the six enneads-第30部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！


　is　accident　and　not　Act；　all　but　what　is　Idea…form　of　the　Reality；　all　that　merely　confers　pattern；　all　this　is　Quality：　qualities　are　characteristics　and　modes　other　than　those　constituting　the　substratum　of　a　thing。　　　　　But　the　Archetypes　of　all　such　qualities；　the　foundation　in　which　they　exist　primarily；　these　are　Activities　of　the　Intellectual　Beings。　　　　　And；　one　and　the　same　thing　cannot　be　both　Quality　and　non…quality：　the　thing　void　of　Real…Existence　is　Quality；　but　the　thing　accompanying　Reality　is　either　Form　or　Activity：　there　is　no　longer　self…identity　when；　from　having　its　being　in　itself；　anything　comes　to　be　in　something　else　with　a　fall　from　its　standing　as　Form　and　Activity。　　　　　Finally；　anything　which　is　never　Form　but　always　accidental　to　something　else　is　Quality　unmixed　and　nothing　more。　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　SEVENTH　TRACTATE。

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　ON　COMPLETE　TRANSFUSION。

　　　　1。　Some　enquiry　must　be　made　into　what　is　known　as　the　complete　transfusion　of　material　substances。　　　　　Is　it　possible　that　fluid　be　blended　with　fluid　in　such　a　way　that　each　penetrate　the　other　through　and　through？　or…　a　difference　of　no　importance　if　any　such　penetration　occurs…　that　one　of　them　pass　completely　through　the　other？　　　　　Those　that　admit　only　contact　need　not　detain　us。　They　are　dealing　with　mixture；　not　with　the　coalescence　which　makes　the　total　a　thing　of　like　parts；　each　minutest　particle　being　composed　of　all　the　combined　elements。　　　　　But　there　are　those　who；　admitting　coalescence；　confine　it　to　the　qualities：　to　them　the　material　substances　of　two　bodies　are　in　contact　merely；　but　in　this　contact　of　the　matter　they　find　footing　for　the　qualities　of　each。　　　　　Their　view　is　plausible　because　it　rejects　the　notion　of　total　admixture　and　because　it　recognizes　that　the　masses　of　the　mixing　bodies　must　be　whittled　away　if　there　is　to　be　mixture　without　any　gap；　if；　that　is　to　say；　each　substance　must　be　divided　within　itself　through　and　through　for　complete　interpenetration　with　the　other。　Their　theory　is　confirmed　by　the　cases　in　which　two　mixed　substances　occupy　a　greater　space　than　either　singly；　especially　a　space　equal　to　the　conjoined　extent　of　each：　for；　as　they　point　out；　in　an　absolute　interpenetration　the　infusion　of　the　one　into　the　other　would　leave　the　occupied　space　exactly　what　it　was　before　and；　where　the　space　occupied　is　not　increased　by　the　juxtaposition；　they　explain　that　some　expulsion　of　air　has　made　room　for　the　incoming　substance。　They　ask　further；　how　a　minor　quantity　of　one　substance　can　be　spread　out　so　as　to　interpenetrate　a　major　quantity　of　another。　In　fact　they　have　a　multitude　of　arguments。　　　　　Those；　on　the　other　hand；　that　accept　〃complete　transfusion；〃　might　object　that　it　does　not　require　the　reduction　of　the　mixed　things　to　fragments；　a　certain　cleavage　being　sufficient：　thus；　for　instance；　sweat　does　not　split　up　the　body　or　even　pierce　holes　in　it。　And　if　it　is　answered　that　this　may　well　be　a　special　decree　of　Nature　to　allow　of　the　sweat　exuding；　there　is　the　case　of　those　manufactured　articles；　slender　but　without　puncture；　in　which　we　can　see　a　liquid　wetting　them　through　and　through　so　that　it　runs　down　from　the　upper　to　the　under　surface。　How　can　this　fact　be　explained；　since　both　the　liquid　and　the　solid　are　bodily　substances？　