Academic Scepticism 265
not giving the slightest opening to his opponents whereby they might
avoid being 'inactive'. [He argued] in accordance with positive and nega-
tive presentations (which he said were based on plausibility) that some
thing was an animal or was not an animal. And so conceding this point,
like wild animals which recoil to throw themselves more violently against
the spears, he himself, having given in [about plausibility], was better
able to attack. And when he withstood an attack and emerged victorious,
he would go right ahead and disregard what he had previously held, and
even forget about it. (738a) He would allow that truth and falsity were
present in things, as though he were cooperating in the investigation;
like a clever wrestler, he gave [his opponent] a good hold and then used
it to get the upper hand. For, by granting either [side of a disagreement]
in accordance with the weight of plausibility, he would then say that
neither side could be securely grasped.
He was both a bandit and a rather clever sorcerer. For taking hold of
a falsehood similar to a truth, and one graspable presentation similar to
another, he would put them on the same footing and not grant that either
the true one or the false one was the case or that one was more the case
than the other, (738b) or that one had more plausibility than the other.
It was then dreams for dreams, because false presentations were similar
to true ones, as in the case of the wax egg compared with a real one.
And the evils multiplied. And still Carneades, when he spoke, charmed
men's souls and enslaved them. He was both a sneak thief and a brazen
bandit, conquering by trickery or force even those who were very well
prepared for him. At any rate, every idea of Carneades was victorious
and no one else's was, since those with whom he did battle were less
powerful in speaking.
(738c) "Antipater [the Stoic], for example, who lived at the same time
as he, even intended to strain himself to write something in opposition
to Carneades. He never made it public, however, in the face of the stream
of arguments coming daily from Carneades. He did not say anything nor
even utter a sound either in the schools or in the streets; in fact, they
say that no one heard even a single syllable from him. But he kept
threatening replies and kept to a corner where he wrote books which he
left for posterity which are now useless and were then even more useless
against a man like Carneades who appeared to be exceedingly great and
renowned among the men of his time. (738d) Nevertheless, Carneades
sowed confusion in public because of his rivalry with the Stoics, but in
private with his friends he would agree to things, say that things were
true, and make claims just like anyone else." ...
(739a) And again he adds, "Carneades, expressing contradictory philo-
sophical positions, as it were, decked himself out with falsehoods and