A public speaker knows he has written well. He has memorized his speech and has a pleasant voice. So why is he still nervous? Because he hasn't studied what really matters. What does he want? He wants the audience to praise him. He has trained himself to give speeches, but he has never trained himself to handle praise and criticism. When did anyone ever teach him what praise really is? What blame really is? What the nature of each one is? What kind of praise is worth seeking? What kind of blame should be avoided? When did he ever practice dealing with these things? So why are you surprised? In areas where someone has studied, they do better than others. In areas where they haven't trained themselves, they're just like everyone else.
When the rhetorician knows that he has written well, that he has committed to memory what he has written, and brings an agreeable voice, why is he still anxious? Because he is not satisfied with having studied. What then does he want? To be praised by the audience? For the purpose then of being able to practise declamation he has been disciplined; but with respect to praise and blame he has not been disciplined. For when did he hear from any one what praise is, what blame is, what the nature of each is, what kind of praise should be sought, or what kind of blame should be shunned? And when did he practise this discipline which follows these words (things)? Why then do you still wonder, if in the matters which a man has learned, there he surpasses others, and in those in which he has not been disciplined, there he is the same with the many.