【英文文学】on the generation and corruption论产生和毁灭

上传人:破*** 文档编号:244212495 上传时间:2022-01-22 格式:DOCX 页数:44 大小:76.70KB
返回 下载 相关 举报
【英文文学】on the generation and corruption论产生和毁灭_第1页
第1页 / 共44页
【英文文学】on the generation and corruption论产生和毁灭_第2页
第2页 / 共44页
【英文文学】on the generation and corruption论产生和毁灭_第3页
第3页 / 共44页
【英文文学】on the generation and corruption论产生和毁灭_第4页
第4页 / 共44页
【英文文学】on the generation and corruption论产生和毁灭_第5页
第5页 / 共44页
点击查看更多>>
资源描述

《【英文文学】on the generation and corruption论产生和毁灭》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《【英文文学】on the generation and corruption论产生和毁灭(44页珍藏版)》请在金锄头文库上搜索。

1、【英文文学】on the generation and corruption 论产生和毁灭Book I chapter 1OUR next task is to study coming-to-be and passing-away. We are to distinguish the causes, and to state the definitions, of these processes considered in general-as changes predicable uniformly of all the things that come-to-be and pass-aw

2、ay by nature. Further, we are to study growth and alteration. We must inquire what each of them is; and whether alteration is to be identified with coming-to-be, or whether to these different names there correspond two separate processes with distinct natures.On this question, indeed, the early phil

3、osophers are divided. Some of them assert that the so-called unqualified coming-to-be is alteration, while others maintain that alteration and coming-to-be are distinct. For those who say that the universe is one something (i.e. those who generate all things out of one thing) are bound to assert tha

4、t coming-to-be is alteration, and that whatever comes-to-be in the proper sense of the term is being altered: but those who make the matter of things more than one must distinguish coming-to-be from alteration. To this latter class belong Empedocles, Anaxagoras, and Leucippus. And yet Anaxagoras him

5、self failed to understand his own utterance. He says, at all events, that coming-to-be and passing-away are the same as being altered: yet, in common with other thinkers, he affirms that the elements are many. Thus Empedocles holds that the corporeal elements are four, while all the elements-includi

6、ng those which initiate movement-are six in number; whereas Anaxagoras agrees with Leucippus and Democritus that the elements are infinite.(Anaxagoras posits as elements the homoeomeries, viz. bone, flesh, marrow, and everything else which is such that part and whole are the same in name and nature;

7、 while Democritus and Leucippus say that there are indivisible bodies, infinite both in number and in the varieties of their shapes, of which everything else is composed-the compounds differing one from another according to the shapes, positions, and groupings of their constituents.)For the views of

8、 the school of Anaxagoras seem diametrically opposed to those of the followers of Empedocles. Empedocles says that Fire, Water, Air, and Earth are four elements, and are thus simple rather than flesh, bone, and bodies which, like these, are homoeomeries. But the followers of Anaxagoras regard the ho

9、moeomeries as simple and elements, whilst they affirm that Earth, Fire, Water, and Air are composite; for each of these is (according to them) a common seminary of all the homoeomeries.Those, then, who construct all things out of a single element, must maintain that coming-tobe and passing-away are

10、alteration. For they must affirm that the underlying something always remains identical and one; and change of such a substratum is what we call altering Those, on the other hand, who make the ultimate kinds of things more than one, must maintain that alteration is distinct from coming-to-be: for co

11、ming-to-be and passingaway result from the consilience and the dissolution of the many kinds. That is why Empedocles too uses language to this effect, when he says There is no coming-to-be of anything, but only a mingling and a divorce of what has been mingled. Thus it is clear (i) that to describe

12、coming-to-be and passing-away in these terms is in accordance with their fundamental assumption, and (ii) that they do in fact so describe them: nevertheless, they too must recognize alteration as a fact distinct from coming to-be, though it is impossible for them to do so consistently with what the

13、y say.That we are right in this criticism is easy to perceive. For alteration is a fact of observation. While the substance of the thing remains unchanged, we see it altering just as we see in it the changes of magnitude called growth and diminution. Nevertheless, the statements of those who posit m

14、ore original reals than one make alteration impossible. For alteration, as we assert, takes place in respect to certain qualities: and these qualities (I mean, e.g. hot-cold, white-black, dry-moist, soft-hard, and so forth) are, all of them, differences characterizing the elements. The actual words

15、of Empedocles may be quoted in illustrationThe sun everywhere bright to see, and hot,The rain everywhere dark and cold;and he distinctively characterizes his remaining elements in a similar manner. Since, therefore, it is not possible for Fire to become Water, or Water to become Earth, neither will

16、it be possible for anything white to become black, or anything soft to become hard; and the same argument applies to all the other qualities. Yet this is what alteration essentially is.It follows, as an obvious corollary, that a single matter must always be assumed as underlying the contrary poles of any change whether change of place, or growth and diminution, or alteration; furt

展开阅读全文
相关资源
相关搜索

当前位置:首页 > 外语文库 > 英语阅读

电脑版 |金锄头文库版权所有
经营许可证:蜀ICP备13022795号 | 川公网安备 51140202000112号