an effort of thought conceive it without the flesh in which the hollowness inheres; so in like manner the mind, in thinking of mathematical forms, conceives them, though not really separated from objects, as if they were so separated. And in general, in fact, reason is the faculty which thinks things in their reality and truth. But as to whether the reason can think anything that is abstract unless it be itself abstract and independent of magnitude—that is a question which must be discussed at a later stage. CHAPTER VIII. We will now sum up the conclusions we have made about the soul. The soul, we have seen, is in a way all existing things. For the objects of existence are either objects of sense or objects of thought: and while science is in a way identical with the objects of thought, sense again is one with the objects of sense. How this comes about is a point we must investigate. Scientific thought and sense-perception thus spread themselves over objects, potential sense and science relating to things potential, actual to things actual. Now the sensitive and the scientific faculty in the soul are potentially these objects—that is to say, the objects of scientific thought on the one hand, the objects of sense on the other. It must be then either the things themselves or their forms with which they are identical. The things themselves, however, they are not: it is not the stone, but simply the form of the stone, that is in the soul. The soul, therefore, is like the hand: for just as the hand is the instrument through which we grasp other instruments, so also reason is the form through which we apprehend other forms, while sense-perception is the form of the objects of sense. [The forms of reason are not however something different from the things of sense.] As there is, according to the common opinion, no object outside the magnitudes of sense, it follows that the ideas of reason are contained in the forms of sense, both the so-called abstract conceptions and the various qualities and ρέσει λεγόμενα, καὶ ὅσα τῶν αἰσθητῶν ἕξεις καὶ πάθη. καὶ διὰ τοῦτο οὔτε μὴ αἰσθανόμενος μηθὲν οὐθὲν ἂν μάθοι οὐδὲ ξυνίοι· ὅταν τε θεωρῇ, ἀνάγκη ἅμα φάντασμά τι θεωρεῖν τὰ γὰρ φαντάσματα ὥσπερ αἰσθήματά ἐστι, πλὴν ἄνευ ὕλης. ἔστι δ ̓ ἡ φαντασία ἕτερον φάσεως καὶ το ἀποφάσεως· συμπλοκὴ γὰρ νοημάτων ἐστὶ τὸ ἀληθὲς ἢ ψεῦδος. τὰ δὲ πρῶτα νοήματα τίνι διοίσει τοῦ μὴ φαντάσματα εἶναι; ἢ οὐδὲ τἆλλα φαντάσματα, ἀλλ ̓ οὐκ ἄνευ φαντασμάτων. 20 ΙΧ. Ἐπεὶ δὲ ἡ ψυχὴ κατὰ δύο ώρισται δυνάμεις ἡ τῶν 15 ζῴων, τῷ τε κριτικῷ, ὃ διανοίας ἔργον ἐστὶ καὶ αἰσθήσεως, καὶ ἔτι τῷ κινεῖν τὴν κατὰ τόπον κίνησιν, περὶ μὲν αἰσθή σεως καὶ νοῦ διωρίσθω τοσαῦτα, περὶ δὲ τοῦ κινοῦντος, τί ποτέ ἐστι τῆς ψυχῆς, σκεπτέον, πότερον ἕν τι μόριον αὐτῆς χωριστὸν ὂν ἢ μεγέθει ἢ λόγῳ, ἢ πᾶσα ἡ ψυχή, κ κἂν εἰ μόριόν τι, πότερον ἴδιόν τι παρὰ τὰ εἰωθότα λέγε§ 2 σθαι καὶ τὰ εἰρημένα, ἢ τούτων ἔν τι. ἔχει δὲ ἀπορίαν εὐθὺς πῶς τε δεῖ μόρια λέγειν τῆς ψυχῆς καὶ πόσα. τρόπον γάρ τινα ἄπειρα φαίνεται, καὶ οὐ μόνον ἅ τινες λέγουσι διορίζοντες, λογιστικὸν καὶ θυμικὸν καὶ ἐπιθυμητι- 35 κόν, οἱ δὲ τὸ λόγον ἔχον καὶ τὸ ἄλογον· κατὰ γὰρ τὰς 10. 432 5. ἐν om. ELSUV. 8. ξυνιή LSXy. ξυνείη Tor. ξυνίοι ETUVWX. 13. οὐδὲ ταῦτα φαντ. Ald. Tor. attributes that determine sensible phenomena. And further, without the aid of sense-perception we never come to learn or understand anything: and whenever we consider something in the mind, we must at the same time contemplate some picture of the imagination: for the pictures of the imagination correspond to the impressions of the senses, except that the former are without material embodiment. At the same time imagination is something different from affirmation and negation, for it is only by a combination of ideas that we attain to truth and falsehood. But, it may be asked, in what respect will our primary ideas differ from mere images of sense? And to this, perhaps, we may reply that they are, as little as other ideas which we frame, mere images of sense, although never framed without the help of such representative images. CHAPTER IX. The soul of animals is, as we have seen before, characterized by two capacities-on the one hand, the cognitive discriminative faculty as shared by understanding and by sense, on the other hand, the faculty of local movement. The nature of sense and intellect has been so far settled: we must now investigate the motive faculty of the soul, and ask whether it is some distinct part of it, separable either actually or by abstraction, or whether, on the contrary, it be the soul taken as a whole: and further, if it be some one part of the soul, whether it be some special