Chapter 14 Volume 12

Chapter One The subject of our study is noumenon; it is the principle and cause of noumenon that we are dealing with.If the universe is a whole (complete thing), the noumenon is the first part of the whole; if the whole is only a series of parts, the noumenon should be the first in order, followed by quality, followed by quantity.At the same time, the latter two are actually just the endowments and changes of the ontology, not the full name of reality——if these are also counted as reality, "not white" and "worthless" also become reality; at least we sometimes Gotta say "here is a no white".Also, except for ontology, other categories cannot exist independently.

The early ancient philosophers were also familiar with the primordial nature of noumenon; it was the principles, elements and causes of noumenon that they were striving for.Modern thinkers tend to use the universal (universal) as the noumenon (because their research tends to focus on abstraction, so all the universal things that become genus are described as principles and noumenon); but the ancient thinkers used the individual (different) Things, such as fire and earth, are listed as noumenon, and their common body is not regarded as noumenon. There are three categories of ontologies. ——The sense body can be divided into two branches, one is eternal, and the other is perishable; (the latter is the consensus of ordinary people, including animals and plants;) For the perishable body, we must delve into its elements, no matter There are only one or multiple elements; only one is the immutable noumenon, some thinkers believe that this immutable noumenon can exist independently, and some divide the immutable noumenon into two, namely the general formula and the mathematical theory. objects, while other thinkers consider both, and consider only mathematical objects to be immutable entities.The first two types of noumenon are subjects of physics (because they are subject to dynamic change); but the third type of noumenon, if its principle is not connected with the other two types, must belong to another science.

Sensible entities are changeable.Now if the change is from the opposite or from the intermediate, this can only be from the antithesis and not from anything that is not opposite (for the sound is not white, but the sound cannot become white), from one end of the antithesis to the other. , its changes are not from the opposite ends but some underlying things are changing between the two ends. Chapter Two Again, in change some effects persist, and others do not; therefore, besides the two relative effects, there must be some third thing, namely matter. Now, because change is classified into four categories,—or the change of noumenon (how);

Either qualitative change, quantitative change, or place change; change in "this" (noumenon) is simple birth and death, change in quantity is increase and decrease, change in endowment (quality) is change, change in location is movement, The change follows these four items from the original state to the opposite state.Matter in change must then be capable of two states.The "being" of a thing is originally ambiguous, and the change means that the potential "is" thing becomes the realized "is" thing, for example, the potential white is realized as white; the increase and decrease become change, and the examples are similar.Therefore, not only can a thing be changed from non-being to being by chance, but also all things appear because of their inherent existence, but they have not been realized before, and they are only potential.This is the "oneness" of Anazagoras; if all things are one, the same is true of the mixture of Empedocles and the names given by Akhnaximander and Denocritus. ,——It is better to say that "all things are potential together and not realized together", which is more appropriate.So these thinkers seem to have acquired certain material concepts.Now, all changeable things have matter, but different things have different matter; and eternal things, that is, all things that are not born and die but can move in space must also have matter, but this is only when moving from one place to another in space. A "moving matter" rather than a "destroyable matter".

One can ask the question, from what kind of "non-being" does becoming proceed; because non-being has three meanings.If there is not a latent form, it cannot be said that all things come from potential, but that "different things come from different things"; it is difficult to say that "all things are mixed together" is not realistic; Things are different from matter. If all things belong to the same thing, there should be only one thing in the world, so why generate endless physical things?Since reason is one, if matter is also one, then matter is potential (undifferentiated element) and reason is its realization (realized element).

Then there are three reasons and principles: the definition or general formula is one, the other is the lack corresponding to the definition and general formula, the two are combined into a pair, and the third is matter. Chapter three Secondly, please note that both matter and formula are not created—here I mean the last personal matter and formula.Every changing thing must have been changed by something to become something.What makes it change is the immediate change; what is passively changed is matter, and what is changed becomes form.If not only the copper was created into the circle, but the circle was also created, and the copper was also created, the process of creation would go on endlessly; so there must be a cessation.

