Wilkins, John, A discovery of a new world : or a discourse tending to prove, that 'tis probable there may be another Habitable World in the Moon ; with a discourse concerning the Probability of a Passage thither; unto which is added, a discourse concerning a New Planet, tending to prove, that 'tis probable our earth is one of the Planets

Table of contents

< >
[Item 1.]
[2.] Ex Libris James S. Dearden Rampside
[3.] A DISCOVERY OF A New , OR,
[4.] In Two Parts.
[5.] The Fifth Edition Corrected and Amended. LONDON,
[6.] The Epiſtle to the READER.
[7.] The Propoſitions that are proved in this Diſcourſe. PROPOSITION I.
[8.] PROP. II.
[9.] PROP. III.
[10.] PROP. IV.
[11.] PROP. V.
[12.] PROP. VI.
[13.] PROP. VII.
[14.] PROP. VIII.
[15.] PROP. IX.
[16.] PROP. X.
[17.] PROP. XI.
[18.] PROP. XII.
[19.] PROP. XIII.
[20.] PROP. XIV.
[21.] The Firſt Book. That the MOON May be a WORLD. The Firſt Propoſition, by way of Preface.
[22.] Sed vanus ſtolidis hæc omnia finxerit Error.
[23.] Solis lunæq; labores.
[24.] Cum fruſtra reſonant æra auxiliaria Lunæ.
[25.] Una laboranti poterit ſuccerrere Lunæ.
[26.] Gantus & è cælo poſſunt deducere Lunam.
[27.] Cantus & ſi curru lunam deducere tentant, Et facerent, ſi non æra repulſa ſonant.
[28.] PROP. II. That a Plurality of Worlds doth not contradict any Principle of Reaſon or Faith.
[29.] Æſtuas infelix auguſto limite mundi.
[30.] PROP. III. That the Heavens do not conſiſt of any ſuch pure Matter, which can priviledge them from the like Change and Corruption, as theſe Inferiour, Bodies are liable unto.
< >
page |< < (17) of 370 > >|
    <echo version="1.0RC">
      <text xml:lang="en" type="free">
        <div xml:id="echoid-div38" type="section" level="1" n="29">
          <p>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s289" xml:space="preserve">
              <pb o="17" file="0029" n="29" rhead="That the Moon may be a World."/>
            Before he thought to ſeat himſelf next the
              <lb/>
            Gods: </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s290" xml:space="preserve">but now when he had done his beſt,
              <lb/>
            he muſt be content with ſome Equal, or per-
              <lb/>
            haps Superiour Kings.</s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s291" xml:space="preserve"/>
          </p>
          <p>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s292" xml:space="preserve">It may be, that Ariſtotle was moved to this
              <lb/>
            Opinion, that he might thereby take from
              <lb/>
            Alexander the occaſion of this Fear and Diſ-
              <lb/>
            content; </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s293" xml:space="preserve">or elſe, perhaps Ariſtotle himſelf was
              <lb/>
            as loth to hold the Poſſibility of a World
              <lb/>
            which he could not diſcover, as Alexander was
              <lb/>
            to hear of one which he could not Conquer.
              <lb/>
            </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s294" xml:space="preserve">’Tis likely that ſome ſuch by-reſpect moved
              <lb/>
            him to this Opinion, ſince the Arguments he
              <lb/>
            urges for it, are confeſt by his Zealous Fol-
              <lb/>
            lowers and Commentators, to be very ſlight
              <lb/>
            and frivolous, and they themſelves grant, what
              <lb/>
            I am now to prove, that there is not any Evi-
              <lb/>
            dence in the Light of natural Reaſon, which
              <lb/>
            can ſufficiently manifeſt that there is but one
              <lb/>
            World.</s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s295" xml:space="preserve"/>
          </p>
          <p>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s296" xml:space="preserve">But however ſome may Object, would it
              <lb/>
            not be inconvenient and dangerous to admit
              <lb/>
            of ſuch Opinions that do deſtroy thoſe Princi-
              <lb/>
            ples of Ariſtotle, which all the World hath ſo
              <lb/>
            long Followed?</s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s297" xml:space="preserve"/>
          </p>
          <p>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s298" xml:space="preserve">This queſtion is much controverted by ſome
              <lb/>
              <note position="right" xlink:label="note-0029-01" xlink:href="note-0029-01a" xml:space="preserve">Apologia
                <lb/>
              pro Galilæo.</note>
            of the Romiſb Divines; </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s299" xml:space="preserve">Campanella hath Writ
              <lb/>
            a Treatiſe in defence of it, in whom you may
              <lb/>
            ſee many things worth the Reading and No-
              <lb/>
            tice.</s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s300" xml:space="preserve"/>
          </p>
          <p>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s301" xml:space="preserve">To it I anſwer, That this Poſition in Philo-
              <lb/>
            ſophy, doth not bring any Inconvenience to
              <lb/>
            the reſt, ſince ’tis not Ariſtotle, but Truth that
              <lb/>
            ſhould be the Rule of our Opinions, and if
              <lb/>
            they be not both found together, we may </s>
          </p>
        </div>
      </text>
    </echo>