Chapter 11 volume nine

Chapter One We have already talked about those original "is", things on which other categories depend-that is, noumenon.Due to the existence of noumenon, other categories such as quantity and quality have their existence; we said at the beginning of this book that everything has to do with the idea of ​​noumenon.Because "reality" is divided into individuality, quality and quantity on the one hand, and potentiality, realization and function on the other hand, let us now try to seek a deeper understanding of potentiality and realization.The strictest interpretation of potentiality, which is limited to the sphere of movement, is not the most practical in the present discussion, since potentiality and realization always extend beyond instances of action.But after we have addressed this category of potentialities, we will move on to the other categories when we discuss "realization".

We have pointed out elsewhere that the words "potential" and "energy" can have several meanings.All those potentialities that are cited in the meanings of the destinies by virtue of a literal pun, we disregard.Some "potentials" are based on analogy. For example, in geometry, we say that certain things are "possible" or "impossible" because of the existence or non-existence of certain relations between things.But wherever potentialities correspond to this same type, there is always some source of change, and if something becomes something else, or becomes itself (taking itself as something else), it always involves to a certain primordial potential.

One type is the passive potential of being affected, that is, the ability to accept the action of another thing (or regard oneself as the action of something else) and passively change; the other is the ability not to change, that is, not to change A source of change that becomes corrupted or destroyed by the action of something else (or takes itself as something else).The formula, formerly called Potential, is included in these definitions.In addition, these so-called "potentials" are either only acting and being acted on, or good acting and being acted on, which is included in the former term in the latter term.

Clearly, then, the potentialities of acting and being acted upon are one in one sense (for the so-called "capability" of a thing is that it can be acted upon or acted on by itself), but are distinct in another sense. .Because a kind of potentiality exists in the things acted on; these substances have a source of movement, each of which has a corresponding movement because of the things it acts on; oily substances can be burned, and brittle substances can be crushed; Other cases like this.But another kind of potentiality exists in things that act, as heat comes from things that have heat energy, and architecture in people who can build.Thus, where a thing is just a natural unity, this cannot be acted upon by itself; for it is one thing, and not two different things.

"Incompetence" and "incompetence" are opposed to these "potentialities" and represent "absence"; the subject and process of each kind of potentiality has correspondingly the same kind of incapacity. "Que lost" has several meanings; (1) Que lacks a certain quality; (2) (A) should be in general but this is unique, (B) (zi) should be special, but this is not there, (Ugly) Part of the contingency and this is not at all.In certain instances, we say that a thing has been "deprived" if it has lost a certain quality through violence. Chapter Two

Some of these origins of change exist in soulless things, and others in souled things, in the soul, in the intellectual part of the soul, so that the potentialities are clearly divided into irrational and rational intellects.All manufacturing techniques are therefore called potentialities; they are sources of change in the manufactured thing (or in the technologist himself as another thing). Various abilities with rational formulas can have opposite effects, and each irrational ability can only have one effect; for example, heat is only heat, while medical technology can cause people to be sick, but also can make people healthy.The reason is that science is a kind of intellectual formula, which can explain things and the absence of objects, but the method is different.The same formula can be applied to both, but is sometimes reserved for positive situations.So this kind of learning has to deal with the opposite situation, and the rational formula can be applied to things that are opposites due to their own nature, and they can also be applied to things that are opposed to things that do not arise from their own nature (that is, due to attributes).Things appear by negation and removal of their opposites; since the opposite is an original absence, the negative term appears when the opposite positive term is removed.Because there are no two opposite situations in the same thing, but learning and art have the potential of rational formulas, and the soul has the origin of change; therefore, healthy things can only produce health, hot things can only produce heat, and cold things can only produce energy. produce cold, but technicians can produce the opposite effect.Since in the soul there is a dynamic source, the intellectual formulas can be applied to both sides, though in different ways; for the soul will have to develop two different processes from the same source, its intellectual formulas.So that which has the potentiality of an intellectual formula acts in parallel differently from those things which have no potentiality of an intellectual formula; the various products of the former are included in one source of movement, the intellectual formula.