And secondly, notice that every substance is created and actualized by certain things corresponding to its name. (Natural things and other things are listed as noumenon.) The creation of things is either by technology (artificial) or by nature, or by chance or spontaneously.Technology is the principle of dynamic change due to other things other than passive things, nature is the principle of dynamic change because of the thing itself (such as human beings), and other reasons are due to the lack of both. There are three types of noumenon—substance, and its existence phenomenon is the sustenance of reality, (all things are not organically grown into one, but only in contact with one place. Substance and bottom layer, such as fire, muscle, head. These Both are matter, and the final physical matter is the full name of the substance;) natural nature, <form>, which is the normal state of individual existence, and is the end point of change; the third is the individual synthesized from the above two , such as Socrates or Gallia.In some cases, the nature of form cannot exist independently of the complex body, (for example, the form of the house does not exist independently of the house, except that the technology of building can be preserved apart from the house; these forms do not arise and die;

As for the existence of "houses" or "health" or all other technological products in the abstract, that is another way of saying ;) Only in natural objects are there examples of such independent existence.Thus Plato says that there are as many general forms as there are natural objects; which is not very wrong (if there are no general forms other than things on this earth).Things that are the cause of change should be prior to the effect, but in terms of definition, the cause and the effect should be at the same time.When a person is healthy, health (the cause of the form) must exist together; the shape of the copper ball and the copper ball exist at the same time.But we should test whether any form survives the disappearance of synthetic things.In some cases this does not seem to be the case, such as the fact that the soul can have this property (not the whole soul, but only the rational part of it; it is probably impossible for the whole soul to die and still survive).Therefore, obviously, at least in this standpoint, the existence of various meanings is unnecessary: ​​people are begotten by people, and a certain person is begotten by a certain father; the same is true for technical manufacturing; medical skills are the formal cause of health.

Chapter Four The causes and principles of different things are different, but in another sense, when people talk about universality in the sense of analogy, all things have the same cause.People can ask questions like this, whether the principles and elements of ontological and relational categories are different or the same; and make similar inquiries in each category.If everything was the same, the question would have to be a paradox.Because then the relationship terms and the ontology will have the same elements.And what will this common element be?There is nothing both common and different between the other categories as predicates and noumenon; but an element should be prior to the things it constitutes as an element; moreover, noumenon is not an element of relation, nor is relation would be an element of ontology.And how can all categories have the same element?Elements and things composed of elements are no longer the same, such as β and α are different from βα. (Similarity is a rational thing such as element and element, and it is not an element; because these can be the common meaning of the composition and its constituent elements.) Therefore, all elements cannot be either a noumenon or a related item.Ontology should have the elements of ontology, and relation should have the elements of relation.

In this way, the elements of each category are not the same. Or, according to our usual view, the elements can be said to be the same or different, for example, the elements of the sensory substance can be: (1) (A) form, such as heat, and its other meaning is (B) absence is cold ; and (ii) matter, matter is directly and itself potentially hot or cold.And substance may be (sub)composed of these elements, or (ugly) re-synthesized from composites, which are synthesized on the principle of these elements, or any body produced by cold and heat, such as flesh or bone. Synthesis; the synthetic product necessarily differs from the elements.These things are then said to be the same in terms of form, absence, and matter in terms of elements and principles—(though each particular thing still has its own particular individual elements); or the elements are only comparatively similar. , while practically everything does not have the same element in this sense.Things at all levels have their own different principles and elements; for example, in color, they are "white", "black" and "surface", and in book night, they are "light", "dark" and "qi".

