for if it were many, 1 would be few), there must be also one which is absolutely many, e.g. 10 is many (if there is no number which is greater than 10), or 10,000. How then, in Schalke 04 Pelipaita view of this, can number consist of few and many? Either both ought to be predicated of it, or neither; but in fact only the one or the other is predicated.
Book XIV Chapter 2
We must inquire generally, whether eternal Dortmund Dame Fodboldtrøjer things can consist of elements. If they do, they will have matter; for everything that consists of elements is composite. Since, then, even if a thing exists for ever, out of that of which it consists it would necessarily also, if it had come into being, have come into being, and since everything comes to be what it comes to be out of that which is it Eduardo Vargas Jersey potentially (for it could not have come to be out of that Stoneman Waterproof 3247 which had not this capacity, nor could it consist of such elements), and since the potential can be either actual or not,-this being so, however everlasting number or anything else that has matter is, it must be capable of not existing, Yeezy 350 Boost Unisex just as that which is any number of years old is as capable of not existing as that which is a day old; if this is capable Jese Jersey of not existing, so is that which has lasted for a time so long that it has Facundo Roncaglia Jersey no limit. They cannot, then, be eternal, since that which is capable of not existing is not eternal, as we had occasion to show in another context. If Portugali Pelipaita that which we are now saying is true universally-that no substance is eternal unless it is actuality-and if the elements are matter that underlies substance, no eternal substance can have elements present in it, of which it consists.
There are some who describe the element which acts with the One as an indefinite Miranda Jersey dyad, and object to ‘the unequal’, reasonably enough, because of the ensuing difficulties; but they have got rid only of those objections which inevitably arise from the treatment of the unequal, i.e. the relative, as an element; those which arise apart from this opinion must confront even these thinkers, whether it is ideal number, or mathematical, that they construct out of those elements.
There are many causes which led them off into these explanations, and especially the fact that they framed the difficulty in an obsolete form. For they thought that all things that are would be one (viz. Being itself), if Pelaajat Pelipaita one did not join issue with and refute the saying of Parmenides:
‘For never will this he proved, that things that are not are.’
They thought it necessary to prove that that which is not is; for only thus-of that which is and something else-could the things that are be composed, if they are Adidas John Wall many.
But, Steven Stamkos Tröja first, if ‘being’ has many senses (for it means sometimes substance, sometimes that it is of a certain quality, sometimes that it is of a certain quantity, and at other times the other categories), what sort of ‘one’, then, are all the things that are, if non-being is to be supposed not to be? Is it the substances that are one, or the affections and similarly the other categories as well, or all together-slinks:
http://www13.plala.or.jp/gakuki3/cgi_bin/aska/aska.cgi
http://www.aptnsw.org.au/cgi-bin/show_blog.cgi
http://www13.plala.or.jp/white_roots/gwbbs/gwbbs.cgi |
