Galilei, Galileo
,
The systems of the world
,
1661
Text
Text Image
Image
XML
Thumbnail overview
Document information
None
Concordance
Figures
Thumbnails
page
|<
<
of 948
>
>|
<
archimedes
>
<
text
>
<
body
>
<
chap
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>
<
pb
xlink:href
="
065/01/008.jpg
"
pagenum
="
2
"/>
ſible: Since that it is neceſſary to introduce in Nature, ſubſtances
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg4
"/>
<
lb
/>
different betwixt themſelves, that is, the Cœleſtial, and
<
lb
/>
ry; that impaſſible and immortal, this alterable and corruptible.
<
lb
/>
</
s
>
<
s
>Which argument
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Ariſtotle
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
handleth in his book
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
De Cœlo,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
<
lb
/>
ating it firſt, by ſome diſcourſes dependent on certain general
<
lb
/>
ſumptions, and afterwards confirming it with experiments and
<
lb
/>
ticular demonſtrations: following the ſame method, I will
<
lb
/>
pound, and freely ſpeak my judgement, ſubmitting my ſelf to
<
lb
/>
your cenſure, and particularly to
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Simplicius,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
a Stout Champion
<
lb
/>
and contender for the
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Ariſtotelian
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg5
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg3
"/>
Copernicus
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
<
lb
/>
teth the earth œ
<
lb
/>
Globe like to a
<
lb
/>
net.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg4
"/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Cœleſtial
<
lb
/>
ces that are
<
lb
/>
rable, and
<
lb
/>
tary that be
<
lb
/>
rable, are neceſſary
<
lb
/>
in the opinion of
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
<
lb
/>
Ariſtotle.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg5
"/>
Ariſtotle
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
maketh
<
lb
/>
the World perfect,
<
lb
/>
becauſe it hath the
<
lb
/>
threefold
<
lb
/>
on.
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>And the firſt Step of the
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Peripatetick
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
arguments is that, where
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
<
lb
/>
riſtotle
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
proveth the integrity and perfection of the World, telling
<
lb
/>
us, that it is not a ſimple line, nor a bare ſuperficies, but a body
<
lb
/>
adorned with Longitude, Latitude, and Profundity; and becauſe
<
lb
/>
there are no more dimenſions but theſe three; The World having
<
lb
/>
them, hath all, and having all, is to be concluded perfect. </
s
>
<
s
>And
<
lb
/>
again, that by ſimple length, that magnitude is conſtituted, which
<
lb
/>
is called a Line, to which adding breadth, there is framed the
<
lb
/>
perficies, and yet further adding the altitude or profoundity, there
<
lb
/>
reſults the Body, and after theſe three dimenſions there is no
<
lb
/>
paſſing farther, ſo that in theſe three the integrity, and to ſo ſpeak,
<
lb
/>
totality is terminated, which I might but with juſtice have
<
lb
/>
red
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Ariſtotle
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
to have proved to me by neceſſary conſequences, the
<
lb
/>
rather in regard he was able to do it very plainly, and ſpeedily.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>SIMPL. </
s
>
<
s
>What ſay you to the excellent demonſtrations in the </
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg6
"/>
<
lb
/>
2. 3. and 4. Texts, after the definition of
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Continual
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
? </
s
>
<
s
>have you it
<
lb
/>
not firſt there proved, that there is no more but three dimenſions,
<
lb
/>
for that thoſe three are all things, and that they are every where?
<
lb
/>
</
s
>
<
s
>And is not this confirmed by the Doctrine and Authority of the
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg7
"/>
<
lb
/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Pythagorians,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
who ſay that all things are determined by three,
<
lb
/>
ginning, middle, and end, which is the number of All? </
s
>
<
s
>And where
<
lb
/>
leave you that reaſon, namely, that as it were by the law of
<
lb
/>
ture, this number is uſed in the ſacrifices of the Gods? </
s
>
<
s
>And why
<
lb
/>
being ſo dictated by nature, do we atribute to thoſe things that
<
lb
/>
are three, and not to leſſe, the title of all? </
s
>
<
s
>why of two is it ſaid
<
lb
/>
both, and not all, unleſs they be three? </
s
>
<
s
>And all this Doctrine you
<
lb
/>
have in the ſecond Text. </
s
>
<
s
>Afterwards in the third,
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Ad pleniorem
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg8
"/>
<
lb
/>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
ſcientiam,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
we read that
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
All,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
the
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Whole,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
and
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Perfect,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
are formally
<
lb
/>
one and the ſame; and that therefore onely the
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Body,
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
amongſt
<
lb
/>
magnitudes is perfect: becauſe it is determined by three, which is
<
lb
/>
All, and being diviſible three manner of waies, it is every way
<
lb
/>
viſible; but of the others, ſome are dividible in one manner, and
<
lb
/>
ſome in two, becauſe according to the number aſſixed, they have
<
lb
/>
their diviſion and continuity, and thus one magnitude is
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg9
"/>
<
lb
/>
ate one way, another two, a third, namely the Body, every way. </
s
>
</
p
>
</
chap
>
</
body
>
</
text
>
</
archimedes
>