qualized, they would not Marian Sarr Drakter have been unequal before; for there is nothing before that which is always. Therefore evidently they are not giving their account of the generation of numbers merely to assist contemplation of their nature.
A difficulty, and a reproach to any one who finds it no difficulty, are contained in the question how the elements and the principles Nick Rimando Drakter are related to the good and the beautiful; the difficulty is this, whether any of the elements is such a thing as we mean by the good itself and the best, or this is not so, but these are later in origin than the elements. The theologians seem to agree with some thinkers of the present day, who answer the question in the negative, and say that both the good and the beautiful appear in the nature of things only when that nature has made some progress. (This they Rafinha Drakter do to avoid a real objection which confronts those who say, as some do, that the one is a first principle. The objection arises not from their ascribing goodness to the first principle as an attribute, but from Vicente Iborra Drakter their making the one a principle-and a principle in the sense of an element-and generating number from the one.) Tiemoue Bakayoko Drakter The old poets agree with this inasmuch as they say that not those who are first in time, e.g. Night and Heaven or Chaos or Ocean, reign and rule, but Mattia De Sciglio Drakter Zeus. These poets, however, are led to speak thus only Roberto Soriano Drakter because they think of the rulers of the world as changing; for those of them who combine the two characters in that they do not use mythical language throughout, e.g. Pherecydes and some others, make the original generating agent the Best, and so do the Magi, and some of the later sages also, e.g. both Empedocles and Anaxagoras, of whom one made love an element, and the other made reason a principle. Of those who maintain the existence of the unchangeable substances some say the One itself is the good itself; but they thought its substance lay mainly in its unity.
This, then, is the problem,-which of the two ways of speaking is right. It would be strange if to that which Nicolas Otamendi Drakter is Tomas Svedkauskas Drakter primary and eternal and most self-sufficient this very quality — self-sufficiency and self-maintenance — belongs primarily in some other way than as a good. But indeed it can be for no other reason indestructible or self-sufficient than because its nature is good. Therefore to say that the first principle is good is probably correct; but that this principle should be the One or, if not that, at least an element, and an element of numbers, is impossible. Powerful objections arise, to avoid which some have given up the Fernando Drakter theory (viz. Alec Georgen Drakter those who agree that the One is a first principle and element, but only of mathematical number). For on this view all the units become identical with species of good, and there is a great profusion of goods. Again, if the Forms are numbers, all the Forms are identical with Alvaro Gonzalez Drakter species of good. But let a man assume Ideas of anything he pleases. If these are Ideas only of goods, the Ideas will not be substances; but if the Ideas are also Ideas of substances, all animals and plants anlinks:
http://www13.plala.or.jp/gakuki3/cgi_bin/aska/aska.cgi
http://www.dwats.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi
http://www13.plala.or.jp/white_roots/gwbbs/gwbbs.cgi |