It is also obvious that the potentiality either only exerts its function, or exerts a good function, and the mere function does not necessarily become a good function, and the good function certainly includes the function. Chapter three Some people, such as the Megarian school, say that things can only be called "capable" when they are using their abilities. If they are not functioning, there is no "capability". No one in the house can build it; it is all alike.The fallacy of this notion is not hard to see. According to this concept, no one can be called an architect except when building a house, and the same is true for other technologies.However, if a person does not acquire certain skills at certain times by learning, he cannot have these skills, and if the person does not lose this acquired skill, (because of forgetting, or change, or the passage of time) ; As for the destruction of finished products, it is not the reason for losing learning skills, knowledge depends on the constant <form>,) he cannot live without these skills.Now it is said that man ceases to have his skill when he ceases to use it, and that when he wants to use it he is immediately available for building.So how did he acquire this skill?

The same is true with regard to inanimate things; if there were no human sensations, there would be no cold, no warmth, no sweetness, and all sensible things would be absent; those who hold this idea will convert to the teachings of Protagoras .Verily, if a man does not use his senses, all things are senseless.Therefore, if a person is called blind (cannot see) when he does not use his vision, and is called bright (can see) when he uses his vision, such a person will be bright and blind a hundred times in a day. up.The same goes for the case of the deaf. Furthermore, if what is deprived of potential is regarded as impossibility, then anything that has not happened will also be considered as impossible; This must be false; for this is the impossible will.These concepts then cancel out movement and creation.

According to this concept, those who are standing will always be standing, and those who are sitting will always be sitting; because they have said that those who are sitting cannot stand up, so they have to sit there all the time.But we don't say so, and it seems to us that potentiality and realization are different, and their conception is the same; and thus what they want to abolish is no less and no less.Things that are not "is" may become "is", and things that are "is" may become "not-is" in the future, and other categories are similar; it is possible to walk without walking, and it is also possible to walk stop walking.All things that "can" do something should fully have the ability to realize their actions, and there are no impossible factors in this respect.For example, if a thing is said to be able to sit, it can sit. When it realizes its sitting, there is no factor that cannot sit; "Non-is" is also similar.

We relate the word "Enudia" (EFEρEια) <realization> to "Endrecht" (EFGEMEJEα) <full realization>, mainly to extend the movement to other things; because the strict interpretation of realization Limited to "actions".Although people give other predicates to non-existing things, they do not predicate actions.They say that non-existent things are the objects of thought and desire, but not so of things in action; these things do not actually exist, but they become as they become.Among non-existing things, some are latent; but they are not present in the sense that they do not exist fully realized.

