Buonamici, Francesco
,
De motu libri X
Text
Text Image
Image
XML
Thumbnail overview
Document information
None
Concordance
Figures
Thumbnails
Page concordance
<
1 - 30
31 - 60
61 - 90
91 - 120
121 - 150
151 - 180
181 - 210
211 - 240
241 - 270
271 - 300
301 - 330
331 - 360
361 - 390
391 - 420
421 - 450
451 - 480
481 - 510
511 - 540
541 - 570
571 - 600
601 - 630
631 - 660
661 - 690
691 - 720
721 - 750
751 - 780
781 - 810
811 - 840
841 - 870
871 - 900
901 - 930
931 - 960
961 - 990
991 - 1020
1021 - 1050
1051 - 1055
>
Scan
Original
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
<
1 - 30
31 - 60
61 - 90
91 - 120
121 - 150
151 - 180
181 - 210
211 - 240
241 - 270
271 - 300
301 - 330
331 - 360
361 - 390
391 - 420
421 - 450
451 - 480
481 - 510
511 - 540
541 - 570
571 - 600
601 - 630
631 - 660
661 - 690
691 - 720
721 - 750
751 - 780
781 - 810
811 - 840
841 - 870
871 - 900
901 - 930
931 - 960
961 - 990
991 - 1020
1021 - 1050
1051 - 1055
>
page
|<
<
of 1055
>
>|
<
archimedes
>
<
text
>
<
body
>
<
chap
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>
<
pb
pagenum
="
175
"/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg1290
"/>
<
lb
/>
quod ab oppoſitione inſtrumentorum acceptum eſt, formas aut propriè ſumi, ſunt verò ſic ac
<
lb
/>
ceptæ cauſſæ, propter quas quidque eſt, aut tanquam efficientia, vnde .ſ. </
s
>
<
s
>initium fiat motus.
<
lb
/>
</
s
>
<
s
>Hoc ſtante ſic aiunt. </
s
>
<
s
>Ab oppoſitione inſtrumentorum ſignificari oppoſitionem in formis, nec qui
<
lb
/>
dem ſimpliciter, verùm vt ſunt cauſſę efficientes. </
s
>
<
s
>Et certè res hæc magnam præſefert ſimilitudi
<
lb
/>
nem veri: nam reapſe inſtrumenta ad fines & efficientia referuntur, non ad formas, quaſi verò
<
lb
/>
forma, efficiens, & finis idem ſpecie non ſint, nec ſolo numero, vel ratione diſtinguantur. </
s
>
<
s
>Igitur
<
lb
/>
ſi efficientia repugnant, formæ item repugnent neceſſe eſt. </
s
>
<
s
>Nec dicere licet efficiens addere ma
<
lb
/>
teriam formæ (eſt enim ſuppoſitum quod efficit) quia propter
<
expan
abbr
="
materiã
">materiam</
expan
>
non ineſt in forma repu
<
lb
/>
gnantia formaliter, ſed effectiuè. </
s
>
<
s
>volo dicere. </
s
>
<
s
>
<
expan
abbr
="
pugnã
">pugnam</
expan
>
ſanè eſſe inter formas quæ ſunt in materia,
<
lb
/>
ſiquidem, vbi ſint extra materiam, contrariæ quoque ſpecies, vt albi & nigri, in medio ſubſiſtant,
<
lb
/>
ſed intrinſecus habent formæ, quòd in materia pugnent, & vt verè dicamus,
<
foreign
lang
="
grc
">ἀσυστασιαν</
foreign
>
. </
s
>
<
s
>Eius
<
lb
/>
rei ſigna quòd efficiens formæ definitur, & quòd compoſito propter materiam, cui contrarium
<
lb
/>
nihil eſt, oppoſitio denegetur. </
s
>
<
s
>Quare ſi verè contraria ſunt efficientia, multò prius item inerit
<
lb
/>
oppoſitio in formis. </
s
>
<
s
>Ita argumentum noſtrum firmum & irrefragabile eſt. </
s
>
<
s
>Iſte Calaber dedit
<
lb
/>
manus ei rationi, ſed quid peccauerit paullò antè ſignificauimus. </
s
>
<
s
>Græci, qui elementa
<
expan
abbr
="
cõponunt
">componunt</
expan
>
<
lb
/>
ex materia prima & primis qualitatibus inter quas intercedit manifeſtè repugnantia; audacter
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg1291
"/>
<
lb
/>
eam ſubſtantiæ tribuunt. </
s
>
<
s
>Huius opinionis auctorem habemus in primis Alexandrum, hunc ſe
<
lb
/>
cuta eſt ſine contentione tota Græcorum ſchola. </
s
>
<
s
>Auerroës inconſtans in hac quæſtione repe
<
lb
/>
ritur: nam
<
emph
type
="
sup
"/>
a
<
emph.end
type
="
sup
"/>
