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

< >
[51.] PROP. IV.
Page: 179
[52.] PROP. V.
Page: 179
[53.] PROP. VI.
Page: 180
[54.] PROP. VII. PROP. VIII. PROP. IX. PROP. X.
Page: 180
[55.] That the EARTH May be a PLANET. PROP. I.
Page: 181 ((1))
[56.] PROP. II.
Page: 201 (21)
[57.] PROP. III.
Page: 215 (35)
[58.] PROP. IV.
Page: 236 (56)
[59.] PROP. V. That the Scripture, in its proper conſtru-ction, does not any where affirm the Immobility of the Earth.
Page: 246 (66)
[60.] PROP. VI. That there is not any Argument from the Words of Scripture, Principles of Na-ture, or Obſervations in Aſtronomy, which can ſuſſiciently evidence the Earth to be in the Gentre of the Uni-verſe.
Page: 258 (78)
[61.] PROP. VII. Tis probable that the Sun is in the Gentre of the World.
Page: 279 (99)
[62.] PROP. VIII. That there is not any ſufficient reaſon to prove the Earth incapable of thoſe mo-tions which Copernicus aſcribes un-to it.
Page: 286 (106)
[63.] Provebimur portu, terræque, verbeſq; recedunt.
Page: 288 (108)
[64.] PROP. IX. That it is more probable the Earth does move, than the Sun or Heavens.
Page: 321 (141)
[65.] PROP. X. That this Hypotheſis is exactly agreeable to common appearances.
Page: 342 (162)
[66.] Quicunq; ſolam mente præcipiti petit
Page: 360 (180)
[67.] Brevem replere non valentis ambitum, # Pudebit aucti nominis.
Page: 361 (181)
[68.] FINIS.
Page: 364 (184)
< >
page |< < (20) of 370 > >|
    <echo version="1.0RC">
      <text xml:lang="en" type="free">
        <div xml:id="echoid-div38" type="section" level="1" n="29">
          <pb o="20" file="0032" n="32" rhead="That the Moon may be a World."/>
          <p>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s334" xml:space="preserve">4. </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s335" xml:space="preserve">A Fourth Argument there is urged by
              <lb/>
            Aquinas; </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s336" xml:space="preserve">if there be more Worlds than one,
              <lb/>
            then they muſt either be of the ſame, or of a
              <lb/>
            divers Nature; </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s337" xml:space="preserve">but they are not of the ſame
              <lb/>
            kind; </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s338" xml:space="preserve">for this were needleſs, and would argue
              <lb/>
              <note position="left" xlink:label="note-0032-01" xlink:href="note-0032-01a" xml:space="preserve">Ibid.</note>
            an Improvidence, ſince one could have no
              <lb/>
            more perfection than the other; </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s339" xml:space="preserve">not of divers
              <lb/>
            kinds, for then one of them would not be cal-
              <lb/>
            led the World or Univerſe, ſince it did not
              <lb/>
            contain univerſal perfection. </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s340" xml:space="preserve">I have cited this
              <lb/>
            Argument, becauſe it is ſo much ſtood upon
              <lb/>
            by Julius Gæſar la Galla, one that has purpoſe-
              <lb/>
            ly writ a Treatiſe againſt this Opinion which
              <lb/>
              <note position="left" xlink:label="note-0032-02" xlink:href="note-0032-02a" xml:space="preserve">DePhanom.
                <lb/>
              in orbe Lu-
                <lb/>
              na.</note>
            I now deliver; </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s341" xml:space="preserve">but the Dilemma is ſo blunt,
              <lb/>
            that it cannot cut on either ſide; </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s342" xml:space="preserve">and the Con-
              <lb/>
            ſequences ſo weak, that I dare truſt them
              <lb/>
            without an Anſwer. </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s343" xml:space="preserve">And (by the way) you
              <lb/>
            may ſee this later Author in that place, where
              <lb/>
            he@ endeavours to prove a neceſſity of one
              <lb/>
            World, doth leave the chief matter in Hand,
              <lb/>
            and take much needleſs pains to diſpute againſt
              <lb/>
            Democritus, who thought, that the World
              <lb/>
            was made by the caſual concourſe of Atoms in
              <lb/>
            a great Vacuum. </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s344" xml:space="preserve">It ſhould ſeem, that either
              <lb/>
            his cauſe, or his Skill was weak, or elſe he
              <lb/>
            would have ventur'd upon a ſtronger Adver-
              <lb/>
            ſary. </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s345" xml:space="preserve">Theſe Arguments which I have ſet
              <lb/>
            down, are the chiefeſt which I have met with
              <lb/>
            againſt this Subject; </s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s346" xml:space="preserve">yet the beſt of theſe hath
              <lb/>
            not force enough to endanger the Truth that
              <lb/>
            I have deliver'd.</s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s347" xml:space="preserve"/>
          </p>
          <p>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s348" xml:space="preserve">Unto the two firſt, it may be anſwer'd, that
              <lb/>
            the Negative Authority of Scripture is not
              <lb/>
            prevalent in thoſe things which are not the
              <lb/>
            Fundamentals of Religion.</s>
            <s xml:id="echoid-s349" xml:space="preserve"/>
          </p>
        </div>
      </text>
    </echo>
Impressum