Not only internal elements are the causes of things, but certain external things, such as motives, are also causes of things, and it is clear then that principles are distinct from elements, but both are causes.Principles are divided into two categories according to the difference between internal and external causes; all things that can cause motion and rest should be a principle and a substance.Therefore, in comparison, there are three elements, and four reasons or principles; but speaking differently, different things have their own different elements, and the immediate causes are also different from different things.Health, disease, body; the cause is medicine.The form, the absence of a certain arrangement, the brick, the motive is architecture.Natural things, such as man, are moved by man, and the moving cause of the products of thought is form or its opposite; thus the causes are either four or three.For sometimes health itself is medicine; the form of a house is architecture, and man begets man.In addition, there must be a first thing that is the initial cause of all things. Chapter five Some things exist independently, while others cannot. The former is noumenon.Since both evolution and motion do not occur without substance, all things have the same causes as substance.Again, these causes are presumably soul and body, or reason and desire and body. On the other hand, things that are analogously the same have the same principle, actuality and potentiality; but in some cases, as wine or muscle or a person, one moment actuality and another potentiality, these things not only remain Each thing is different, and these same principles should be invoked in different ways, (these are also grouped in the classification of the reasons listed above. For if the form can exist independently, this is the actual existence, the two things of form and matter , and absences such as "darkness" and "disease" can also exist independently; but matter exists as potentiality; therefore matter can only have its expression by form or absence.) But actualization and potentiality, respectively, are applied in another way Instances differing from material cause and effect, some of which are different in form; for example, the cause of man (a) the connotative elements of man (one is matter such as fire and earth, and the other is a special form of man), and ( ii) other external things such as the father, and (iii) Except for the two elements, such as the sun and its ecliptic, they are neither human matter, nor form, nor lacking, and are different from human species, but they are the motives of human (and biological). Also, it should be noted that some reasons can be explained by general terms, while others cannot.The immediate principle of everything lies in the individual who is close to actualization and the other close to potentiality.There is no universal cause of which we speak, so the immediate principle is not universal.The cause of the individual (principle of creation) comes from the individual.Although human beings generally take man as the cause, there is no "universal man" in the world, and all people are just Beliu as Akiri's cause, and your father is your cause; Although β can generally create βα in general, only this particular β can be the principle of creation of this particular βα. Moreover, even though the cause of noumenon is universal, as we have said, different things should still have different causes and elements; the different classes of things, such as noumenon and quantity, color and sound, are only in comparison. It may be the same, but the actual factors are all different; however, the causes of different things of the same species are not different from the species, only different from the individual. For the individual, your substance, form and motivation are different from mine. , which have exactly the same general definition.If we ask what are the principles and elements of the three terms of noumenon, relation, and quality—they are the same or different—clearly, the words "principle" and "element" can be regarded as the same if they are used in different meanings; But this is also different when there is actually a difference: only in the following meanings are the causes of all things said to be the same. (1) Matter, form, absence, and movement are common to all things, and here the causes can be said to be the same or comparable; The causes of things can also be called the same cause in this meaning; and (3) the first complete realization as the total cause of all things can also be called the same cause in this meaning.In terms of other meanings, all pairs that are neither genus nor ambiguous in meaning should have different proximate causes; as for the material causes of individual things, they are also different. Here we have explained the principles of sensible