| | |
| Paragraph 1 |
(1) First then with regard to what we mentioned first, does it belong
to one or to more sciences to investigate all the kinds of causes? |
| Paragraph 2 |
Further, there are many things to which not all the principles pertain. |
| Paragraph 3 |
But if there are several sciences of the causes, and a different
science for each different principle, which of these sciences should
be said to be that which we seek, or which of the people who possess
them has the most scientific knowledge of the object in question? |
| Paragraph 4 |
But (2), taking the starting-points of demonstration as well as the
causes, it is a disputable question whether they are the object of
one science or of more (by the starting-points of demonstration I
mean the common beliefs, on which all men base their proofs); |
| Paragraph 5 |
But if the science of substance and the science which deals with
the axioms are different, which of them is by nature more authoritative
and prior? |
| Paragraph 6 |
(3) In general, do all substances fall under one science or under
more than one? |
| Paragraph 7 |
(5) Further, does our investigation deal with substances alone or
also with their attributes? |
| Paragraph 8 |
(4) Further, must we say that sensible substances alone exist, or
that there are others besides these? |
| Paragraph 9 |
Further, if we are to posit besides the Forms and the sensibles the
intermediates between them, we shall have many difficulties. |
| Paragraph 10 |
But on the other hand astronomy cannot be dealing with perceptible
magnitudes nor with this heaven above us. |
HTML by 
created 1996/11/25 modified 2009/04/26