Again, iv, 6, 1. Σωκράτης δὲ τοὺς μὲν εἰδότας τί ἕκαστον εἴη τῶν ὄντων, ἐνόμιζε καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἂν ἐξηγεῖσθαι δύνασθαι· τοὺς δὲ μὴ εἰδότας, οὐδὲν ἔφη θαυμαστὸν εἶναι, αὐτοὺς τε σφάλλεσθαι καὶ ἄλλους σφάλλειν. Ὧν ἕνεκα σκοπῶν σὺν τοῖς συνοῦσι, τί ἕκαστον εἴη τῶν ὄντων, οὐδέποτ᾽ ἔληγε. Πάντα μὲν οὖν, ᾗ διωρίζετο, πολὺ ἂν ἔργον εἴη διεξελθεῖν· ἐν ὅσοις δὲ τὸν τρόπον τῆς ἐπισκέψεως δηλώσειν οἶμαι, τοσαῦτα λέξω.
[687] Aristot. Metaphys. i, 6, 3, p. 987, b. Σωκράτους δὲ περὶ μὲν τὰ ἠθικὰ πραγματευομένου, περὶ δὲ τῆς ὅλης φύσεως οὐδὲν—ἐν μέντοι τούτοις τὸ καθόλου ζητοῦντος καὶ περὶ ὁρισμῶν ἐπιστήσαντος πρώτου τὴν διάνοιαν, etc. Again, xiii, 4, 6-8, p. 1078, b. Δύο γάρ ἐστιν ἅ τις ἂν ἀποδοίη Σωκράτει δικαίως, τοὺς τ᾽ ἐπακτικοὺς λόγους καὶ τὸ ὁρίζεσθαι καθόλου: compare xiii, 9, 35, p. 1086, b; Cicero, Topic. x, 42.
These two attributes, of the discussions carried on by Sokratês, explain the epithet attached to him by Timon the Sillographer, that he was the leader and originator of the accurate talkers:—
Ἐκ δ᾽ ἄρα τῶν ἀπέκλινεν ὁ λιθοξόος, ἐννομολέσχης,
Ἑλλήνων ἐπαοιδὸς ἀκριβολόγους ἀποφῄνας,
Μυκτὴρ, ῥητορόμυκτος, ὑπαττικὸς εἰρωνεύτης.
(ap. Diog. Laërt. ii, 19.)
To a large proportion of hearers of that time, as of other times, accurate thinking and talking appeared petty and in bad taste: ἡ ἀκριβολογία μικροπρεπές (Aristot. Ethic. Nikomach. iv, 4, p. 1122, b; also Aristot. Metaphys. ii, 3, p. 995, a). Even Plato thinks himself obliged to make a sort of apology for it (Theætet. c. 102, p. 184, C). No doubt Timon used the word ἀκριβολόγους in a sneering sense.
[688] How slowly grammatical analysis proceeded among the Greeks, and how long it was before they got at what are now elementary ideas in every instructed man’s mind, may be seen in Gräfenhahn, Geschichte der Klassischen Philologie im Alterthum, sects. 89-92, etc. On this point, these sophists seem to have been decidedly in advance of their age.
[689] This same tendency, to break off from the vague aggregate then conceived as physics, is discernible in the Hippokratic treatises, and even in the treatise De Antiquâ Medicinâ, which M. Littré places first in his edition, and considers to be the production of Hippokratês himself, in which case it would be contemporary with Sokratês. On this subject of authorship, however, other critics do not agree with him: see the question examined in his vol. i, ch. xii, p. 295, seq.