This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
1 Cf. Hereclitus Fr. 20-22 (Bywater).
2 The argument seems to be: Since all change is from contrary to contrary, and it is impossible that either (a) one of the elements should be contrary to the rest, or (b) one material principle should be contrary to all four elements, it follows that no one element, and similarly that no one material principle apart from the elements, can be the ultimate material principle of the universe.
3 i.e., the region of the universe which is proper to a given element is proper also to any part of that element. The proper region of earth is the center, of fire the circumference of the universe. Cf. Aristot. De Caelo 1.2.
4 Ross is evidently right in taking this to refer to the rest or motion of the parts. An infinite body cannot move as a whole, because there is no space outside it.
5 If earth is an infinite body, its region must be infinite. But the infinite has no center (cf. sect. 13). Therefore a clod, which cannot occupy the whole region proper to earth, will have no region proper to itself to which it can move or in which it can rest.
6 sc. in quantity. If the universe is infinite in quantity, and the elements are limited in kind, some of the elements (or at least one) must be infinite in quantity. But this is impossible, just as it is impossible that all the elements should be infinite in quantity. Cf. sect. 7 above
7 sc. in kind or number.
8 Cf. sect. 6 n.
9 Cf. sect. 14 n.
10 i.e., above and below, before and behind, right and left (Aristot. Phys. 205b 31).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.