Interpenetration　without　disintegration　is　difficult　to　conceive；　and　if　there　is　such　mutual　disintegration　the　two　must　obviously　destroy　each　other。　　　　　When　they　urge　that　often　there　is　a　mixing　without　augmentation　their　adversaries　can　counter　at　once　with　the　exit　of　air。　　　　　When　there　is　an　increase　in　the　space　occupied；　nothing　refutes　the　explanation…　however　unsatisfying…　that　this　is　a　necessary　consequence　of　two　bodies　bringing　to　a　common　stock　their　magnitude　equally　with　their　other　attributes：　size　is　as　permanent　as　any　other　property；　and；　exactly　as　from　the　blending　of　qualities　there　results　a　new　form　of　thing；　the　combination　of　the　two；　so　we　find　a　new　magnitude；　the　blending　gives　us　a　magnitude　representing　each　of　the　two。　But　at　this　point　the　others　will　answer；　〃If　you　mean　that　substance　lies　side　by　side　with　substance　and　mass　with　mass；　each　carrying　its　quantum　of　magnitude；　you　are　at　one　with　us：　if　there　were　complete　transfusion；　one　substance　sinking　its　original　magnitude　in　the　other；　we　would　have　no　longer　the　case　of　two　lines　joined　end　to　end　by　their　terminal　points　and　thus　producing　an　increased　extension；　we　would　have　line　superimposed　upon　line　with；　therefore；　no　increase。〃　　　　　But　a　lesser　quantity　permeates　the　entire　extent　of　a　larger；　the　smallest　is　sunk　in　the　greatest；　transfusion　is　exhibited　unmistakably。　In　certain　cases　it　is　possible　to　pretend　that　there　is　no　total　penetration　but　there　are　manifest　examples　leaving　no　room　for　the　pretence。　In　what　they　say　of　the　spreading　out　of　masses　they　cannot　be　thought　very　plausible；　the　extension　would　have　to　be　considerable　indeed　in　the　case　of　a　very　small　quantity　＇to　be　in　true　mixture　with　a　very　large　mass＇；　for　they　do　not　suggest　any　such　extension　by　change　as　that　of　water　into　air。　　　　　2。　This；　however；　raises　a　problem　deserving　investigation　in　itself：　what　has　happened　when　a　definite　magnitude　of　water　becomes　air；　and　how　do　we　explain　the　increase　of　volume？　But　for　the　present　we　must　be　content　with　the　matter　thus　far　discussed　out　of　all　the　varied　controversy　accumulated　on　either　side。　　　　　It　remains　for　us　to　make　out　on　our　own　account　the　true　explanation　of　the　phenomenon　of　mixing；　without　regard　to　the　agreement　or　disagreement　of　that　theory　with　any　of　the　current　opinions　mentioned。　　　　　When　water　runs　through　wool　or　when　papyrus…pulp　gives　up　its　moisture　why　is　not　the　moist　content　expressed　to　the　very　last　drop　or　even；　without　question　of　outflow；　how　can　we　possibly　think　that　in　a　mixture　the　relation　of　matter　with　matter；　mass　with　mass；　is　contact　and　that　only　the　qualities　are　fused？　The　pulp　is　not　merely　in　touch　with　water　outside　it　or　even　in　its　pores；　it　is　wet　through　and　through　so　that　every　particle　of　its　matter　is　drenched　in　that　quality。　Now　if　the　matter　is　soaked　all　through　with　the　quality；　then　the　water　is　everywhere　in　the　pulp。　　　　　〃Not　the　water；　the　quality　of　the　water。〃　　　　　But　then；　where　is　the　water？　and　＇if　only　a　quality　has　entered＇　why　is　there　a　change　of　volume？　The　pulp　has　been　expanded　by　the　addition：　that　is　to　say　it　has　received　magnitude　from　the　incoming　substance　but　if　it　has　received　the　magnitude；　magnitude　has　been　added；　and　a　magnitude　added　has　not　been　absorbed；　therefore　the　combined　matter　must　occupy　two　several　places。　And　as　the　two　mixing　substances　communicate　quality　and　receive　matter　in　mutual　give　and　take　so　they　may　give　and　take　magnitude。　