Chapter Four If, as we said before, everything that is possible contains no element of impossibility, then it would be hypocritical to say, "This is possible, but it will not be realized"; Things we can't imagine.For example, if someone—he doesn't care that it is impossible to realize—says that the diagonal of a square can be measured, but it cannot be measured, because things can indeed become "realized" and neither the present nor the future will be "unrealized" of.But from this premise must lead to such a conclusion, we actually assume that what is not can become what is, will become what is, and there is nothing impossible in the world; but it is impossible to measure the diagonal line, and the result he proposed will be is impossible.False is not the same as impossible; yet you assert "false" as "non-impossible". At the same time, it is evident that if A is true, B must also be true, then if A is possible, B must also be possible; for although B need not be possible, there is nothing here to prevent it from being possible.Now try to make A possible. Then, if A is already true, there is no element of impossibility involved, and B must also be true.However, B was assumed to be impossible.Let B count as impossible. Then, if B is impossible, so must A.But A has been conceived to be possible, so B must be the same.Then if A is possible, B will also be possible; if they are in such a relation: if A is true, B must also be true.Then, after admitting the above-mentioned relationship between A and B, if A is possible and B is impossible, then the relationship between A and B does not conform to the original assumption.If A is possible, B must also be possible, and if A is true, B must also be true. It is said that if A is possible, B must also be possible. The relevant meaning here is that if A is true at a certain time and in a certain way, B must also be true at a certain time and in a certain way. Chapter five All potentials (ability) are derived from connotation, such as feeling, or obtained from practice, such as playing the flute, or obtained from research, such as art; all potentials obtained from practice and reason must first be practiced.The connotation of non-intellectual potential is contained in the receiver, and it is self-prepared without practice. Because "capable" is capable of being something at a certain time and in a certain way (and other conditions that should be defined), and because some things can cause motion according to the formula of the intellect, their potentiality includes intellect, while others Some irrational things, their potential is irrational, the former must be living things, and the latter can be living things or non-living things.With regard to the latter type of potential, when the actor and the affected are two-phase, it must work, but the former type of potential does not necessarily work.For each irrational potentiality can have only one effect, and the intellectual potentialities can produce opposite effects, so that if they act, the opposite things must be caused at the same time; but this is impossible.Therefore, there must be another reason for this: this, I think, is "will" or "desire".When an animal has to choose between two things, the will becomes the deciding factor, choosing the mode suitable to the object to be acted upon and to its potentialities.Everything that has intellectual potentiality, in the things within the reach of that potentiality, and in the circumstances suitable to that potentiality, exerts its potentiality.If the thing acted on does not exist, or the situation does not correspond to its potential, the thing has this potential but cannot seek its realization; if these things are right, the potential must be realized. (In addition, such a condition, "if there is no external object obstructing", is unnecessary; because "the situation is suitable" in the previous sentence indicates certain positive conditions, because of these positive conditions, the negative conditions have been excluded .) Thus, if a man tries to do two things at the same time, or to do opposite things, he cannot do it; for his potentialities which do one thing cannot do the other opposite thing, and one potentiality does two things at the same time. , is also impossible, he can only do one thing that is suitable for his potential under suitable conditions. Chapter Six Now that we have spoken of the kind of potentiality associated with movement, let us discuss actualization—what actualization is and what kind of thing actualization is.In the course of our analysis, it will also be clear that potentialities have other meanings than those called potentialities which are unconditionally or exclusively changed or make other things move.Because we want to study other fate meanings, we first explain the above meanings. Here, the existence of a thing indicated by "realization" is different from the potentiality mentioned above; we say that there is a statue of Herme latent in a piece of hardwood, and a half-line in a whole line, because this is possible. carved or separated; and we may even call a man a scholar who is not studying, if he is able to study;These meanings can be seen by generalizing certain situations, we don't have to find a definition for everything, we can understand the analogy: this is like building and building, sleeping and awake, eyes can see Those who look with closed eyes and those who look with open eyes are only the contrasts between a piece of material and what is carved out of it, and all unmade things turned into finished products.One of these pairings can be interpreted as potential and the other as actualization.But the realization and existence of all things means that they are not identical, but only similar—just as A is in B, or A belongs to B, so C is similarly said to be D, or C belongs to D; for in many comparisons, some are Like the ratio of change to potential, some are like the ratio of noumenon to some kind of substance. But "infinity" and "emptiness" and such things, if they are said to exist potentially and actually, are different from other examples, such as "watcher" or "walker" or "watched". Arrivals".Because in the latter case, these are sometimes seen or seen, these predicates can be completely affixed.As for "infinity", although it exists in potentiality, the destiny of this kind of potentiality does not expect its realization; it only has this potentiality in consciousness.The fact is that dividing a line can never be completely divided. In the process of dividing, there is a potential "infinity", but this "infinity" cannot be realized as an independent