1. Phyſ. in Alexandri veſtigiis hærens in ſubſtantia ponit tale genus oppoſitionis:
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg1292
"/>
<
lb
/>
huic quoque ſubſcripſit Albertus. </
s
>
<
s
>Idem poſteà machinis omnibus euertere viſus eſt hoc decre
<
lb
/>
tum,
<
emph
type
="
sup
"/>
b
<
emph.end
type
="
sup
"/>
vt illud ex eius verbis expromamus ipſum aliquando animum ad hanc partem proble
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg1293
"/>
<
lb
/>
matis inclinaſſe. </
s
>
<
s
>Hæc ſunt quæ vltrò
<
expan
abbr
="
citroq́
">citroque</
expan
>
. </
s
>
<
s
>Peripateticè diſputari poſſe videbantur.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1275
"/>
C</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1276
"/>
a 5. Phyſ.
<
lb
/>
T. 10.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1277
"/>
D</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1278
"/>
b 2. de ge.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1279
"/>
c T. 56.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1280
"/>
E</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1281
"/>
a 5. Met.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1282
"/>
b 3. Phyſ.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1283
"/>
F</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1284
"/>
c 10. Met.
<
lb
/>
à T. 15. vſ
<
lb
/>
que ad 25.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1285
"/>
G</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1286
"/>
d T. 20.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1287
"/>
e T. 56.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1288
"/>
H</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1289
"/>
f 2. de an.
<
lb
/>
c. 23.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1290
"/>
A</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1291
"/>
B</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1292
"/>
a T. c. 49.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1293
"/>
b 5. Phyſ.
<
lb
/>
T. c. 10.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
head
">
<
s
>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
De oppoſitione differentiarum, & vtrum oppoſitio inter differentias efficiat oppoſitionem
<
lb
/>
inter formas. </
s
>
<
s
>Cap. </
s
>
<
s
>XX
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>ZIMARA non ſemel attigit hanc quæſtionem, ſiue illam ſæpius obiecerit, vt ſua conſtan
<
lb
/>
tia nobis eam magis perſuaderet, ſiue vt aliquorum doctrinam obiter arguere vellet, & ad
<
lb
/>
illud argumentum quod ab inſtrumentorum oppoſitione ductum eſt, ita dicebat, non
<
expan
abbr
="
neceſſariũ
">neceſſarium</
expan
>
<
lb
/>
eſſe, vt contraria ex contrariis formis extarent, ſed ſufficere ſi diuerſæ fuerint. </
s
>
<
s
>Prętereà monebat
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg1294
"/>
<
lb
/>
etiam ſi differentiæ contrariæ forent, non ſequi nihilominus formas eſſe contrarias; verùm & eas
<
lb
/>
eſſe diuerſas illò fortè reſpiciens, quòd cùm formæ conſtent ex materia quæ cadit in mentem,
<
lb
/>
cui nihil eſt contrarium, quòd nihil ſit formæ contrarium tanquam toti. </
s
>
<
s
>Veruntamen ſi diuerſę
<
lb
/>
ſunt, cur hoc ex hoc fit, & hoc cum illo mutatur, nec quodlibet abit in quodlibet, aut generatur
<
lb
/>
ex quolibet? </
s
>
<
s
>Certè nil aliud reſpondebit, àc communionem materiæ. </
s
>
<
s
>Ergo, inquam, ſunt diuer
<
lb
/>
ſæ formæ in aliquo: igitur & contrariæ. </
s
>
<
s
>Et talis
<
expan
abbr
="
.n.
