Buonamici, Francesco
,
De motu libri X
Text
Text Image
Image
XML
Thumbnail overview
Document information
None
Concordance
Figures
Thumbnails
Table of figures
<
1 - 30
[out of range]
>
<
1 - 30
[out of range]
>
page
|<
<
of 1055
>
>|
<
archimedes
>
<
text
>
<
body
>
<
chap
>
<
pb
pagenum
="
180
"/>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1306
"/>
C</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1307
"/>
D</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1308
"/>
E</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1309
"/>
F</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1310
"/>
a 7. Met.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1311
"/>
G</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1312
"/>
b 1. de par.
<
lb
/>
</
s
>
<
s
>an. cap. 4.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1313
"/>
H</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1314
"/>
A</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1315
"/>
a 10. Met.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1316
"/>
B</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1317
"/>
b 5. Phyſ.
<
lb
/>
<
lb
/>
10. Met.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1318
"/>
C</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1319
"/>
c 9. Met.</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1320
"/>
D</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
head
">
<
s
>
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
Singulæ dubitationes tolluntur de oppoſitione ſubſtantiarum. </
s
>
<
s
>Cap. </
s
>
<
s
>XXII
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
.
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg1321
"/>
</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
margin
">
<
s
>
<
margin.target
id
="
marg1321
"/>
E</
s
>
</
p
>
<
p
type
="
main
">
<
s
>HAEC quę ponimus in ſubſtantia contraria, prohibent, quò minus generatio ſubſtantię pun
<
lb
/>
cto temporis abſoluatur. </
s
>
<
s
>At verò ſi ſunt termini poſitiui ex quibus volumus conſtitui mo
<
lb
/>
tum, nec ſanè communiter (iam enim generatio non ſeparatur à motu communiter) ſed à motu
<
lb
/>
propriè, ecquid eſt cauſſæ, cur in ſubſtantia ſit mutatio, non motus? </
s
>
<
s
>Cauſſam reddidit Themi
<
lb
/>
ſtio Auerroës, licet apud Themiſtium mihi non ſucceſſerit obſeruare talem locum. </
s
>
<
s
>In motu &
<
lb
/>
mutatione terminos eſſe duplices poſitiuos nimirùm & priuantes. </
s
>
<
s
>Ita è ſemine fit animal, & ei
<
lb
/>
non animali, atque item ex nigro fit album, & ex non albo. </
s
>
<
s
>Sed quanquàm in omni mutatione
<
lb
/>
ineſt vtraque terminorum ratio, longè diſpar eſt in mutatione ſubſtantiæ, atque in ea quæ fit ſe
<
lb
/>
cundùm accidens. </
s
>
<
s
>Siquidem in ſubſtantiæ mutatione, termini proximi ſint priuantes, poſit in
<
lb
/>
autem remoti. </
s
>
<
s
>Nam mutatio ſubſtantiæ fit è non ſubſtantia: proptereà nihil habet ante ſe
<
lb
/>
aliter accidens à ſubſtantia ſeparari poſſet. </
s
>
<
s
>Quicquid enim eſt vel eſt ſubſtantia, vel accidens.
<
lb
/>
</
s
>
<
s
>At id ex quo ſubſtantia fit, ſubſtantia eſſe nequit, niſi poteſtate & per accidens, ne fateri coga
<
lb
/>
mur
<
expan
abbr
="
eã
">eam</
expan
>
eſſe antequàm fiat, neque
<
expan
abbr
="
itẽ
">item</
expan
>
accidens, quandò ſupponitur illi actu
<
expan
abbr
="
ſubſtãtia
">ſubſtantia</
expan
>
quę tum nul
<
lb
/>
la exiſtit: generatur
<
expan
abbr
="
.n.
