1ruptible, aſwell as the Elementary, what will you ſay then?
SIMPL. I will ſay you have done that which is impoſſible to
be done.
be done.
SAGR. Go to; tell me, Simplicius, are not theſe affections
contrary to one another?
contrary to one another?
SIMPL. Which?
SAGR. Why theſe; Alterable, unalterable; paſſible, ^{*}
ſible; generable, ingenerable; corruptible, incorruptible?
ſible; generable, ingenerable; corruptible, incorruptible?
* Or, Impatible.
SIMPL. They are moſt contrary.
SAGR. Well then, if this be true, and it be alſo granted,
that Cœleſtial Bodies are ingenerable and incorruptible; I prove
that of neceſſity Cœleſtial Bodies muſt be generable and
ptible.
that Cœleſtial Bodies are ingenerable and incorruptible; I prove
that of neceſſity Cœleſtial Bodies muſt be generable and
ptible.
SIMPL. This muſt needs be a Sophiſm.
SAGR. Hear my Argument, and then cenſure and reſolve it.
Cœleſtial Bodies, for that they are ingenerable and incorruptible,
have in Nature their contraries, which are thoſe Bodies that be
generable and corruptible; but where there is contrariety, there
is alſo generation and corruption; therefore Cœleſtial Bodies are
generable and corruptible.
Cœleſtial Bodies, for that they are ingenerable and incorruptible,
have in Nature their contraries, which are thoſe Bodies that be
generable and corruptible; but where there is contrariety, there
is alſo generation and corruption; therefore Cœleſtial Bodies are
generable and corruptible.
Cœlestial Bodies
are generable and
corruptible,
cauſe they are
generable and
corruptible.
are generable and
corruptible,
cauſe they are
generable and
corruptible.
SIMPL. Did I not ſay it could be no other than a Sophiſm?
This is one of thoſe forked Arguments called Soritæ: like that
of the Cretan, who ſaid that all Cretans were lyars; but he as
being a Cretan, had told a lye, in ſaying that the Cretans were
ars; it followed therefore, that the Cretans were no lyars, and
conſequently that he, as being a Cretan, had ſpoke truth: And
yet in ſaying the Cretans were lyars, he had ſaid true, and
prehending himſelf as a Cretan, he muſt conſequently be a lyar.
And thus in theſe kinds of Sophiſms a man may dwell to eternity,
and never come to any concluſion.
This is one of thoſe forked Arguments called Soritæ: like that
of the Cretan, who ſaid that all Cretans were lyars; but he as
being a Cretan, had told a lye, in ſaying that the Cretans were
ars; it followed therefore, that the Cretans were no lyars, and
conſequently that he, as being a Cretan, had ſpoke truth: And
yet in ſaying the Cretans were lyars, he had ſaid true, and
prehending himſelf as a Cretan, he muſt conſequently be a lyar.
And thus in theſe kinds of Sophiſms a man may dwell to eternity,
and never come to any concluſion.
The forked
giſm cal'd Ξωρίτης.
giſm cal'd Ξωρίτης.
SAGR. You have hitherto cenſured it, it remaineth now that
you anſwer it, ſhewing the fallacie.
you anſwer it, ſhewing the fallacie.
SIMPL. As to the reſolving of it, and finding out its fallacie,
do you not in the firſt place ſee a manifeſt contradiction in it?
Cœleſtial Bodies are ingenerable and incorruptible; Ergo,
ſtial Bodies are generable and corruptible. And again, the
trariety is not betwixt the Cœleſtial Bodies, but betwixt the
lements, which have the contrariety of the Motions, ſurſùm and
deorſùm, and of levity and gravity; But the Heavens which move
circularly, to which motion no other motion is contrary, want
contrariety, and therefore they are incorruptible.
do you not in the firſt place ſee a manifeſt contradiction in it?
Cœleſtial Bodies are ingenerable and incorruptible; Ergo,
ſtial Bodies are generable and corruptible. And again, the
trariety is not betwixt the Cœleſtial Bodies, but betwixt the
lements, which have the contrariety of the Motions, ſurſùm and
deorſùm, and of levity and gravity; But the Heavens which move
circularly, to which motion no other motion is contrary, want
contrariety, and therefore they are incorruptible.
Amongſt Cœleſtial
Bodies there is no
contrariety.
Bodies there is no
contrariety.
SAGR. Fair and ſoftly, Simplicius; this contrariety whereby
you ſay ſome ſimple Bodies become corruptible, reſides it in the
ſame Body which is corrupted, or elſe hath it relation to ſome
other? I ſay, for example, the humidity by which a piece of Earth
you ſay ſome ſimple Bodies become corruptible, reſides it in the
ſame Body which is corrupted, or elſe hath it relation to ſome
other? I ſay, for example, the humidity by which a piece of Earth
zoom in
zoom out
zoom area
full page
page width
set mark
remove mark
get reference
digilib