">enim</
expan
>
eſt contrariorum ratio. </
s
>
<
s
>Necnon forma per ſe
<
lb
/>
eſt vltimus terminus, itaque eſt ſimplex: de eius oppoſitione igitur erat dicendum. </
s
>
<
s
>Tertiò con
<
lb
/>
cedit differentias eſſe contrarias: at ſunt ſubſtantiæ. </
s
>
<
s
>Et ſubſtantiæ igitur aliquid erit contrarium.
<
lb
/>
</
s
>
<
s
>Apud nos plurimum valet Ariſtotelis auctoritas, præſertim ſi ratione confirmari poſsit, is certè
<
lb
/>
in ſubſtantia, ſeu potius inter ſubſtantias oppoſitionem,
<
expan
abbr
="
atq;
">atque</
expan
>
illam quidem poſitiuam conſtituit,
<
lb
/>
& quanquam cenſuit oppoſitum in prædicamentis, hanc controuerſiam tollunt Alexander,
<
expan
abbr
="
atq;
">atque</
expan
>
<
lb
/>
Simplicius allata diſtinctione ſubſtantiarum: etenim ipſæ ſunt ſimplices, aut compoſitæ, oppo
<
lb
/>
ſitionem planè fatentes eſſe inter ſubſtantias ſimplices, huiuſmodi verò ſunt formæ: nam mate
<
lb
/>
ria nulli eſt contraria; at compoſitę carent contrario. </
s
>
<
s
>Ergo de materia & de compoſito dicta
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg1295
"/>
<
lb
/>
Ariſtotelis accipienda, vbicunque talis oppoſitio de ſubſtantia tollatur. </
s
>
<
s
>Quocirca in prædica
<
lb
/>
mentis non de ſubſtantia ſimpliciter exiſtimabimus ea verba pronunciata, verùm de compoſita
<
lb
/>
tantùm de qua defendimus conſtanter verba fieri in eo libro, nihil autem de ſimplici, neque id
<
lb
/>
iniuria: cùm
<
expan
abbr
="
.n.
">enim</
expan
>
liber ille ſit
<
foreign
lang
="
grc
">εἰσαγωγικὸς</
foreign
>
, atque etiam Auerrois teſtimonio ruditer exquirat no
<
lb
/>
tiones prędicamentorum, & potius figuram dictionis, quàm elementa ipſorum, ſiquidem hæc
<
lb
/>
pleniorem rerum intelligentiam flagitarent, ideò mentio facta eſt ibi de ſubſtantia compoſita,
<
lb
/>
quemadmodum de ipſa quoque tùm 4. Met. tùm etiam ſub initium 7. meminiſſe legitur Ariſto
<
lb
/>
les: nanque ibi ipſius elementa primùm veſtigare cœpit. </
s
>
<
s
>Quòd ſi contra dubitaueris, quemad
<
lb
/>
modum etiam fecit Alexander hoc modo. </
s
>
<
s
>Si partes ſunt contrariæ, ergo & totum, quod confla
<
lb
/>
tur è contrariis, erit alteri toti
<
expan
abbr
="
contrariũ
">contrarium</
expan
>
, etiam notat in hoc argumento
<
expan
abbr
="
fallaciã
">fallaciam</
expan
>
ſummus ille vir.
<
lb
/>
</
s
>
<
s
>Neque enim, inquit, valet argumentum à partibus ad totum, niſi partes vniuerſę ſint vniuſmodi,
<
lb
/>
veluti ſi vnum foret è nigro & amaro, contrarium foret alteri, quod conſtaret ex albo & dulci.
<
lb
/>
</
s
>
<
s
>Nam conſtat totum è diuerſo genere partium. </
s
>
<
s
>Cùm igitur earum aliquæ materiæ vim obti
<
lb
/>
neant, aliæ formæ in ſubſtantia: materia verò nulli contraria ſit; quin,
<
expan
abbr
="
neq;
">neque</
expan
>
omnes formæ partes;
<
lb
/>
proptereaquòd eius partes ſunt differentię, ſingulas
<
expan
abbr
="
aũt
">aut</
expan
>
differentias vnius ſpeciei ſingulis alterius </
s
>
</
p
>
</
chap
>
</
body
>
</
text
>
</
archimedes
>