Skip to main content
↑ Back to the start
5 months 4 weeks ago

All things as subsist from nature appear to contain in themselves a principle of motion and permanency; some according to place, others according to increase and diminuation; and others according to change in quality.

0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
Book II, Ch. I, p. 88.
5 months 4 weeks ago

The first philosophers, in investigating the truth and the nature of things, wandered, as if led by ignorance, into a certain... path. Hence, they say that no being is either generated or corrupted, because it is necessary that what is generated should be generated either from being or non-being: but both these are impossible; for neither can being be generated, since it already is; and from nothing, nothing can be generated... And thus... they said that there were not many things, but that being alone had a subsistence. ...the ancient philosophers ...through this ignorance added so much to their want of knowledge, as to fancy that nothing else was generated or had a being; but they subverted all generation.

0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
Book I, Ch. IX, pp. 73-76.
5 months 4 weeks ago
This opinion... appears to be ancient... that the one, excess and defect, are the principles of things... It is not... probable that there are more than three principles... [E]ssence is one certain genus of being: so that principles will differ from each other in prior and posterior alone, but not in genus, for in one genus there is always one contrariety, and all contrarieties appear to be referred to one. That there is neither one element, therefore, nor more than two or three, is evident.
0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
Book I, Ch. VII, pp. 62-63.
5 months 4 weeks ago

Universal is known according to reason, but that which is particular, according to sense...

0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
Book I, Ch. VI, p. 59.
5 months 4 weeks ago

The ancient philosophers... all of them assert that the elements, and those things which are called by them principles, are contraries, though they establish them without reason, as if they were compelled to assert this by truth itself. They differ, however... that some of them assume prior, and others posterior principles; and some of them things more known according to reason, but others such as are more known according to sense: for some establish the hot and the cold, others the moist and the dry, others the odd and the even, and others strife and friendship, as the causes of generation. ...in a certain respect they assert the same things, and speak differently from each other. They assert different things... but the same things, so far as they speak analogously. For they assume principles from the same co-ordination; since, of contraries, some contain, and others are contained.

0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
Book I, Ch. VI, pp. 57-59.
5 months 4 weeks ago
It is necessary that every thing which is harmonized, should be generated from that which is void of harmony, and that which is void of harmony from that which is harmonized. ...But there is no difference, whether this is asserted of harmony, or of order, or composition... the same reason will apply to all of these.
0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
Book I, Ch. VI, p. 57.
5 months 4 weeks ago
But it is better to assume principles less in number and finite, as Empedocles makes them to be. All philosophers... make principles to be contraries... (for Parmenides makes principles to be hot and cold, and these he demominates fire and earth) as those who introduce as principles the rare and the dense. But Democritus makes the principles to be the solid and the void; of which the former, he says, has the relation of being, and the latter of non-being. ...it is necessary that principles should be neither produced from each other, nor from other things; and that from these all things should be generated. But these requisites are inherent in the first contraries: for, because they are first, they are not from other things; and because they are contraries, they are not from each other.
0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
Book I, Ch. VI, pp. 53-55.
5 months 4 weeks ago
The natural way of doing this [seeking scientific knowledge or explanation of fact] is to start from the things which are more knowable and obvious to us and proceed towards those which are clearer and more knowable by nature; for the same things are not 'knowable relatively to us' and 'knowable' without qualification. So in the present inquiry we must follow this method and advance from what is more obscure by nature, but clearer to us, towards what is more clear and more knowable by nature. Now what is to us plain and obvious at first is rather confused masses, the elements and principles of which became known to us by later analysis...
0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
A.1, 184a.16 sqq, [http://classics.mit.edu//Aristotle/physics.html source:], Book I, Part 1, Tr. R. P. Hardie, R. K. Gaye.
5 months 4 weeks ago
The science which has to do with nature clearly concerns itself for the most part with bodies and magnitudes and their properties and movements, but also with the principles of this sort of substance, as many as they may be.
0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
On the Heavens Book I, pg. 1 (350 BCE)
5 months 4 weeks ago
We may assume the superiority ceteris paribus [all things being equal] of the demonstration which derives from fewer postulates or hypotheses—in short from fewer premisses; for... given that all these are equally well known, where they are fewer knowledge will be more speedily acquired, and that is a desideratum. The argument implied in our contention that demonstration from fewer assumptions is superior may be set out in universal form...
0
⚖0
▼ Source
source
Book I, Part 25 | Also known as Occam's razor or the principle of parsimony / economy (lex parsimoniae) | Richard McKeon (tr.) (1963), p. 150

CivilSimian.com created by AxiomaticPanic, CivilSimian, Kalokagathia