1and thinne Figures: If all indifferently, then every Body ſhall reſt:
becauſe every Body hath ſome Figure, which is falſe: but if ſome
particular Figures only may be in ſome manner a Cauſe of Reſt, as,
for Example, the broad, then the others would be in ſome manner
the Cauſes of Motion: for if from ſeeing ſome Bodies of a contracted
Figure move, which after dilated into Plates reſt, may be inferred,
that the Amplitude of Figure hath a part in the Cauſe of that Reſt;
ſo from ſeeing ſuch like Figures reſt, which afterwards contracted
move, it may with the ſame reaſon be affirmed, that the united and
contracted Figure, hath a part in cauſing Motion, as the remover of
that which impeded it: The which again is directly oppoſite to what
Ariſtotle ſaith, namely, that Figures are not the Cauſes of Motion.
Beſides, if Ariſtotle had admitted and not excluded Figures from
ing Cauſes of not moving in ſome Bodies, which moulded into
ther Figure would move, he would have impertinently propounded
in a dubitative manner, in the words immediately following, whence
it is, that the large and thinne Plates of Lead or Iron, reſt upon the
water, ſince the Cauſe was apparent, namely, the Amplitude of
Figure. Let us conclude, therefore, that the meaning of Ariſtotle
in this place is to affirm, that Figures are not the Cauſes of abſolutely
moving or not moving, but only of moving ſwiftly or ſlowly: which
we ought the rather to believe, in regard it is indeed a meſt true
ceipt and opinion. Now the mird of Ariſtotle being ſuch, and
pearing by conſequence, rather contrary at the firſt ſight, then
vourable to the aſſertion of the Oponents, it is neceſſary, that their
Interpretation be not exactly the ſame with that, but ſuch, as being
in part underſtood by ſome of them, and in part by others, was ſet
down: and it may eaſily be indeed ſo, being an Interpretation
conſonent to the ſence of the more famous Interpretors, which is,
that the Adverbe Simply or Abſolutely, put in the Text, orght not to
be joyned to the Verbe to Move, but with the Noun Cauſes: ſo that
the purport of Ariſtotles words, is to affirm, That Figures are not the
Cauſes abſolutely of moving or not moving, but yet are Cauſes
cundum quid, viz in ſome ſort; by which means, they are called
Auxiliary and Concomitant Cauſes: and this Propoſition is received
and aſſerted as true by Signor Buonamico Lib. 5. Cap. 28. where he
thus writes. There are other Cauſes concomitant, by which ſome
things float, and others ſink, among which the Figures of Bodies hath
the firſt place, &c.
becauſe every Body hath ſome Figure, which is falſe: but if ſome
particular Figures only may be in ſome manner a Cauſe of Reſt, as,
for Example, the broad, then the others would be in ſome manner
the Cauſes of Motion: for if from ſeeing ſome Bodies of a contracted
Figure move, which after dilated into Plates reſt, may be inferred,
that the Amplitude of Figure hath a part in the Cauſe of that Reſt;
ſo from ſeeing ſuch like Figures reſt, which afterwards contracted
move, it may with the ſame reaſon be affirmed, that the united and
contracted Figure, hath a part in cauſing Motion, as the remover of
that which impeded it: The which again is directly oppoſite to what
Ariſtotle ſaith, namely, that Figures are not the Cauſes of Motion.
Beſides, if Ariſtotle had admitted and not excluded Figures from
ing Cauſes of not moving in ſome Bodies, which moulded into
ther Figure would move, he would have impertinently propounded
in a dubitative manner, in the words immediately following, whence
it is, that the large and thinne Plates of Lead or Iron, reſt upon the
water, ſince the Cauſe was apparent, namely, the Amplitude of
Figure. Let us conclude, therefore, that the meaning of Ariſtotle
in this place is to affirm, that Figures are not the Cauſes of abſolutely
moving or not moving, but only of moving ſwiftly or ſlowly: which
we ought the rather to believe, in regard it is indeed a meſt true
ceipt and opinion. Now the mird of Ariſtotle being ſuch, and
pearing by conſequence, rather contrary at the firſt ſight, then
vourable to the aſſertion of the Oponents, it is neceſſary, that their
Interpretation be not exactly the ſame with that, but ſuch, as being
in part underſtood by ſome of them, and in part by others, was ſet
down: and it may eaſily be indeed ſo, being an Interpretation
conſonent to the ſence of the more famous Interpretors, which is,
that the Adverbe Simply or Abſolutely, put in the Text, orght not to
be joyned to the Verbe to Move, but with the Noun Cauſes: ſo that
the purport of Ariſtotles words, is to affirm, That Figures are not the
Cauſes abſolutely of moving or not moving, but yet are Cauſes
cundum quid, viz in ſome ſort; by which means, they are called
Auxiliary and Concomitant Cauſes: and this Propoſition is received
and aſſerted as true by Signor Buonamico Lib. 5. Cap. 28. where he
thus writes. There are other Cauſes concomitant, by which ſome
things float, and others ſink, among which the Figures of Bodies hath
the firſt place, &c.
Lib. 4. Cap.
61
Text. 42.
Text. 42.
Concerning this Propoſition, I meet with many doubts and
culties, for which me thinks the words of Ariſtotle are not capable of
ſuch a conſtruction and ſence, and the difficulties are theſe.
culties, for which me thinks the words of Ariſtotle are not capable of
ſuch a conſtruction and ſence, and the difficulties are theſe.
Firſt in the order and diſpoſure of the words of Ariſtotle, the
ticle Simpliciter, or if you will abſoluté, is conjoyned with the Verb
ticle Simpliciter, or if you will abſoluté, is conjoyned with the Verb