Galilei, Galileo, The systems of the world, 1661

Page concordance

< >
Scan Original
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
< >
page |< < of 948 > >|
    <archimedes>
      <text>
        <body>
          <chap>
            <p type="main">
              <s>
                <pb xlink:href="065/01/130.jpg" pagenum="122"/>
              dicular, unleſs we firſt know that the Earth ſtands ſtill? </s>
              <s>Therefore
                <lb/>
              in your Syllogiſm the certainty of the middle term is aſſumed
                <lb/>
              from the uncertainty of the concluſion. </s>
              <s>You may ſee then, what
                <lb/>
              and how great the Paralogiſm is.</s>
            </p>
            <p type="main">
              <s>SAGR. </s>
              <s>I would, in favour of
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Simplicius,
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              defend
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Ariſtotle
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              if it
                <lb/>
              were poſſible, or at leaſt better ſatisfie my ſelf concerning the
                <lb/>
              ſtrength of your illation. </s>
              <s>You ſay, that the ſeeing the ſtone rake
                <lb/>
              along the Tower, is not ſufficient to aſſure us, that its motion is
                <lb/>
              perpendicular (which is the middle term of the Syllogiſm) unleſs
                <lb/>
              it be preſuppoſed, that the Earth ſtandeth ſtill, which is the
                <lb/>
              cluſion to be proved: For that if the Tower did move together
                <lb/>
              with the Earth, and the ſtone did ſlide along the ſame, the motion
                <lb/>
              of the ſtone would be tranſverſe, and not perpendicular. </s>
              <s>But I
                <lb/>
              ſhall anſwer, that ſhould the Tower move, it would be impoſſible
                <lb/>
              that the ſtone ſhould fall gliding along the ſide of it; and
                <lb/>
              fore from its falling in that manner the ſtability of the Earth is
                <lb/>
              ferred.</s>
            </p>
            <p type="main">
              <s>SIMPL. </s>
              <s>It is ſo; for if you would have the ſtone in
                <lb/>
              ing to grate upon the Tower, though it were carried round by
                <lb/>
              the Earth, you muſt allow the ſtone two natural motions, to wit,
                <lb/>
              the ſtraight motion towards the Centre, and the circular about
                <lb/>
              the Centre, the which is impoſſible.</s>
            </p>
            <p type="main">
              <s>SALV.
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Ariſtotles
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              defenſe then conſiſteth in the impoſſibilitie,
                <lb/>
              or at leaſt in his eſteeming it an impoſſibility, that the ſtone ſhould
                <lb/>
              move with a motion mixt of right and circular: for if he did
                <lb/>
              not hold it impoſſible that the ſtone could move to the Centre,
                <lb/>
              and about the Centre at once, he muſt have underſtood, that it
                <lb/>
              might come to paſs that the cadent ſtone might in its deſcent, race
                <lb/>
              the Tower as well when it moved as when it ſtood ſtill; and
                <lb/>
              ſequently he muſt have perceived, that from this grating nothing
                <lb/>
              could be inferred touching the mobility or immobility of the
                <lb/>
              Earth. </s>
              <s>But this doth not any way excuſe
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Aristotle
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              ; aſwell
                <lb/>
              cauſe he ought to have expreſt it, if he had had ſuch a conceit, it
                <lb/>
              being ſo material a part of his Argument; as alſo becauſe it can
                <lb/>
              neither be ſaid that ſuch an effect is impoſſible, nor that
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Ariſtotle
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
                <lb/>
              did eſteem it ſo. </s>
              <s>The firſt cannot be affirmed, for that by and
                <lb/>
              by I ſhall ſhew that it is not onely poſſible, but neceſſary: nor
                <lb/>
                <arrow.to.target n="marg311"/>
                <lb/>
              much leſs can the ſecond be averred, for that
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Ariſtotle
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              himſelf
                <lb/>
              granteth fire to move naturally upwards in a right line, and to
                <lb/>
              move about with the diurnal motion, imparted by Heaven to the
                <lb/>
              whole Element of Fire, and the greater part of the Air: If
                <lb/>
              fore he held it not impoſſible to mix the right motion upwards,
                <lb/>
              with the circular communicated to the Fire and Air from the
                <lb/>
              cave of the Moon, much leſs ought he to account impoſſible the
                <lb/>
              mixture of the right motion downwards of the ſtone, with the </s>
            </p>
          </chap>
        </body>
      </text>
    </archimedes>
Impressum