<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0062.tlg030.perseus-eng2:29</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0062.tlg030.perseus-eng2:29</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text><body><div type="translation" n="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0062.tlg030.perseus-eng2" xml:lang="eng"><div type="textpart" xml:base="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0062.tlg030.perseus-eng2" subtype="section" n="29"><p>
The same can be said, too, of the objective reality
of rhetoric. When all do not express the same views
about one subject, but there is a battle royal of contradictory declarations, that is the greatest proot
that the subject of which there is not a single definite conception does not exist at all ; for to enquire
whether it is this rather than that, and never to agree

<pb n="v.3.p.277"/>

that it is one, does away with the very existence of
the subject that is questioned.
</p></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>