BENJAMIN J. GRAZZINIinquiry. Perhaps more signifi cantly, despite Socrates’ denials of mak-
ing any contribution, his part in this drama is essential—and not only
insofar as Theaetetus probably would not have thought of himself as
pregnant were it not for Socrates’ intervention. Recall the ways in which
Theaetetus is bound to Socrates. It is Socrates’ task to determine when
Theaetetus’ offspring has been fully brought to light; it is Socrates’ task
to determine whether that offspring is viable. And this is not merely
an instrumental role. No matter how impartial the maieutic measure
might claim to be, insofar as there can be no simply subjective nor sim-
ply objective measure, that act of determination at the heart of psychic
maieutics makes an essential contribution to the process as a whole. It
is Socrates’ translation of Theaetetus’ “knowledge is perception” into
Protagoras’ “a human being is the measure of all things” that seems
to stand out most clearly as the sort of contribution Socrates’ account
would deny. It seems that the translation is justifi ed, fi rst insofar as it
elicits Theaetetus’ familiarity with Protagoras’ writings, and then inso-
far as Socrates can show how the two are “twins”—but this is only after
the fact. In showing how Protagoras said “the same things, but in a dif-
ferent way” (152a1– 2), Socrates does bring something new to the con-
versation. This is just one example, but Theaetetus seems right to say, as
he does at the end of the conversation, that Socrates has brought forth
more from Theaetetus than was in him (210b6 – 7).
Socrates is bound to Theaetetus. In one sense, this is obvious.
Qua psychic maieute, Socrates is bound to care for his patient, and when
Socrates puts off the discussion of Parmenides and focuses the conver-
sation on Theaetetus, he appears to acknowledge his responsibility to
the boy. But how, then, are we to understand Socrates’ denials that he is
responsible for the consequences of his associations with others? Again,
the denial of responsibility follows from the denial of being a teacher.
Socrates claims to have no wisdom or expertise to teach, nor does he
charge or receive fees commensurate with such knowledge. Insofar as
Socrates does not enter into any contractual arrangement, there can be
no “implied warranty of service.”^36 If this is the case, however, then we
again face the problem of Socrates’ assumption of the status of mea-
sure. Insofar as Theaetetus is bound to Socrates, and Socrates is the
measure, that is, has the power to determine pregnancy, birth, and vi-
ability, it remains a question how Socrates will act on that power. The ac-
count of psychic maieutics (indeed, the conversation as a whole) may be
an elaborate ruse allowing Socrates to use Theaetetus as an occasion to
learn about himself. Focusing on this aspect of psychic maieutics, Joan
Harrison suggests that “Socrates’ own logos in the Theaetetus becomes a
tyrant; in his ergon so does Socrates.”^37
Now, such a conclusion seems too hastily drawn. As indicated