True.

And what is that with which we have to bore?

A borer.

And that with which we weave?

A shuttle.

And that with which we must name?

A name.

Right. A name also, then, is a kind of instrument.

Certainly.

Then if I were to ask What instrument is the shuttle? Is it not that with which we weave?

Yes.

And what do we do when we weave? Do we not separate the mingled threads of warp and woof?

Yes.

And you could give a similar answer about the borer and the rest, could you not?

Certainly.

And can you say something of the same kind about a name? The name being an instrument, what do we do with it when we name?

I cannot tell.

Do we not teach one another something, and separate things according to their natures?

Certainly.

A name is, then, an instrument of teaching and of separating reality, as a shuttle is an instrument of separating the web?

Yes.

But the shuttle is an instrument of weaving?

Of course.

The weaver, then, will use the shuttle well, and well means like a weaver; and a teacher will use a name well, and well means like a teacher.

Yes.

Whose work will the weaver use well when he uses the shuttle?

The carpenter’s.

Is every one a carpenter, or he who has the skill?

He who has the skill.

And whose work will the hole-maker use when he uses the borer?

The smith’s.

And is every one a smith, or he who has the skill?

He who has the skill.

And whose work will the teacher use when he uses the name?

I cannot tell that, either.

And can you not tell this, either, who gives us the names we use?

No.

Do you not think it is the law that gives them to us?

Very likely.

Then the teacher, when he uses a name, will be using the work of a lawgiver?

I think so.

Do you think every man is a lawgiver, or only he who has the skill?

He who has the skill.