Dialogue

 1 Intro|  nature of the proposition, of definition, of generalization, of synthesis
 2 Intro|  within the limits of a single definition. In the infancy of logic,
 3 Intro|        sought only to obtain a definition of an unknown or uncertain
 4 Intro|      not, would be the popular definition of falsehood or error. If
 5 Intro|        not included under this definition. He is and is not, and is
 6 Intro|         we have arrived at the definition of the angler’s art.~And
 7  Soph|     thing itself in terms of a definition, and not merely about the
 8  Soph|       about the name minus the definition. Now the tribe of Sophists
 9  Soph|       is yet as susceptible of definition as any larger thing? Shall
10  Soph|    furnish us with the sort of definition and line of enquiry which
11  Soph|    angler’s art, but about the definition of the thing itself. One
12  Soph| existence; and I hold that the definition of being is simply power.~
13  Soph|      you agree with our recent definition?~THEAETETUS: What definition?~
14  Soph|   definition?~THEAETETUS: What definition?~STRANGER: We said that
15  Soph|       by us to be a sufficient definition of being?~THEAETETUS: True.~
16  Soph| moveable and immoveable in his definition of being and all.~THEAETETUS:
17  Soph|       or may not be capable of definition. But as touching our present
18  Soph|       form consistent with our definition.~THEAETETUS: Yes, this was