Indeed　when　a　quality　meets　another　quality　it　suffers　some　change；　it　is　mixed；　and　by　that　admixture　it　is　no　longer　pure　and　therefore　no　longer　itself　but　a　blunter　thing；　whereas　magnitude　joining　magnitude　retains　its　full　strength。　　　　　But　let　it　be　understood　how　we　came　to　say　that　body　passing　through　and　through　another　body　must　produce　disintegration；　while　we　make　qualities　pervade　their　substances　without　producing　disintegration：　the　bodilessness　of　qualities　is　the　reason。　Matter；　too；　is　bodiless：　it　may；　then；　be　supposed　that　as　Matter　pervades　everything　so　the　bodiless　qualities　associated　with　it…　as　long　as　they　are　few…　have　the　power　of　penetration　without　disintegration。　Anything　solid　would　be　stopped　either　in　virtue　of　the　fact　that　a　solid　has　the　precise　quality　which　forbids　it　to　penetrate　or　in　that　the　mere　coexistence　of　too　many　qualities　in　Matter　＇constitutes　density　and　so＇　produces　the　same　inhibition。　　　　　If；　then；　what　we　call　a　dense　body　is　so　by　reason　of　the　presence　of　many　qualities；　that　plenitude　of　qualities　will　be　the　cause　＇of　the　inhibition＇。　　　　　If　on　the　other　hand　density　is　itself　a　quality　like　what　they　call　corporeity；　then　the　cause　will　be　that　particular　quality。　　　　　This　would　mean　that　the　qualities　of　two　substances　do　not　bring　about　the　mixing　by　merely　being　qualities　but　by　being　apt　to　mixture；　nor　does　Matter　refuse　to　enter　into　a　mixing　as　Matter　but　as　being　associated　with　a　quality　repugnant　to　mixture；　and　this　all　the　more　since　it　has　no　magnitude　of　its　own　but　only　does　not　reject　magnitude。　　　　　3。　We　have　thus　covered　our　main　ground；　but　since　corporeity　has　been　mentioned；　we　must　consider　its　nature：　is　it　the　conjunction　of　all　the　qualities　or　is　it　an　Idea；　or　Reason…Principle；　whose　presence　in　Matter　constitutes　a　body？　　　　　Now　if　body　is　the　compound；　the　thing　made　up　of　all　the　required　qualities　plus　Matter；　then　corporeity　is　nothing　more　than　their　conjunction。　　　　　And　if　it　is　a　Reason…Principle；　one　whose　incoming　constitutes　the　body；　then　clearly　this　Principle　contains　embraced　within　itself　all　the　qualities。　If　this　Reason…Principle　is　to　be　no　mere　principle　of　definition　exhibiting　the　nature　of　a　thing　but　a　veritable　Reason　constituting　the　thing；　then　it　cannot　itself　contain　Matter　but　must　encircle　Matter；　and　by　being　present　to　Matter　elaborate　the　body：　thus　the　body　will　be　Matter　associated　with　an　indwelling　Reason…Principle　which　will　be　in　itself　immaterial；　pure　Idea；　even　though　irremoveably　attached　to　the　body。　It　is　not　to　be　confounded　with　that　other　Principle　in　man…　treated　elsewhere…　which　dwells　in　the　Intellectual　World　by　right　of　being　itself　an　Intellectual　Principle。　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　EIGHTH　TRACTATE。

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　WHY　DISTANT　OBJECTS　APPEAR　SMALL。

　　　　1。　Seen　from　a　distance；　objects　appear　reduced　and　close　together；　however　far　apart　they　be：　within　easy　range；　their　sizes　and　the　distances　that　separate　them　are　observed　correctly。　　　　　Distant　objects　show　in　this　reduction　because　they　must　be　drawn　together　for　vision　and　the　light　must　be　concentrated　to　suit　the　size　of　the　pupil；　besides；　as　we　are　placed　farther　and　farther　away　from　the　material　mass　under　observation；　it　is　more　and　more　the　bare　form　that　reaches　us；　stripped；　so　to　speak；　of　magnitude　as　of　all　other　quality。　　　　　Or　it　may　be　that　we　appreciate　the　magnitude　o