things, their number, and the difference between the same and the different. Chapter Six It was said that there are three types of noumenon, the second is the noumenon of natural objects, and the first is the noumenon of immutable ones. For the latter kind of noumenon, we must explain that there should be an eternal and unchanging noumenon in the universe.The substances are the first things to exist. If the substances are all destructible, then everything will be destroyed.But it is impossible to say that movement is alive or dead, and time is alive or dead (both movement and time should always exist).If there is no time, neither the first nor the later can exist.Motion is continuous in the same sense as time; time is either motion or a property of motion.There is no continuous movement except space movement, and only circular movement is continuous in space movement. But if things can make other things move and act on other things, and if they don't implement what they can, the change will not occur; it is just unused potentiality.Even if, like those who believe in general formulas, we assume eternal substances, it is useless if we do not give these eternal substances the principle of actuation and change; It is not enough; for unless this works, there will be no movement in the world.Again, even if this were capable of functioning, it would not be enough if it were only potentiality; since potentiality need not always become reality, there cannot yet be eternal motion in the world.So there must be such a principle, the essence of which is realization.Again, these beings must be without matter; if there are any eternal things in the world, they must be so.Well, they must be implementations. Here, however, is a difficulty; it has been supposed that since not everything that acts acts, but everything that acts acts, the potentiality should come first.If this is true, then there is no need for everything: everything that could exist may not exist at present. But if we follow the theologians who created the world out of "dark night" or the natural philosophers who assert that "all things blend together," this leads to equally impossible conclusions.If there is no realization as the prior cause, how can the cosmic cloud change vividly?Mubi 30 cannot be automatic - it must be effected by the craftsmanship of carpentry; Neither the menstrual blood nor the land can change by itself. It is necessary for the seeds to act on the land and the sperm to act on the menstrual blood (then there can be plants and animals). This is why some - like Leucippus and Plato - reason for assuming an eternal realization; they say that the universe is in constant motion.But where does this movement come from, what is this movement, and what is the reason for such and such movements in the universe, they have not told us.Now all things do not change indiscriminately, there must be some things that lead to change. Actually speaking, the change of things should come from nature, or from force or reason or other things. (Again, which kind of motion is the fundamental motion? There is a huge difference here.) But it may not be in Plato's purport to point here to automatic natural things as the sources of change which Plato sometimes assumes; According to the discussion, the generation of the soul is later, but at the same time as the sense universe.We have indicated that hypothetical potentialities precede actualization, and this is true in one sense and not in another.Realization as "before" was understood by Anaxagoras (his "reason" is realization), and also experienced by Empedocles in his "love and hatred" (friend and struggle) In the thesis, Leucippus and others recognized that there is always "endless movement" in the universe, and the meaning is the same. Therefore, "chaos" or "dark night" does not last forever, but because they are governed by the cycle of change or obey other laws, these things can be common in the universe, so the realization should always precede the potential.Then, if there is an eternal cycle, certain things (stars) must always behave in the same way.And if there is birth and death, there must be another thing (the sun) to do activities in different ways.The source of this activity must then be deduced at last from the self or from something else—or from a third principle of activity to the original cause.Now this must come down to the "first cause".If this first cause is not recognized, we must go on looking for that thing from which the second or third cause derives its principle of action.So we should call this thing "first".This is the cause of eternal regular motion; other things are the cause of variation, and the combination of the two is evidently the total cause of the constant and variable wings of the universe.This is the character that the movement actually expresses.So, why not look