De natura rationis non est res ut contingentes sed ut necessarias contemplari.
Concerning the nature of reason it is not that it observes things as contingent but as necessary.
DEMONSTRATIO: De natura rationis est res vere percipere (per propositionem 41 hujus) nempe (per axioma 6 partis I) ut in se sunt hoc est (per propositionem 29 partis I) non ut contingentes sed ut necessarias. Q.E.D.
Demonstration: Concerning the nature of reason it is that it truly perceives things (by IIP41), namely (by IA6) that they are in themselves, that is (by IP29) not as contingent buy as necessary.
COROLLARIUM I: Hinc sequitur a sola imaginatione pendere quod res tam respectu præteriti quam futuri ut contingentes contemplemur.
Corollary 1: From this it follows that it depends on the imagination alone that we observe things as contingent not only with respect to the past but also to the future.
SCHOLIUM: Qua autem ratione hoc fiat paucis explicabo. Ostendimus supra (propositione 17 hujus cum ejus corollario) mentem, quamvis res non existant, eas tamen semper ut sibi præsentes imaginari nisi causæ occurrant quæ earum præsentem existentiam secludant. Deinde (propositione 18 hujus) ostendimus quod si corpus humanum semel a duobus corporibus externis simul affectum fuit, ubi mens postea eorum alterutrum imaginabitur, statim et alterius recordabitur hoc est ambo ut sibi præsentia contemplabitur nisi causæ occurrant quæ eorum præsentem existentiam secludant. Præterea nemo dubitat quin etiam tempus imaginemur nempe ex eo quod corpora alia aliis tardius vel celerius vel æque celeriter moveri imaginemur. Ponamus itaque puerum qui heri prima vice hora matutina viderit Petrum, meridiana autem Paulum et vespertina Simeonem atque hodie iterum matutina hora Petrum. Ex propositione 18 hujus patet quod simulac matutinam lucem videt, illico solem eandem cæli quam die præcedenti viderit partem percurrentem sive diem integrum et simul cum tempore matutino Petrum, cum meridiano autem Paulum et cum vespertino Simeonem imaginabitur hoc est Pauli et Simeonis existentiam cum relatione ad futurum tempus imaginabitur et contra si hora vespertina Simeonem videat, Paulum et Petrum ad tempus præteritum referet, eosdem scilicet simul cum tempore præterito imaginando atque hæc eo constantius quo sæpius eos eodem hoc ordine viderit. Quod si aliquando contingat ut alia quadam vespera loco Simeonis Jacobum videat, tum sequenti mane cum tempore vespertino jam Simeonem jam Jacobum, non vero ambos simul imaginabitur. Nam alterutrum tantum, non autem ambos simul tempore vespertino vidisse supponitur. Fluctuabitur itaque ejus imaginatio et cum futuro tempore vespertino jam hunc jam illum imaginabitur hoc est neutrum certo sed utrumque contingenter futurum contemplabitur. Atque hæc imaginationis fluctuatio eadem erit si imaginatio rerum sit quas eodem modo cum relatione ad tempus præteritum vel præsens contemplamur et consequenter res tam ad tempus præsens quam ad præteritum vel futurum relatas ut contingentes imaginabimur.
Scholium: Moreover, I will with a few words by what way this happens. We have shown above (IIP7/C) the mind, although things do not exist, nevertheless always imagines things as if present to itself unless causes happen which exclude their present existence. Next (IIP18) we have shown that if the human body has once been affected by two external bodies at the same time, when the mind later imagines one of them, immediately remembers the other, that is observes both as present to itself unless causes occur which preclude their present existence. Meanwhile no one doubts that we do not also imagine time, namely that some bodies move more quickly than others, some more slowly and some equally quickly. Let us suppose that a boy who saw Peter yesterday morning, then Paul in midday and Simon in the evening and then Peter today in the morning. From IIP18, it is clear that as soon as he sees the morning light, he will imagine the same sun in the spot of the sky which he saw a passing part on the preceding day or even more the whole day and at the same time Peter with the morning, then Paul with midday and Simon with evening, that is he will imagine the existence of Paul and Simon in relation to a future time and, in contrast, if he might see Simon in the evening, he might refer Paul and Peter to an earlier time, of course by imagining the same ones together with the earlier time and these things the more constantly the more often he will see them in this same order. Because if it happens some other time that he might see on another certain evening Jacob in place of Simon, then on the following morning he will imagine now Simon, now Jacob with the evening time, indeed not both together. For it is supposed that he has seen one of the two not both together at the evening time. Thus his imagination will fluctuate and will imagine now this now that with a future evening time, that is, he will observe neither as certain future but both as contingent. And this fluctuation of imagination will be the same if the imagination of things which we observe in the same way with relation to an earlier or present time and consequently we imagine things relating to a present time or an earlier or future time as contingent.
COROLLARIUM II: De natura rationis est res sub quadam æternitatis specie percipere.
Concerning the nature of reason it is that it perceives things under a certain species of eternity.
DEMONSTRATIO: De natura enim rationis est res ut necessarias et non ut contingentes contemplari (per propositionem præcedentem). Hanc autem rerum necessitatem (per propositionem 41 hujus) vere hoc est (per axioma 6 partis I) ut in se est, percipit. Sed (per propositionem 16 partis I) hæc rerum necessitas est ipsa Dei æternæ naturæ necessitas; ergo de natura rationis est res sub hac æternitatis specie contemplari. Adde quod fundamenta rationis notiones sint (per propositionem 38 hujus) quæ illa explicant quæ omnibus communia sunt quæque (per propositionem 37 hujus) nullius rei singularis essentiam explicant quæque propterea absque ulla temporis relatione sed sub quadam æternitatis specie debent concipi. Q.E.D.
Concerning the nature of reason it is that it observes things as necessary and not as contingent (by IIP43). Moreover it perceives this necessity of things (by IIP41) truly, that is (by IA6) as in itself. But (IP16) this necessity of things is the necessity itself of God's eternal nature; thus concerning the nature of reason is that is observes things under the this species of eternity. Ad what are the fundament notions of reason (by IIP38) which explicate those things which are common to all and which (by IIP37) do not explicate the essence of any singular thing and besides which ought be conceived without any relation of time but under a certain species of eternity.
No comments:
Post a Comment