Dialecticians

And when one who claims perfection in knowledge and skill in dialectic presents himself, and by his adroitness makes him so, he has nothing with which to test him:

Along with that, if a man aims to be a strong dialectician, or an eloquent orator, or a poet who splits open his theme, he inclines towards what he seeks and acquires the book in which the canons of that art were composed, so as to become by them in the highest degree of it and the loftiest rank in it.

it is only that one is referred to the art of dialectic and so is called a dialectician — not that there is there a man called Dialectic.

But the points urged by the dialecticians against this opinion had to be kept apart, and were therefore set aside.

That we hold nothing to be a good which is made up of separate things.

First, whether there is any good that consists of separate things is still under inquiry, and each side has its champions.

Those things which the dialecticians now hand down and teach — were they not instituted or invented by them?

They also distinguish this — that lust is of those things which are spoken of some one or some several things, which the dialecticians call katēgorēmata (predicates), as to have riches, to take offices;

I was asking, then, whether I should spread the sails of discourse at once, or first propel it a little with the oars of the dialecticians.

and it is to be acquired by the temperate man, not for the sake of saying or doing anything toward men, as the dialecticians now do who busy themselves about sophistical things, but for being able both to say what is pleasing to God and to do what is pleasing to him, the whole according to one's power.

while still others have occupied themselves with dialogue, and are called dialecticians.