part different from these usually recognised and enumerated, or whether, on the contrary, it is some one of these which have been stated. An immediate question which arises is-in what sense are we to speak of parts of the soul, and how many are there of them. From one point of view such parts appear innumerable, and not confined merely to the "rational," "spirited," and "appetitive" parts which some distinguish, or the rational and irrational which others enumerate. The characteristics, on the ground of which they distinguish these, shew also other parts further dis διαφορὰς δι ̓ ἃς ταῦτα χωρίζουσι, καὶ ἄλλα φανεῖται μόρια μείζω διάστασιν ἔχοντα τούτων, περὶ ὧν καὶ νῦν εἴρηται, τό τε θρεπτικόν, ὃ καὶ τοῖς φυτοῖς ὑπάρχει καὶ πᾶσι τοῖς ζῴοις, καὶ τὸ αἰσθητικόν, ὃ οὔτε ὡς ἄλογον οὔτε 30 § 3 ὡς λόγον ἔχον θείη ἄν τις ῥᾳδίως. ἔτι δὲ τὸ φανταστικόν, ὃ τῷ μὲν εἶναι πάντων ἕτερον, τίνι δὲ τούτων ταὐτὸν ἢ ἔτε-43 ρον, ἔχει πολλὴν ἀπορίαν, εἴ τις θήσει κεχωρισμένα μό ρια τῆς ψυχῆς. πρὸς δὲ τούτοις τὸ ὀρεκτικόν, ὃ καὶ λόγῳ καὶ δυνάμει ἕτερον ἂν δόξειεν εἶναι πάντων. καὶ ἄτοπον δὴ τοῦτο διασπᾶν ἔν τε τῷ λογιστικῷ γὰρ ἡ βούλησις γίνεται, 5 καὶ ἐν τῷ ἀλόγῳ ἡ ἐπιθυμία καὶ ὁ θυμός· εἰ δὲ τρία ἡ § 4 ψυχή, ἐν ἑκάστῳ ἔσται ὄρεξις. καὶ δὴ καὶ περὶ οὗ νῦν ὁ λόγος ἐνέστηκε, τί τὸ κινοῦν κατὰ τόπον τὸ ζῷόν ἐστιν; τὴν μὲν γὰρ κατ' αὔξησιν καὶ φθίσιν κίνησιν, ἅπασιν ὑπάρχου σαν, τὸ πᾶσιν ὑπάρχον δόξειεν ἂν κινεῖν τὸ γεννητικὸν καὶ το θρεπτικόν. περὶ δὲ ἀναπνοῆς καὶ ἐκπνοῆς καὶ ὕπνου καὶ ἐγρηγόρσεως ὕστερον ἐπισκεπτέον· ἔχει γὰρ καὶ ταῦτα πολ§ 5 λὴν ἀπορίαν. ἀλλὰ περὶ τῆς κατὰ τόπον κινήσεως, τί τὸ κινοῦν τὸ ζῷον τὴν πορευτικὴν κίνησιν, σκεπτέον. ὅτι μὲν οὖν οὐχ ἡ θρεπτικὴ δύναμις, δῆλον· ἀεί τε γὰρ ἕνεκά του ἡ κίνη- 15 σις αὕτη, καὶ ἢ μετὰ φαντασίας ἢ ὀρέξεως ἐστιν· οὐθὲν γὰρ μὴ ὀρεγόμενον ἢ φεύγον κινεῖται ἀλλ ̓ ἢ βίᾳ. ἔτι κἂν τὰ φυτὰ κινητικὰ ἦν, κἂν εἶχέ τι μόριον ὀργανικὸν πρὸς τὴν § 6 κίνησιν ταύτην. ὁμοίως δὲ οὐδὲ τὸ αἰσθητικόν· πολλὰ γάρ ἐστι τῶν ζῴων ἃ αἴσθησιν μὲν ἔχει, μόνιμα δ ̓ ἐστὶ καὶ ἀκί- 10 νητα διὰ τέλους. εἰ οὖν ἡ φύσις μήτε ποιεῖ μάτην μηθὲν μήτε ἀπολείπει τι τῶν ἀναγκαίων, πλὴν ἐν τοῖς πηρώμασι 27. ταύτας EL. || φαίνεται TUWXy. τοῦτο φάναι διασπάν VW. LSTUVXY. 22. 432b 4, 5. δὴ τὸ [τοῦτο] διασπᾶν. Tor. 9. ἅπασιν ὑπάρχουσαν] αἱ πᾶσιν ὑπάρχουσι τι om. LSTUWXy. tant from each other than these are-the parts in question being just those which we have before described-the vegetative, which is an attribute at once of plants and every animal-the sentient, which cannot be easily classed either as rational or irrational— and, further, the imaginative faculty, which is different in its action and aspect from all, while with which of them is it either the same or different is a question full of perplexities, if we assume so many distinct parts of soul. Besides these, there is the conative or desiring faculty, which would seem to be different from all, both in its conception and in its capacity for action. Now, it is absurd to parcel this out in the manner indicated. The settled wish [which is one of its aspects] constitutes itself within the rational part of soul, while the appetite and passion, which are its other factors, lie within the sphere of the irrational. And thus, if there be three parts of the soul, desire will have to be present in each of them. To return, then, to our original question-What is the part that communicates local movement to the animal? As for the movements of growth and decay, they would seem, as they are the attributes of all animals, to be caused by those powers of production and nutrition which characterize all animal life: and with regard to respiration and exspiration, as also sleep and waking, we must investigate their nature on another occasion, as they are marked by many difficulties. Our present task is to investigate the nature of local movement, and see what it is that moves the animal in the way of progressive movement. Evidently it is not the mere vegetative capacity which does so. Local movement is always directed to some end, and is accompanied either by a representative image or by a desire, since nothing unless indeed its movement be the result of force— moves without seeking either to gain or to escape something. And further, plants would be capable of local movement and would possess some part instrumental for this movement. As little is it the faculty of sense which causes local movement. There are many animals which possess sense powers and yet continue throughout fixed and unmoved. But nature makes nothing without a purpose, nor leaves anything, mutilated and imperfect forms excepted, without that which it requires. Now |