Socrates and Ion speak of a rhapsode’s skill. Ion states that he is only skilled in Homer. Then, Socrates points out that if he is skilled in interpreting Homer, he should be skilled in interpreting all poets. But since Ion only is interested in Homer and doses off at the mention of other poets, he is not, in fact, skilled, but rather divinely inspired and possessed by the spirit of Homer. Ion refutes this, saying he cannot be possessed and mad, since he can speak well about the topic. Socrates then begins to question him, coming to the conclusion that skills are differentiated, and thus a rhapsode does not know better than a charioteer, fisherman, or doctor on the topics in the poems. Thus, what can a rhapsode speak skillfully about? Nothing at all. Ion refutes this, saying that his skill as a general comes from being a rhapsode; but a good general cannot be a good rhapsode. He learned how to be a good general from Homer, he says. But then why is he still a rhapsode? Ion makes up some excuses. He tries to paint the two skills as inseparable, but at this point, it is evident that the skills of a rhapsode are non-existent. Therefore, he must be divinely inspired. Performing poetry is not a skilled art, but rather a moment of irrationality, madness, and possession by the gods.