for other principles? Chapter seven Since (a) this is a possible explanation of the problem, and (b) otherwise, the world would develop from "dark night" and "everything that mixes" and would be produced from "non-is", <then admitting the above explanation> the difficulty is It can be considered solved. Here, then, there must be something constantly moving, the motion of which is circular; and this is true not only in theory, but also in fact.So the first day must be eternal.There must also be something that causes movement.Since things that are active and passive are intervening, there must be something eternal that is active but not passive, which is noumenon and actualization.Desire and reason act in the same way; they cause things to move and do not move themselves. Desire has the same basic object as reason.Desire seeks to be false and good external things", while rationality seeks to be true and good (real things).But thought (knowledge) is the starting point; desire should follow thought, and thought should precede desire.Reason moves on the object of intellect, and one of the two series of antithesis is itself the object of intellect; in this series Noumenon is first, and in Noumenon the simple and realized is first. (One is different from simplicity; "one" is a measure, and "simplicity" signifies that things have some nature that may be called simple.) But beauty is also in the same series as everything that is desirable in itself; Things that are first in the middle of a pair are often the best, or comparable to the best. There is an extreme cause in the existence of immutable reality, which can be explained by analyzing its meaning.The function of extreme cause is not only for good karma, but also for the good effect of something.The latter intent applies to things that do not change, while the former intent does not.Extremely because of what it likes to change, everything else changes according to what it changes.Now, suppose things change so that they don't follow the rules.If the realization of this thing is only the basic form of space movement, then it is true that the thing that moves in space cannot move in other forms—even if it is not a change of the ontology, at least it can not keep its fixed position.Once it is established that there is a prime mover that does not move itself but moves other things, then things that are in motion cannot return to the routine that is moved.Spatial motion is the first type of dynamic change, and circular motion is the first level of spatial motion; the first active causes the first level of motion.Here, the prime mover must exist; since its existence is necessary, its purpose of being true must also be good, and precisely because of this purpose, this becomes the first principle.The so-called necessities should include the following meanings (A) against the existence of nature. Therefore, the nature of the universe and the heavens depend on such a principle.And we look up in such a universe, and enjoy the best life, although it is quite happy and very fast (the universe will last forever, this joy and this truth will last forever; and we cannot be in this world), but it is The person who realizes it is the same, and the joy is also the same.The activities and realizations we are endowed and received from this, we regard awakening, seeing and hearing, and thinking, so we have nowhere to go but feel comfortable.And those who use pure truth as their activity and realization are especially good, and their thoughts must be aimed at the best and highest of things, and the thoughts that arise from this are good ideas.Thought touches and participates with what it thinks, and the two become one.Only those who can understand what the object is by reason can become reason.In the moment of thought activity is also the moment when thought holds the object of its thought.Therefore, meditation on "spiritual thinking" is the only victory, and it is joyful and good, reaching the highest state.It is surprising that God is not in such a good place for a moment in all the ages, and it is even more surprising if it is said that the place where God is in a better place than this one.And God is in a better and higher place.Life also belongs to God.Life is the realization of rationality, and the only one who realizes this is the gentry; the realization of God's self is the supreme good and eternal life.Therefore, we say that God is a supremely good and eternal being, so life and endless continuation as well as eternal space and time belong to God; this is God. Those men like the Pythagoreans and Spankers, who, because of the illustrations of plants and animals (beautiful as seeds and embryos), are wrong to suppose that the best and all beauty do not appear in the beginning but in the aftermath. .For the seed comes from other individuals, who are perfected