existence after all. Because although limited movements point to the ultimate, they are not ultimate. For example, when people practice the weight loss method, they lose some fat every day. This daily weight loss activity does not achieve the goal of weight loss immediately, and the weight loss method cannot be fully realized on this day; An activity that does not accomplish its purpose is not practice.Practice is an activity that includes the completion of the goal; for example, at the same time, we see and see, seek knowledge and understand, and think about it (as for learning, it is said to have been learned at the same time, and at the same time, it is said that the disease is cured , that is wrong).At the same time, we are living well, and we have lived well, and we have been happy until now.Otherwise, the process would have to be interrupted from time to time, as is the method of emaciation; but what exists does not cease; we have lived so far, and we still live.For these processes, we must separately call one series of activities and another series of realizations.For each movement—cellulite, learning, walking, building—does not reach its ultimate; these moments of doing, not yet done, are called "movements," walking and speaking, building and It is not correct to say that it has been created, that it is complete while it is changing, that it is successful while it is in motion, and that there is a difference between activity and passivity and the completion of activity and passivity.But seeing and seeing, thinking and thinking are exactly at the same time.The latter kind of process I call realization, the former kind of activity. After these discussions and similar considerations, what is meant by realization and what kind of realization can be counted has been explained. Chapter seven But we must show when a thing is potential and when it is not; for things are not always and every moment potential.For example, is soil potentially a person?No—that can only be said when it has become a seed; perhaps this cannot be said yet.It's like cured things; not everything can be cured by medical technology or by luck, only things that can be said to be potentially healthy.Again, (1) A latent being, by the effect of thought, becomes a fully realized being, the division of which lies in the agent and the effected, and if no external cause prevents it, the agent wills it, and this is realized; On the other hand, in the case of the sick person who is cured, this is achieved as health if there is no hindrance from internal causes.The situation is similar with a potential house; if there is no inherent hindrance, nothing to add or take away or change in the matter which it uses as a building, the matter is potentially a house; For other things that create origin are like this. (2) What is created by inner instinct is potentially all that will be realized if no external cause hinders it.The seed is not yet realized as a person; this is because it needs to undergo a transformation (development) into something else.As for its own source of change (internal cause), it has indeed possessed the necessary performance. According to this situation, it is already a potential person: according to the previous situation, it needs another principle of change, just like Earth (ore) is not yet potentially a statue (because copper has to be smelted from the earth before copper is potentially a statue). It seems that we don't call what is made of "that" another something "that" but "that"—for example, a wooden-box, not wood, but "wooden "; the wood born of the soil is not said to be soil, but "of the soil"; if the soil is also made of something else, it can also be used as an example in this series of things. — "The" other something in the series is often the potential (in the full sense of the word) of the something it successively becomes.For example, a box is not called soil, nor is it called soil, but only wood; because wood is the material of the box, it is potentially a box, and ordinary wood is potentially ordinary box. Potentially this box. If there is a first thing in the world, it does not depend on other things called "that"; this is the original matter; for example, earth is not air, but it is made of air, and air is not fire, but it is made of fire. As for the fire, it is the original substance, it is only the general "that" and not a "this" (individual) for itself.The bottom layer can be distinguished as the bottom layer of the evolution of individual and non-individual attributes.The bottom layer is a "person" (that is, the integrated individual of body and soul), and the attribute is "civilized" or "white".When people are civilized, they don't say "civilized" but "civilized", their face is "white", they don't say it's "white"; while they are "walking or moving", they don't say it's "walking or walking". Actions" - these are similar to "that" (rather than the substance of that body).If so, then, its last substratum is a substance; if not, if it is called a form or a substance, then its last substratum is matter or material substance.From this, it is affirmed that "that's" should be applied to the substratum of matter, and can also be invoked in terms of properties; to denote the substrata of individuals; for neither material nor properties are determinative things. Here we have shown when a thing may be called potential and when it is not. Chapter eight According to what we have said "prior to" (innate) meanings, it is clear that "prior to" potentialities are realized.By potentiality I mean not only the principle of motion to a thing or to oneself (as another), but also the principle of motion or rest in general. Essence is also of the same genus as Potentiality; for Essence is the Principle of Change—Essence, however, does not make other things move, but makes itself move.Realization is prior to all such potentialities, both formulaically and ontologically; in terms of time, it can be said to "before" in one sense, but not in the other; (1) Clearly, the realization precedes the formula; the reason why a thing is called potential is that it can be implemented; for example, if it has "constructive skills", I refer to the builder, and "with visual ability" refers to The one who sees, "visible" means the one who can be seen.The same is true for other cases, so the formula for realization must be known before the potential is known. (2) In terms of time, the meaning of realizing first is as follows: Realization and potentiality are the same as those of the species (the number does not have to be the same), and realization is prior to the