第26章

Itisclearalsofromtheseveryfactswhatconsequence

confrontsthosewhosaytheIdeasaresubstancescapableofseparate

existence，andatthesametimemaketheFormconsistofthegenusand

thedifferentiae。ForiftheFormsexistand’animal’ispresentin

’man’and’horse’，itiseitheroneandthesameinnumber，or

different。(Informulaitisclearlyone；forhewhostatesthe

formulawillgothroughtheformulaineithercase。)Ifthenthere

isa’man-in-himself’whoisa’this’andexistsapart，thepartsalso

ofwhichheconsists，e。g。’animal’and’two-footed’，mustindicate

’thises’，andbecapableofseparateexistence，andsubstances；

therefore’animal’，aswellas’man’，mustbeofthissort。

Now(1)ifthe’animal’in’thehorse’andin’man’isoneandthe

same，asyouarewithyourself，(a)howwilltheoneinthingsthat

existapartbeone，andhowwillthis’animal’escapebeingdivided

evenfromitself？

Further，(b)ifitistosharein’two-footed’and

’many-footed’，animpossibleconclusionfollows；forcontrary

attributeswillbelongatthesametimetoitalthoughitisoneanda

’this’。Ifitisnottoshareinthem，whatistherelationimplied

whenonesaystheanimalistwo-footedorpossessedoffeet？But

perhapsthetwothingsare’puttogether’andare’incontact’，orare

’mixed’。Yetalltheseexpressionsareabsurd。

But(2)supposetheFormtobedifferentineachspecies。Then

therewillbepracticallyaninfinitenumberofthingswhosesubstance

isanimal’；foritisnotbyaccidentthat’man’has’animal’for

oneofitselements。Further，manythingswillbe’animal-itself’。For

(i)the’animal’ineachspecieswillbethesubstanceofthespecies；

foritisafternothingelsethatthespeciesiscalled；ifitwere，

thatotherwouldbeanelementin’man’，i。e。wouldbethegenusof

man。Andfurther，(ii)alltheelementsofwhich’man’iscomposed

willbeIdeas。Noneofthem，then，willbetheIdeaofonethingand

thesubstanceofanother；thisisimpossible。The’animal’，then，

presentineachspeciesofanimalswillbeanimal-itself。Further，

fromwhatisthis’animal’ineachspeciesderived，andhowwillitbe

derivedfromanimal-itself？Orhowcanthis’animal’，whoseessenceis

simplyanimality，existapartfromanimal-itself？

Further，(3)inthecaseofsensiblethingsboththese

consequencesandothersstillmoreabsurdfollow。If，then，these

consequencesareimpossible，clearlytherearenotFormsofsensible

thingsinthesenseinwhichsomemaintaintheirexistence。

Sincesubstanceisoftwokinds，theconcretethingandthe

formula(Imeanthatonekindofsubstanceistheformulatakenwith

thematter，whileanotherkindistheformulainitsgenerality)，

substancesintheformersensearecapableofdestruction(forthey

arecapablealsoofgeneration)，butthereisnodestructionofthe

formulainthesensethatitiseverincourseofbeingdestroyed(for

thereisnogenerationofiteither；thebeingofhouseisnot

generated，butonlythebeingofthishouse)，butwithoutgeneration

anddestructionformulaeareandarenot；forithasbeenshownthat

noonebegetsnormakesthese。Forthisreason，also，thereisneither

definitionofnordemonstrationaboutsensibleindividual

substances，becausetheyhavematterwhosenatureissuchthatthey

arecapablebothofbeingandofnotbeing；forwhichreasonallthe

individualinstancesofthemaredestructible。Ifthendemonstration

isofnecessarytruthsanddefinitionisascientificprocess，andif，

justasknowledgecannotbesometimesknowledgeandsometimes

ignorance，butthestatewhichvariesthusisopinion，sotoo

demonstrationanddefinitioncannotvarythus，butitisopinion

thatdealswiththatwhichcanbeotherwisethanasitis，clearly

therecanneitherbedefinitionofnordemonstrationaboutsensible

individuals。Forperishingthingsareobscuretothosewhohavethe

relevantknowledge，whentheyhavepassedfromourperception；and

thoughtheformulaeremaininthesoulunchanged，therewillnolonger

beeitherdefinitionordemonstration。Andsowhenoneofthe

definition-mongersdefinesanyindiv