before the seed, and the first thing is not the seed, but the finished reality; we shall say that there was a man before the seed, not man begotten by the offspring, It's about life. From what has been said above, it is clear that there is an eternal, immutable, and independent being outside of sensible things.For it has also been shown that this being has no measure, no part, and is indistinguishable (for this can create motion through infinite time, whereas all finite things cannot be infinite; every measure being either finite or infinite, this being With infinite power it cannot be a finite measure, but an infinite measure doesn't actually exist, so it wouldn't be an infinite measure).All other changes are after the space change, which shows that this body must not change and cannot be changed. Chapter eight Therefore, it should be clear why this ontology is like this.But we can't forget, "is there one or more than one such noumenon", if there is more than one, how many there are.We also have to mention that each school has not explained the possible ontology, and no one has paid attention to the number of them.Schematicism does not discuss this issue. Schematicists use semaphore as their number, and their number is sometimes infinite and sometimes limited to 10; as to why the number of columns should be exactly 10, they have not made any precise demonstration.Instead, we have to elaborate on the questions we have raised based on pre-conceived assumptions and analyses.The First Principle or Fundamental Reality is the creation of the first level of simple eternal motion without motion itself, nor motion incidentally.But since the passive thing must have something to cause it to move, and the mover must itself not move, the eternal and simple movement must be created for it by the eternal and simple thing, and because we see the creation of the said immovable primordial being In addition to the simple spatial motion of the universe, there are other spatial motions—such as planetary motion—that are also eternal (any object that moves in a circle is eternal; this we have proved in the "Papers on Physics" ), each of these movements must also have an eternal and immobile being of its own for its creative cause.The stars are eternal because they are a certain kind of noumenon, and what actuates the stars must be prior to the stars and must also be the eternal noumenon.It is clear, then, from the above-mentioned theory, that there must be as many beings as there are movements of the stars, immobile by themselves, eternal without any measure. Then, it is clear that, according to the order of the movement of the stars, among the actuating bodies, one is the first, next to the second, next to each other, and others.However, the question of the number of motions can only be studied from the standpoint of astronomy, which is a science in mathematics, which is very close to philosophy; Geometry does not study matter.There are more orbits of celestial bodies than bodies in motion, as anyone who pays a little attention to astronomy will understand; each planet moves in more than one orbit.How many of these motion studies are there? Now we cite the opinions of some mathematicians so that we can know the exact number on this topic; as for other issues, we must study for ourselves and learn from other scholars to study this issue. If there are people who disagree with us, we should respect each other's opinions and follow the more accurate side. Eudoxus deduces that the movement of the sun and the moon follows three celestial spheres, the first is the sidereal sky, the second is the circular orbit of the midline of the ecliptic, and the third is the oblique circular orbit between the two solstices of the ecliptic; The skewness is larger than that of the solar orbit.There are four celestial spheres in each planet's orbit, and the first and second days are the same as the above-mentioned sun and moon orbits (the sidereal sky is the general orbit, and the ecliptic midline circular orbit below it is shared by all celestial bodies), but the first and second days of each planet The axis of motion of the three spheres is built on the circle formed by the midline of the ecliptic, and the circle of motion of the fourth sphere deviates from the equator of the third sphere; the two poles of the axis of motion of the third sphere, the planets are only Aphrodite. Venus> is the same as Herme<Mercury>.The rest are different. Garypu’s inference on the position of the celestial sphere is similar to that of Eudock’s case, and the number of orbits of Zeus (Jupiter) and Crono (Saturn) is also the same, but he thinks that the sun and the moon should add two orbits each, and the others The orbits of the planets are also increased by one each, so as to be consistent with the measured travel speeds of all celestial bodies. But