HUS
then we seem to have discovered that the many ideas which the
multitude entertain about the beautiful and about all other things are
tossing about in some region which is halfway between pure being and
pure not-being? We have. Yes; and we had before agreed that anything
of this kind which we might find was to be described as matter of
opinion, and not as matter of knowledge; being the intermediate flux
which is caught and detained by the intermediate faculty. Quite true.
Then those who see the many beautiful, and who yet neither see
absolute beauty, nor can follow any guide who points the way thither;
who see the many just, and not absolute justice, and the like, --such
persons may be said to have opinion but not knowledge? That is
certain. But those who see the absolute and eternal and immutable may
be said to know, and not to have opinion only? Neither can that be
denied. The one loves and embraces the subjects of knowledge, the
other those of opinion? The latter are the same, as I dare say will
remember, who listened to sweet sounds and gazed upon fair colours,
but would not tolerate the existence of absolute beauty. Yes, I
remember. Shall we then be guilty of any impropriety in calling them
lovers of opinion rather than lovers of wisdom, and will they be very
angry with us for thus describing them? I shall tell them not to be
angry; no man should be angry at what is true. But those who love the
truth in each thing are to be called lovers of wisdom and not lovers
of opinion. Assuredly.