corresponding potential thing.I mean that someone who actually exists is before the seed, the potential man, the ear before the grain, the seen before the seer; these are "before" in time, because those potentialities are produced by these realized things.From realized things come potential things, and this potential things become realized things, for example, from man to man, from civilized man to civilized man;We said, when we were speaking of substance, that all things must be made of certain things by certain things of the same kind. Therefore, everyone thinks that a person who has never built cannot become an architect, and a person who has never played the piano cannot become a luthier; because those who can play the piano are trained by playing the piano frequently, and the same is true for other arts.This leads to a sophistry saying: Scholars learn this science because they don't have it; then the so-called learning is practicing the science that they don't have before. <Then, a person can play the tune that he doesn't know how to play. 〉However, the achievement of learning and art is gradually achieved, part by part, and the general changes of things are also carried out part by part (this has been seen in "Theory of Change"), so scholars should have some clues about that academic . Here, too, it is clear that actuality, in the sense of attainment, precedes potentiality both in order and in time. But (3) Realization is also "before" in the ontology; (a) Because things "behind" the process of occurrence, they are "before" in form and ontology, for example, adults "before" children, and human beings are "before" Seed; because the one has its form and the other has not; and because every moving thing is always moving towards some principle, which is an end, (the end of a thing is the principle by which it comes into being; creation by its end For the purpose,) the realization is the ultimate, and it is for the attainment of this ultimate that things acquire their potentialities.Animals do not see in order to see, but see in order to see.Similarly, people have architectural skills for building houses, and theoretical studies for the sake of theory; it is not for the sake of theoretical studies that everyone conducts theories. If there is such a theory, it must be the ability of students to practice theory; these Theory is only in a limited sense, and students have no need to theorize about that topic. Again, matter exists in a latent state precisely because this can become form; when it exists actually, it exists in form.This holds true for all cases, even if the ultimate is an action.The teacher fulfills his purpose when he shows examples to his pupils, and naturally shows them to mankind.If this is not clear enough, we shall refer again to Paulson's Hermetic image, which is difficult to explain whether it is internal or external.Where function is the ultimate, function is realized.Therefore, the word "Enujiya" (EFEραEια, to achieve) was originally derived from "Erlo" (EρHF, function), and led to "Endlaixi" (EFGEMEJEια, to reach the end). In some cases the use of the senses is the last thing (e.g. vision is only seeing at any time, without the products of vision), in others there are products following the use of the intellect (e.g. architecture produces buildings and building work).But in the former case the action is ultimate, in the second the action is only closer to the ultimate than to the potential. Building work is performed on what is being built, realized and completed with the house. Wherefore, where the action produces something else as a result, the fulfillment is attributed to that product, as building work has its fulfillment to buildings, and weaving work to textiles, and similarly, movement is generally due to the thing moved; As for actions without products, the fulfillment should be attributed only to the agent; for example, the realization of visual activities is due to the seer, the realization of theological speculation is due to the theologian, and the realization of life is due to the soul (the realization of happiness in life is also due to the soul; because happiness a certain type of life). Clearly, then, identity or form is realization.According to this argument, actualization is of course noumenonally prior to potentiality; and, as has been said, one actualization always precedes the other in time, going back to the actualization of the eternal prime mover. But (b) Realization is also "before" in a stricter sense; eternal things are ontologically prior to perishable things, and eternal things are not potential.The reason is this: every potentiality is at the same time the potentiality of the opposite; what is impossible in a subject must not occur, and what is possible may not be realized.Then what can be "is" can be or not be.If it is possible to become "non-is", it can become non-is; if it is possible to become "non-is", it is destructible; "destroyable", if it is a full name, it means destroying "in the body", if it is another name, it can be destroyed. Locally, either quantitatively or qualitatively, the parts perish in relation to each possible right and wrong.Therefore a totally indestructible thing is not potential at all, (although in some respects it is not impossible to say that it is potentially possessed of certain qualities or that it is potential in a certain place;) so the existence of all indestructible things are realized.Nor can all necessary things potentially exist; so-called necessary things are elementary things, and if there are no such things in the world, there will be no other things.If there were such things as so-called perpetual motion, these would not be potentiality; if there is a perpetual thing here: its motion is not from potentiality, but only on the question of "from where" and "where to". It's a different matter (if it is said that it has matter with kinetic energy in all directions, this is not impossible).The sun, stars and the whole universe are in constant motion, and we don't need to be worried that they will cease to be active one day like those natural philosophers.Nor do they tire of such activities; their motions are not like those of perishable things; the matter and potentiality from which perishable things cause their motion contain relative opposites, so that motion is laborious; The movement of the indestructible is out of actuality, <not out of potentiality, which is effortless. 