbyyou，Zeno，inaveryspiritedmanner;but，asIwassaying，Ishouldbefarmoreamazedifanyonefoundintheideasthemselveswhichareapprehendedbyreason，thesamepuzzleandentanglementwhichyouhaveshowntoexistinvisibleobjects。