when using the comprehensive motion of these celestial spheres to explain the measured trajectories of celestial bodies, it is necessary to arrange other celestial spheres for each planet to balance the above-mentioned celestial spheres (the number of balancing spheres for each planet is one less than the original moving celestial sphere), And make all the planets in the lower layer of the celestial sphere return to their positions; only with this arrangement, when all the celestial forces are in full motion, can the planetary phenomenon observed by everyone be produced.Calculate all the moving orbits of the celestial spheres in this way, Saturn and Jupiter are eight in total, and the rest are twenty-five. Of these thirty-three moving orbits, only the lowest moving orbit does not need to balance the celestial sphere, so balance the two outermost planets The orbit of the sphere is six, and the next four stars are sixteen; so the total of the moving celestial sphere and the balance celestial sphere is fifty-five.If the moving orbits of the sun and the moon do not make the above additions, the total number of moving orbit celestial spheres should be forty-seven. Therefore, if this number is used as the number of moving celestial spheres, there should be so many immutable entities and principles; as for how to deduce these data, it should be left to more refined thinkers, "if there are other factors that are not beneficial to the motion of stars There will be no spatial movement, and if every reality and every substance that is free from change and can be made good by itself should be an ultimate, then in addition to the facts we have listed above, it should be There are no other realities; and this would be the number of these substances. If there were other realities, they would cause changes for the extremes of motion; but there can be no other motions than those of the celestial bodies mentioned above. This is also reasonable in consideration of passively changing objects; motion belongs to the object being moved, and each agent causes motion for the sake of the affected object, and motion is not for motion itself or for other motions. Since there are stars, there is This motion. If the end of motion is another motion, the other motion will trace another motion; since such an endless series cannot exist, the ultimate purpose of each motion will have to be determined by the gods passing through the sky. One of the <stars> is expressed for it. There is obviously only one universe.If there are as many heavens as there are people, the principle of motion will also be like people, with only one form and many numbers.But everything that is numerous has matter; there is only one definition of man that applies to all, and Socrates is one of them.But the base is not material; it is fully realized.Therefore the immovable prime mover is one in number and one in definition; so is the constant and continuous motion of the moved things; therefore there is but one universe. Our ancient ancestors handed down their generational knowledge to their descendants in the form of myths, saying that these entities (stars) are gods, and the gods sealed the secrets of all nature in the constellations.Later, due to the maintenance of etiquette, exhortation to the people and other practical functions, the legends in the form of myths were gradually expanded; they described the gods in the form of humans or certain animals, and they followed suit and became more and more beautiful.But if people delete the attachments of the later generations, so that the original intention of the ancient times can be clearly revealed to the world-they recognize the original body as the gods, people must be shocked by this meaning, it is not inspired by inspiration, so they can achieve this immortality And think back to every academic, every skill, generation or death, or passed on or lost, and these concepts have been preserved for us like the treasures of the barren valley until now.Only in this way can we understand what our ancestors and early thinkers believed. Chapter Nine There are certain problems involved in the nature of reason (mind); we note that thought is the most pious thing, yet how much doubt arises if we ask how thought can be arranged to make it pious.Because if the human mind is not thinking, what is the difference from falling asleep?There is no way to be respected.However, if the reason (heart) has to rely on other things for its thinking activities, then its noumenon is not thinking activities but a potentiality, which cannot be a perfect noumenon; this is because thinking activities, rationality Only then does it attain its ultimate good.Does the essence of rationality lie in the function of thought, or does it lie in the activity of thought, let alone what it thinks?Is it thinking of itself or thinking of