Page:Discourse Concerning the Natation of Bodies.djvu/64

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
62
Galileus Of the

and thinne Figures: If all indifferently, then every Body shall rest: because every Body hath some Figure, which is false: but if some particular Figures only may be in some manner a Cause of Rest, as, for Example, the broad, then the others would be in some manner the Causes of Motion: for if from seeing some Bodies of a contracted Figure move, which after dilated into Plates rest, may be inferred, that the Amplitude of Figure hath a part in the Cause of that Rest; so from seeing such like Figures rest, which afterwards contracted move, it may with the same reason be affirmed, that the united and contracted Figure, hath a part in causing Motion, as the remover of that which impeded it: The which again is directly opposite to what Aristotle saith, namely, that Figures are not the Causes of Motion. Besides, if Aristotle had admitted and not excluded Figures from being Causes of not moving in some Bodies, which moulded into another Figure would move, he would have impertinently propounded in a dubitative manner, in the words immediately following, whence it is, that the large and thinne Plates of Lead or Iron, rest upon the water, since the Cause was apparent, namely, the Amplitude of Figure. Let us conclude, therefore, that the meaning of Aristotlein this place is to affirm, that Figures are not the Causes of absolutely moving or not moving, but only of moving swiftly or slowly: which we ought the rather to believe, in regard it is indeed a most true conceipt and opinion. Now the mind of Aristotle being such, and appearing by consequence, rather contrary at the first sight, then favourable to the assertion of the Oponents, it is necessary, that their Interpretation be not exactly the same with that, but such, as being in part understood by some of them, and in part by others, was set down: and it may easily be indeed so, being an Interpretation consonent to the sence of the more famous Interpretors, which is, that the Adverbe Simply or Absolutely, put in the Text, ought not to be joyned to the Verbe to Move, but with the Noun Causes: so that the purport of Aristotles words, is to affirm, That Figures are not the Causes absolutely of moving or not moving, but yet are Causes Secundum quid, viz in some sort; by which means, they are called Auxiliary and Concomitant Causes: and this Proposition is received and asserted as true by Signor Buonamico Lib. 5. Cap. 28. where he thus writes. There are other Causes concomitant, by which some things float, and others sink, among which the Figures of Bodies hath the first place, &c.

Concerning this Proposition, I meet with many doubts and difficulties, for which me thinks the words of Aristotle are not capable of such a construction and sence, and the difficulties are these.

First in the order and disposure of the words of Aristotle, the particle Simpliciter, or if you will absoluté, is conjoyned with the Verbto