〉Those things which themselves contain movement, such as the earth and fire, imitate the indestructible things (celestial bodies).These, too, are eternally active; for they cause their own motion and their own motion.However, according to our previous research, other potentialities contain relative and opposite factors; potentialities that make another thing act in this way according to the rational formula can also make it act in the opposite way; Its presence or absence results in opposite results. If, then, there were any formula or noumenon such as Italians, as the dialecticians say, there must be something else of a higher quality of realization, of which learning and movement would be potentialities; Admirals will have higher academics, and there will be higher changes above the dynamic style. Realization, then, obviously precedes potentiality and all principles of movement. Chapter Nine From the following argument, it can be seen that it is better and more valuable to realize potentials than good.Anyone who can make a difference is always able to do the opposite. People can do good things, but they can also do bad things. Every potential contains both ends; the same potential can cause people's health and disease, and lead to tranquility. Also actuates, builds and destroys, and actuates builds and destroys.Thus potentialities simultaneously contain opposites; but opposites cannot exist at the same time, nor can their fulfillment be seen at the same time, as in health and disease.Therefore, where the potentialities are neither, the good occupies only one of the extremes; and therefore the realization of that good is better than its potential.The same is true in evil karma. If the outcome is evil, the realization of this evil is worse than its latent evil. It is clear, then, that malignity exists independently of the evil thing; "evil" is inherently inferior to potentiality.So we can also say that the primordial and eternal things have no evil, no flaws, and no partiality (the so-called partiality is also close to evil karma). Geometric diagrams are discoverable by implementation; we use reticles to create these diagrams.The intention of the picture is only implicitly implied; if the division is also drawn first, it will be explained.Why are the interior angles of a triangle equal to two right angles?For the angles drawn at a point are equal to two right angles.Anyone who sees the diagram will understand if those parallel lines to one side of the triangle are drawn.How come the angles inside a semicircle are right angles wherever they are?If the two lines are a line perpendicular to the bottom line and the center, the three lines are equal—if people know the previous geometrical definition, the conclusion can be known at a glance.It is evident, therefore, that latent diagrams are discovered by performing divisions; the reason is that the thought of the geometer is a "realization" from which realizations become potentialities; drawing is done so that everyone can understand the intention of the diagram, although this last realization is later than the corresponding potentiality; but this potentiality is developed from the previous realization of the geometer. Chapter ten The terms "is" and "not-is" are applied first to categories, second to their potentialities or realizations, or their non-potentialities and non-realizations, and third to truth and falsity.The question of truth or falsehood depends on whether the objects of things are united or separated. If those who agree with each other think they are united, and those who are separated think they are separated, then it is true; Mistaken. In this way, when does the so-called true and false exist, and when does it not exist?We must consider the real meaning of these nouns. It is not because we say that your face is white that you are white; it is only because you are white that we are right when we say so.Therefore, if some things are often combined but cannot be separated, other things are often separated and cannot be combined, and some things can be separated or combined, then the one that combines and becomes one becomes "yes", and the one that is many and not combined is "no-yes". ".With regard to undetermined events, the same opinion or statement may be true or false, being true at one time and false at another time; Either it is always right, or it is often wrong. But in non-combined things, how can it be said to be or not and true or false?Since there is no combination of such things, then combination cannot be regarded as "yes" and separation can be regarded as "nothing". When different from the above examples.In fact, true and false are different from previous examples, and right and wrong should also be different. (a) True or false can be judged in this way—truth is contact and confirmation (confirmation and affirmation are not the same), and non-contact is ignorance.Questions such as "what is this" are error-free except for accidental properties; the same is true for non-composite ontology.These are not potential but actual beings; otherwise, they would have birth and death and decay; but none of these have birth and death themselves; if they had a process of creation they would have to be produced by something else.Therefore, there can be no falsity in what is and what is realized, the question is only whether we know them or not.But we have to actually study them to see whether they really have this or that nature. (B) Regarding the so-called "is" that corresponds to the real and the so-called "non-is" that corresponds to the false, one example is: the two items of <subject and attribute> are indeed combined into one, which is true, and if they are not, it is false, and another example is: things are just It exists individually, and without this individuality it would not exist at all.Reality consists in knowing these things; here there is no falsity, no error, all but ignorance (not knowing)— This ignorance is not like blindness; for blindness, being completely devoid of sight, is like being completely devoid of the faculties of thought (ignorance is the faculties of thought without being able to know things that are known. > It is also evident that nothing can be wrong about things that do not change from time to time.For example, if we assume that triangles do not change, we should not suppose that their three internal angles are sometimes equal to and sometimes not equal to two right angles (for this admits of change).However, it is possible to imagine that in the same class of things, some have a certain property and some do not; Prime number.But encountering a single number, errors of this type are impossible; I cannot say here that this property is or is not; our judgments may be right or wrong, and the fact is always that.