something else?If it is thought of something else, does it always refer to the same thing, or does it refer to different things?What difference does it make if it is dedicated to wholesome karma or if it thinks wildly?Is there anything unthinkable in the world?Obviously, "since reason has presupposed itself not to move", it should be aimed at the most sacred and precious things without changing; if it is changed, it will become a movement and will go down with each change.Therefore, first, if rationality (heart) is only potentiality rather than thinking activity, it must be assumed that the endless continuous activity should be fatigued by rationality.Secondly, it is evident that there must be something more precious than reason for reason to think about.Thinking activities are not necessarily the best things, because the past and present thoughts of people engaged in thinking activities often think of some mundane things that should not be thought of (people have seen that there are indeed unsightly things in the world, and they have also thought of them. hardly worth thinking about). Therefore, if reason is regarded as the supreme good, reason (the mind of God) can only be thought of in the divine self, and thought becomes a thought of thought in thought. But, obviously, knowledge, feeling, opinion, and understanding are always aimed at other things, and the chance of involving oneself is only accidental.If the thought and the being thought of are two different things, and the thinking activities and the thoughts obtained are different, then where does the good of the heart belong?We reply that in some cases knowledge is the object of thought.In manufacturing academics, if we don’t care about matter, we take how things are as the object of thinking; in theoretical academics, formulas or thinking activities are the object of thinking. Therefore, here in the immaterial case, thought is not different from thought activity, and thought is one with thought object. Another question remains—whether the object of thought is compound, and if so, the thought changes accordingly as it passes through the parts of that whole.We answer thus, that all immaterial things are indistinguishable—like the "mind of mind," or reason, as it is called a composite body, whose object of thought is sometimes compound, and the mind only occasionally seeks itself (as the mind is good, There is something different from the perfect good, so we have to sometimes think about the bad, but pray for it to reach the highest good in the whole life), but the god of perfect goodness has been through the ages and always thinks simply of the big self. Chapter ten We must also consider in what manner the nature of the universe maintains its good and supreme good: Nature is independent of all things, or is the order of all things.Perhaps both ways are true; for example, in an army, the goodness of an army depends on its order and its leader, and many depend on the leader; for order comes from the leader, not from the leader.Moreover, although all things are not the same, they have their own order more or less-everything is the same; all things in the world are not independent, but are related everywhere.一切悉被安排于一个目的；象在一室之内，自由人最少自由，他不做无目的的动作，一切事情或大部分事情业已为他制完了一生的行迹，而奴隶与牲畜却大部分蠢蠢而动，无所用心，并不专为某些共通的善业而一起努力；这些共通的善业，就是人类本性的组成要素，其它的机体也都相似地各有共通的善业为大家向往的目标。 我们不可忽视那些与我们不同的意见内涵着多少不可解或不可能的症结；我们也得注意到古今贤达的意见，其中那一些论点比较起来最少迷惑。大家都认为一切事物出于对成。 但"一切事物"与"出于对成"两有所误；这些思想家谁也没有说明具有对成的事物如何由对成造出；因为对成各据一端，不能相为制作。现在我们提出第三要素〈即底层〉使这疑难可得自然地解决。可是那些思想家以物质作为两个对成之一；例如某些人，以不等为相等的物质，或以众多为单一的物质。然而同一物质为一组对成的底层者不与何物为对反；这样就否定了原来的论据。又，按照我们正在评议着的这些思想家，除了元一以外，一切事物，均沾染有恶；因为恶就是两对成中的要素之一。但也有些学派认为善与恶不能算是原理；可是，在一切事物之中，善实为一至高原理，我们先提到的那一学派以善为一原理是对的，不过他们没有说明善之所以成为一个原理，究属是作为目的或动因抑或形式。 恩培多克勒也有一个悖解的观点；因为他以友〈爱〉为善，但友这一原理既为动因（它使事物结合）又为物因（它是混合物的一个部分）。现在即便这同样事物同为物质与主动原理，至少，两者的实是仍复不同。友之为原理究应属之于那一方面？斗〈争〉说是不灭坏这也悖解；斗恰正是恶的本质。 阿那克萨哥拉以善为主动原理；因为他的"理性"能致动一切事物。但动因在致动事物时必使之趋向干某一目的，这目的，必然有别于动因，我们认为极因才是善；照我们所曾说过的另一命意，则健康本身就是医师。以"理性"为善，而理性无对成，这也是悖解的。但所有谈论对成的人，若非我们捉住他们的观点以纳入于其自设之模型，他们就不应用他们的对成。他们以一切现存事物为出于同一原理，然而世上有些事物可灭坏，而有些为不灭坏，这其故何如，却没人为之说明。又，有些人以现存一切事物为出于非现存事物〈"有"生于"无"，或"实是"出于"非是"〉；另一些人，避免这样的悖解结论，就说一切事物原皆混和在一起。 再者，何以常有创生，其因何在？——这也没有人为之说明。 那些假设创生有两原理的人，必须再假设一更高原理〈动因〉；那些信有通式为创生之本的人，亦当如此，事物怎样来参加，又为何要参加通式呢？所有其他的思想家都得面对着这样的必然结论，智慧，即最高知识应有某物为之对反；至于我们，就没有这样的结论。凡属原始性〈第一〉事物均无对成；因为一切对成均具有物质，而物质所存仅为潜在；如以"无知"为任何知识的相对名词，这就得引出"无知"的对象以对向"知识"的对象；但一切原始事物没有对成。 又，可感觉事物以外倘别无事物，这就没有第一原理，也无秩序，也无创生，也无日月星辰，这就得象所有自然哲学家和神学家所说的每一原理其先将各有另一原理。但，通式或数苟确乎存在，它们也全不成为事物的原因；或者至少不是动因。又，一个延续体，其量度怎样从无量度的部分产生？ 因为数不能作为动因或式因来创作延续体。但凡事物主要地为一个制造或动变原理者，它就不作为任何对成；苟作对成，它就可能成为"非是"，或者，至少，其实现活动后于其潜能。 于是世界就不会是永恒的。但世上确有永恒实是；于是这些前提之一必须被抛弃。我们已说过怎样这些可得成为永恒。 又，"列数"，或"灵魂与身体"，或一般"形式与事物"由何而成一，——这个也没有人做过任何说明；若有人能为之说明，他就只有照我们那么说，"致动者使它们成一"。 那些主张数为第一的人进而用数来创造一类又一类的本体，为每一类赋予不同的原理，他们使宇宙诸本体成为仅是一联串的插曲（因为照他们的讲法万物各自存在，或不存在，与它物无关）；他们授给我们许多管理法则，但世界必然拒绝混乱的管理。 "其善政而出于多门，宁一王以为治。"