The seer seems to scoff at the idea that helping the city is the most breautiful thing; he counters that it is awful when it does not trigger the goal “for the clear-sighted one.” Perhaps by “goal” Teiresias simply means helping the city. But, since the city can only be helped by Oidipous’s removal, that interpretation does not altogether fit. The situation is more complicated. Who has what goal in mind? Oidipous has it in mind to save the city, but this goal will bring with it his own demise. Is this what Teiresias has in mind? Or, since Teiresias’ insight comes from Apollo, who is also the truly “clear-sighted one,” is Teiresias commenting rather on how terrible it is for the god to see his own communication fail of its purpose? The audience can infer that Teiresias foresees that Oidipous would not accept the truths he might disclose. This confirms the audience’s earlier supposition that the Delphic god had good reason not to name the source of the city’s pollution (m. 170). Indeed, if Teiresias either delivered or even merely knew of the god’s threat to Laios, that if he and Iokaste had a child, Laios must die at its hand, then Teiresias has himself previously been witness to this family’s generational response to bad tidings. So, if he is complaining that it is terrible to present one’s prophecies when they result in no good ends (τέλη), it is because, contrary to what Oidipous may suppose, he knows for a fact that the exercise of his faculties is unlikely to achieve positive results. Insight is indeed pointless if the person to whom it is presented does not make proper use of his mental faculties (φρονοῦντι). In this regard, Teiresias seems to be thinking not only of Laios’ response to prophecy but of any similar failure to treat prophecy with proper regard and thus to secure a benefit to the consulter. [Md] [Ad] [Mi] [Mpea] [Mw]