">enim</
expan
>
Inde ſequitur generationem eſſe mutationem totius in totum. </
s
>
<
s
>At verò
<
lb
/>
accidentis mutatio fit circum actu ſubſtantiam, ob
<
expan
abbr
="
eamq́
">eamque</
expan
>
. </
s
>
<
s
>cauſſam eius termini proximi ſunt po
<
lb
/>
ſitiui,
<
expan
abbr
="
eaq́
">eaque</
expan
>
. </
s
>
<
s
>mutatio totius non eſt. </
s
>
<
s
>Ergo ſiquis introſpiciat eius argumenti formam, falsò aſſum
<
lb
/>
ptum fuiſſe videbit. </
s
>
<
s
>Oppoſitionem contrariorum eſſe cauſſam primam motus, quippe quòd
<
lb
/>
<
expan
abbr
="
etiã
">etiam</
expan
>
præter id requiratur contraria terminos eſſe proximos tranſmutationis, qui cùm in ſubſtan
<
lb
/>
tia non ſint: etiam faciunt, quò minus in ſubſtantia ſit motus. </
s
>
<
s
>Sed quoniam vrgebit quempiam
<
lb
/>
auctoritas Ariſtotelis in ſubſtantia poſitiuam oppoſitionem eſſe negantis. </
s
>
<
s
>Prętereà quoniam om
<
lb
/>
nes illæ rationes quibus ipſe motum à mutatione ſeiungit, tanquam inter ſe commeantia
<
expan
abbr
="
motũ
">motum</
expan
>
<
lb
/>
accipiunt, atque contraria. </
s
>
<
s
>Nam ſi ibi non eſt motus, quia nec oppoſitio, cùm ſit in aliis muta
<
lb
/>
tionibus oppoſitio, erit igitur & motus. </
s
>
<
s
>Poſtremò omne id quod fit, fit ex eo quod non eſt, qua
<
lb
/>
tenus non eſt, quod autem habet hanc conditionem,
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
quatenus
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
, id etiam eſt primò. </
s
>
<
s
>Ergo in om
<
lb
/>
ni tranſmutatione ens & non ens erunt termini primi & proximi. </
s
>
<
s
>Sic non diſcrepabunt alij mo
<
lb
/>
tus à mutatione ſubſtantiæ. </
s
>
<
s
>Ad eum locum Ariſtotelis, duo dicere licet. </
s
>
<
s
>Primùm ipſum inqui
<
lb
/>
rere terminos proximos motus & mutationis, qui in ſubſtantia ſunt eſſe & non eſſe. </
s
>
<
s
>Nos verò ta
<
lb
/>
metſi collocauimus in ſubſtantia contraria,
<
expan
abbr
="
nõ
">non</
expan
>
idcirco dicimus ea terminos eſſe proximos tranſ
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg1322
"/>
<
lb
/>
mutationis, ſed remotos. </
s
>
<
s
>Atqui à proximis terminis prima tranſmutationis ratio conſtituitur.
<
lb
/>
</
s
>
<
s
>Poſſumus etiam dicere, Ariſtotelem ibi monſtrare ſubiectum formale tranſmutationis, hoc verò
<
lb
/>
eſt in generatione tota ſubſtantia, neque ſufficere oppoſitionem
<
expan
abbr
="
formarũ
">formarum</
expan
>
, ad id, vt mutatio ſub
<
lb
/>
ſtantiæ fiat inter contraria, quia cùm fiat ſecundùm totam ſubſtantiam, ſubſtantia tota toti ſub
<
lb
/>
ſtantiæ contraria non eſt, cùm ceteroquin accidentis mutatio proximè fiat ſecundùm formas ſo
<
lb
/>
las inter quas eſt oppoſitio. </
s
>
<
s
>ſiquidem accidentis compoſitio ſubiectum includat, quod eſt ſub
<
lb
/>
ſtantia, hæc verò in tali mutatione conſeruatur,
<
expan
abbr
="
nanq;
">nanque</
expan
>
homo fit albus, neque conſimile eſt ſubie
<
lb
/>
ctum in generatione, & cęteris motibus cum reliqui omnes ſubſtantiam actu requirant circum
<
lb
/>
quam mutatio fiat. </
s
>
<
s
>Et certè poſterior hæc ſolutio valdè implet animum meum, quia redditur
<
lb
/>
vera cauſſa, cur in accidentibus mutatio proximè fiat inter contraria, minimè verò in ſubſtantia.
