Galilei, Galileo, The systems of the world, 1661

Page concordance

< >
Scan Original
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
< >
page |< < of 948 > >|
    <archimedes>
      <text>
        <body>
          <chap>
            <p type="main">
              <s>
                <pb xlink:href="065/01/009.jpg" pagenum="3"/>
              Moreover in the fourth Text; doth he not after ſome other
                <lb/>
              ctrines, prove it by another demonſtration?
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Scilicet,
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              That no
                <lb/>
              ſition is made but according to ſome defect (and ſo there is a
                <lb/>
              ſition or paſſing from the line to the ſuperficies, becauſe the line is
                <lb/>
              defective in breadth) and that it is impoſſible for the perfect to
                <lb/>
              want any thing, it being every way ſo; therefore there is no
                <lb/>
              ſition from the Solid or Body to any other magnitude. </s>
              <s>Now
                <lb/>
              think you not that by all theſe places he hath ſufficiently proved,
                <lb/>
              how that there's no going beyond the three dimenſions, Length,
                <lb/>
              Breadth, and Thickneſs, and that therefore the body or ſolid,
                <lb/>
              which hath them all, is perfect?</s>
            </p>
            <p type="margin">
              <s>
                <margin.target id="marg6"/>
              Ariſtotles
                <emph type="italics"/>
                <lb/>
              ſtrations to prove
                <lb/>
              the dimenſions to be
                <lb/>
              three and no more.
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              </s>
            </p>
            <p type="margin">
              <s>
                <margin.target id="marg7"/>
                <emph type="italics"/>
              The number three
                <lb/>
              celebrated among ſt
                <lb/>
              the
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              Pythagorians</s>
            </p>
            <p type="margin">
              <s>
                <margin.target id="marg8"/>
              Omne, Totum &
                <lb/>
              Perfectum.</s>
            </p>
            <p type="margin">
              <s>
                <margin.target id="marg9"/>
              Or Solid.</s>
            </p>
            <p type="main">
              <s>SALV. </s>
              <s>To tell you true, I think not my ſelf bound by all theſe
                <lb/>
              reaſons to grant any more but onely this, That that which hath
                <lb/>
              beginning, middle, and end, may, and ought to be called perfect: But
                <lb/>
              that then, becauſe beginning, middle, and end, are Three, the
                <lb/>
              ber Three is a perfect number, and hath a faculty of conferring
                <lb/>
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Perfection
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              on thoſe things that have the ſame, I find no inducement
                <lb/>
              to grant; neither do I underſtand, nor believe that, for example,
                <lb/>
              of feet, the number three is more perfect then four or two, nor do
                <lb/>
              I conceive the number four to be any imperfection to the
                <lb/>
              ments: and that they would be more perfect if they were three.
                <lb/>
              </s>
              <s>Better therefore it had been to have left theſe ſubtleties to the
                <lb/>
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Rhetoricians,
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              and to have proved his intent, by neceſſary
                <lb/>
              tion; for ſo it behoves to do in demonſtrative ſciences.</s>
            </p>
            <p type="main">
              <s>SIMPL. </s>
              <s>You ſeem to ſcorn theſe reaſons, and yet it is all the
                <lb/>
              Doctrine of the
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Pythagorians,
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              who attribute ſo much to numbers;
                <lb/>
              and you that be a
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Mathematician,
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              and believe many opinions in
                <lb/>
              the
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Pythagorick
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              Philoſophy, ſeem now to contemn their
                <lb/>
              ſteries.</s>
            </p>
            <p type="main">
              <s>SALV. </s>
              <s>That the
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Pythagorians
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              had the ſcience of numbers in
                <lb/>
              high eſteem, and that
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Plato
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              himſelf admired humane
                <lb/>
              ing, and thought that it pertook of Divinity, for that it
                <lb/>
                <arrow.to.target n="marg10"/>
                <lb/>
              ſtood the nature of numbers, I know very well, nor ſhould I be
                <lb/>
              far from being of the ſame opinion: But that the Myſteries for
                <lb/>
              which
                <emph type="italics"/>
              Pythagoras
                <emph.end type="italics"/>
              and his ſect, had the Science of numbers in ſuch
                <lb/>
              veneration, are the follies that abound in the mouths and writings
                <lb/>
                <arrow.to.target n="marg11"/>
                <lb/>
              of the vulgar, I no waies credit: but rather becauſe I know that they,
                <lb/>
              to the end admirable things might not be expoſed to the
                <lb/>
              tempt, and ſcorne of the vulgar, cenſured as ſacrilegious, the
                <lb/>
                <arrow.to.target n="marg12"/>
                <lb/>
              liſhing of the abſtruce properties of Numbers, and
                <lb/>
              ſurable and irrational quantities, by them inveſtigated; and
                <lb/>
              vulged, that he who diſcovered them, was tormented in the other
                <lb/>
              World: I believe that ſome one of them to deter the common
                <lb/>
              ſort, and free himſelf from their inquiſitiveneſs, told them that the
                <lb/>
              myſteries of numbers were thoſe trifles, which afterwards did ſo </s>
            </p>
          </chap>
        </body>
      </text>
    </archimedes>
Impressum