To (or against) A person who was one of those who were not valued (esteemed) by him.—­A certain person said to him (Epictetus):  Frequently I desired to hear you and came to you, and you never gave me any answer; and now, if it is possible, I entreat you to say something to me.  Do you think, said Epictetus, that as there is an art in anything else, so there is also an art in speaking, and that he who has the art, will speak skilfully, and he who has not, will speak unskilfully?—­I do think so.—­He then who by speaking receives benefit himself, and is able to benefit others, will speak skilfully; but he who is rather damaged by speaking and does damage to others, will he be unskilled in this art of speaking?  And you may find that some are damaged and others benefited by speaking.  And are all who hear benefited by what they hear?  Or will you find that among them also some are benefited and some damaged?  There are both among these also, he said.  In this case also then those who hear skilfully are benefited, and those who hear unskilfully are damaged?  He admitted this.  Is there then a skill in hearing also, as there is in speaking?  It seems so.  If you choose, consider the matter in this way also.  The practice of music, to whom does it belong?  To a musician.  And the proper making of a statue, to whom do you think that it belongs?  To a statuary.  And the looking at a statue skilfully, does this appear to you to require the aid of no art?  This also requires the aid of art.  Then if speaking properly is the business of the skilful man, do you see that to hear also with benefit is the business of the skilful man?  Now as to speaking and hearing perfectly, and usefully, let us for the present, if you please, say no more, for both of us are a long way from everything of the kind.  But I think that every man will allow this, that he who is going to hear philosophers requires some amount of practice in hearing.  Is it not so?

Why then do you say nothing to me?  I can only say this to you, that he who knows not who he is, and for what purpose he exists, and what is this world, and with whom he is associated, and what things are the good and the bad, and the beautiful and the ugly, and who neither understands discourse nor demonstration, nor what is true nor what is false, and who is not able to distinguish them, will neither desire according to nature nor turn away nor move towards, nor intend (to act), nor assent, nor dissent, nor suspend his judgment:  to say all in a few words, he will go about dumb and blind, thinking that he is somebody, but being nobody.  Is this so now for the first time?  Is it not the fact that ever since the human race existed, all errors and misfortunes have arisen through this ignorance?