rom some and not from others, or from none? (A) If there is nothing apart from individuals,Marc-Edouard Vlasic Tröjor, there will be no object of thought,Dame Moncler Clairy, but all things will be objects of sense, and there will not be knowledge of anything, unless we say that sensation is knowledge. Further,Air Jordan Retro 1 Męskie, nothing will be eternal or unmovable; for all perceptible things perish and are in movement. But if there is nothing eternal,Michal Neuvirth Tröjor, neither can there be a process of coming to be; for there must be something that comes to be, i.e. from which something comes to be, and the ultimate term in this series cannot have come to be, since the series has a limit and since nothing can come to be out of that which is not. Further,Jimmy Howard Tröjor, if generation and movement exist there must also be a limit; for no movement is infinite, but every movement has an end, and that which is incapable of completing its coming to be cannot be in process of coming to be; and that which has completed its coming to be must he as soon as it has come to be. Further, since the matter exists, because it is ungenerated, it is a fortiori reasonable that the substance or essence,Brad Marchand Tröjor, that which the matter is at any time coming to be, should exist; for if neither essence nor matter is to be, nothing will be at all, and since this is impossible there must be something besides the concrete thing,Jeff Carter Tröjor, viz. the shape or form.
But again (B) if we are to suppose this, it is hard to say in which cases we are to suppose it and in which not. For evidently it is not possible to suppose it in all cases; we could not suppose that there is a house besides the particular houses.-Besides this,Alec Martinez Tröjor, will the substance of all the individuals,Jake Muzzin Tröjor, e.g. of all men, be one? This is paradoxical, for all the things whose substance is one are one. But are the substances many and different? This also is unreasonable.-At the same time, how does the matter become each of the individuals, and how is the concrete thing these two elements?
(9) Again,Jonathan Ericsson Tröjor, one might ask the following question also about the first principles. If they are one in kind only, nothing will be numerically one, not even unity-itself and being-itself; and how will knowing exist, if there is not to be something common to a whole set of individuals?
But if there is a common element which is numerically one, and each of the principles is one,Canada Goose Chilliwack Bomber, and the principles are not as in the case of perceptible things different for different things (e.g. since this particular syllable is the same in kind whenever it occurs, the elements it are also the same in kind; only in kind, for these also,NHL Mens Washington Capitals Heritage Pullover Hoodie - Ash, like the syllable, are numerically different in different contexts),-if it is not like this but the principles of things are numerically one, there will be nothing else besides the elements (for there is no difference of meaning between ‘numerically one’ and ‘individual’; for this is just what we mean by the individual-the numerically one, and by the universal we mean that which is predicable of the individuals). Therefore it will be just as if the elements of articulate sound were limited in n
相关的主题文章：
http://www.rockclimbing.com/cgi-bin/photos/search.cgi
http://www012.upp.so-net.ne.jp/ad-lib/bbs/index.cgi
http://cgi.tako.ne.jp/~friends/bbs3/light.cgi?res=7180 |