<
lb
/>
</
s
>
<
s
>Sic fit vt oppoſitio nihilominus ſit in ſubſtantia, non propterea tamen ea ſit prima ratio traſmu
<
lb
/>
tationis ſubſtantiæ, à qua motus ipſius appellatio ducebatur. </
s
>
<
s
>Et quanquam enitetur aduerſa
<
lb
/>
rius oſtendere oppoſitionem & motum eſſe reciproca, tamen neque id neceſſariò conſequitur,
<
lb
/>
neque poſtulas demonſtrationis Ariſtotelicę progreſſus. </
s
>
<
s
>quoniam Ariſtoteles argumentatur ſup
<
lb
/>
poſita ratione motus. </
s
>
<
s
>Si oppoſitio neceſſariò quæritur in conſtituendo motu, aut ſi motus eſt,
<
lb
/>
<
arrow.to.target
n
="
marg1323
"/>
<
lb
/>
ibi quoque contraria reperiuntur, quæ .ſ. </
s
>
<
s
>ſint prima ratio motus, itaque efficitur vbi contraria
<
lb
/>
non ſint, quę ſint prima ratio motus, neque ibi fore motum. </
s
>
<
s
>Quod verò additur. </
s
>
<
s
>Inter acciden
<
lb
/>
tia quoque progreſſum eſſe ab eo quod eſt ad id quod non eſt: fateor equidem, & tunc aio pro
<
lb
/>
greſſum illum conſtituere mutationem. </
s
>
<
s
>Cùm verò inſtes: eos eſſe terminos proximos, quòd
<
lb
/>
ex eo quod non eſt, quatenus non eſt, illa mutatio fiat: Reſpondeo, vel ibi non diſtinxiſſe Ari
<
lb
/>
ſtotelem mutationem à motu, ſed vtranque communiter accepiſſe, & concepiſſe motum ſub ra
<
lb
/>
tione formali tranſmutationis, vel intelligi vocem
<
expan
abbr
="
illã
">illam</
expan
>
analogicè primum de ſubſtantia, deinde
<
lb
/>
de accidentibus, nanque & in ipſis eſt progreſſus ab ente ad non ens. </
s
>
<
s
>Ita vt ea vox,
<
emph
type
="
italics
"/>
quatenus
<
emph.end
type
="
italics
"/>
ana
<
lb
/>
logicè capiatur, non ſecundùm omneis illas conditioneis quæ 1. Poſt. deſcriptæ ſunt: nimirùm
<
lb
/>
quòd omni per ſe & neceſſario, necnon æqualiter conueniat aliquod attributum, ſed hoc loco
<
lb
/>
quòd vniuersè inſit: ſiquidem in omni tranſmutatione ſit ea
<
expan
abbr
="
terminorũ
">terminorum</
expan
>
oppoſitio. </
s
>
<
s
>Poſtremum
<
lb
/>
quoque tollitur hæc machina. </
s
>
<
s
>Cùm enim accipiatur, vbi ſunt contraria, ibi eſſe intentionem &
<
lb
/>
<
expan
abbr
="
remiſsionẽ
">remiſsionem</
expan
>
. </
s
>
<
s
>Negamus. </
s
>
<
s
>Cùm approbes. </
s
>
<
s
>Omne plus & minus,
<
expan
abbr
="
inquiẽs
">inquiens</
expan
>
, fieri ex miſtura
<
expan
abbr
="
cõtrariorũ
">contrariorum</
expan
>
. </
s
>
</
p
>
</
chap
>
</
body
>
</
text
>
</
archimedes
>