1
quite differing there-from ſhould be thence produced; and if I
fancy to my ſelf a body under one aſpect, and by and by under
another very different, I cannot think it impoſſible but that it may
happen by a ſimple tranſpoſition of parts, without corrupting or
ingendring any thing a-new; for we ſee ſuch kinds of
phoſes dayly: ſo that to return to my purpoſe, I anſwer you,
that inaſmuch as you go about to perſwade me that the Earth can
not move circularly by way of corruptibility and generability,
you have undertook a much harder task than I, that with
ments more difficult indeed, but no leſs concluding, will prove
the contrary.
quite differing there-from ſhould be thence produced; and if I
fancy to my ſelf a body under one aſpect, and by and by under
another very different, I cannot think it impoſſible but that it may
happen by a ſimple tranſpoſition of parts, without corrupting or
ingendring any thing a-new; for we ſee ſuch kinds of
phoſes dayly: ſo that to return to my purpoſe, I anſwer you,
that inaſmuch as you go about to perſwade me that the Earth can
not move circularly by way of corruptibility and generability,
you have undertook a much harder task than I, that with
ments more difficult indeed, but no leſs concluding, will prove
the contrary.
SAGR. Pardon me, Salviatus, if I interrupt your diſcourſe,
which, as it delights me much, for that I alſo am gravel'd with
the ſame doubts; ſo I fear that you can never conclude the ſame,
without altogether digreſſing from your chief deſign: therefore
if it be permitted to proceed in our firſt argument, I ſhould think
that it were convenient to remit this queſtion of generation and
corruption to another diſtinct and ſingle conference; as alſo, if
it ſhall pleaſe you and Simplicius, we may do by other particular
queſtions which may fall in the way of our diſcourſe; which I
will keep in my mind to propoſe, and exactly diſcuſs them ſome
other time. Now as for the preſent, ſince you ſay, that if
ſtotle deny circular motion to the Earth in common with other
bodies Cœleſtial, it chence will follow, that the ſame which
falleth the Earth, as to its being generable, alterable, &c. will
hold alſo of Heaven, let us enquire no further if there be ſuch
things in nature, as generation and corruption, or not; but let
us return to enquire what the Globe of the Earth doth.
which, as it delights me much, for that I alſo am gravel'd with
the ſame doubts; ſo I fear that you can never conclude the ſame,
without altogether digreſſing from your chief deſign: therefore
if it be permitted to proceed in our firſt argument, I ſhould think
that it were convenient to remit this queſtion of generation and
corruption to another diſtinct and ſingle conference; as alſo, if
it ſhall pleaſe you and Simplicius, we may do by other particular
queſtions which may fall in the way of our diſcourſe; which I
will keep in my mind to propoſe, and exactly diſcuſs them ſome
other time. Now as for the preſent, ſince you ſay, that if
ſtotle deny circular motion to the Earth in common with other
bodies Cœleſtial, it chence will follow, that the ſame which
falleth the Earth, as to its being generable, alterable, &c. will
hold alſo of Heaven, let us enquire no further if there be ſuch
things in nature, as generation and corruption, or not; but let
us return to enquire what the Globe of the Earth doth.
SIMPL. I cannot ſuffer my ears to hear it queſtion'd, whether
generation and corruption be in rerum naturà, it being a thing
which we have continually before our eyes, and whereof Ariſtotle
hath written two whole Books. But if you go about to deny the
Principles of Sciences, and queſtion things moſt manifeſt, who
knows not, but that you may prove what you will, and maintain
any Paradox? And if you do not dayly ſee herbs, plants,
mals to generate and corrupt, what is it that you do ſee? Alſo,
do you not continually behold contrarieties contend together,
and the Earth change into Water, the Water turn to Air, the
Air into Fire, and again the Air to condenſe into Clouds, Rains,
Hails and Storms?
generation and corruption be in rerum naturà, it being a thing
which we have continually before our eyes, and whereof Ariſtotle
hath written two whole Books. But if you go about to deny the
Principles of Sciences, and queſtion things moſt manifeſt, who
knows not, but that you may prove what you will, and maintain
any Paradox? And if you do not dayly ſee herbs, plants,
mals to generate and corrupt, what is it that you do ſee? Alſo,
do you not continually behold contrarieties contend together,
and the Earth change into Water, the Water turn to Air, the
Air into Fire, and again the Air to condenſe into Clouds, Rains,
Hails and Storms?
SAGR. Yes, we ſee theſe things indeed, and therefore will
grant you the diſcourſe of Ariſtotle, as to this part of generation
and corruption made by contraries; but if I ſhall conclude by
virtue of the ſame propoſitions which are granted to Ariſtotle,
that the Cœleſtial bodies themſelves are alſo generable and
grant you the diſcourſe of Ariſtotle, as to this part of generation
and corruption made by contraries; but if I ſhall conclude by
virtue of the ſame propoſitions which are granted to Ariſtotle,
that the Cœleſtial bodies themſelves are alſo generable and