Page:Mathematical collections and translations, in two tomes - Salusbury (1661).djvu/239

 videtur agnita. (In English thus:) Contrary to which position there do arise most difficult, yea inextricable second questions, such as these; That intern principle is either an accident, or a substance. If the first; what manner of accident is it? For a locomotive quality about the centre, seemeth to be hitherto acknowledged by none.

How, is there no such thing acknowledged? Is it not known to us, that all these elementary matters move round, together with the Earth? You see how this Author supposeth for true, that which is in question.

He saith, that we do not see the same; and me thinks, he hath therein reason on his side.

We see it not, because we turn round together with them.

Hear his other Argument. Quæ etiam si esset, quomodò tamen inveniretur in rebus tam contrariis? in igne, ut in aquâ; in aëre, ut in terra; in viventibus, ut in animà carentibus? [in English thus:] Which although it were, yet how could it be found in things so contrary? in the fire, as in the water? in the air, as in the earth? in living creatures, as in things wanting life?

Supposing for this time, that water and fire are contraries; as also the air and earth; (of which yet much may be said) the most that could follow from thence would be, that those motions cannot be common to them, that are contrary to one another: so that v. g. the motion upwards, which naturally agreeth to fire, cannot agree to water; but that, like as it is by nature contrary to fire: so to it that motion suiteth, which is contrary to the motion of fire, which shall be the motion deorsum; but the circular motion, which is not contrary either to the motion sursum, or to the motion deorsum, but may mix with both, as Aristotle himself affirmeth, why may it not equally suit with grave bodies and with light? The motions in the next place, which cannot be common to things alive, and dead, are those which depend on the soul: but those which belong to the body, in as much as it is elementary, and consequently participateth of the qualities of the elements, why may not they be common as well to the dead corps, as to the living body? And therefore, if the circular motion be proper to the elements, it ought to be common to the mixt bodies also.

It must needs be, that this Author holdeth, that a dead cat, falling from a window, it is not possible that a live cat also could fall; it not being a thing convenient, that a carcase should partake of the qualities which suit with things alive.

Therefore the discourse of this Author concludeth