Page:The Analyst; or, a Discourse Addressed to an Infidel Mathematician.djvu/90

80 diviible; and of all the Difficulties and Aburdities conequent thereupon?

Qu. 18. Whether from Geometrical Propoitions being general, and the Lines in Diagrams being therefore general Subtitutes or Repreentatives, it doth not follow that we may not limit or conider the number of Parts, into which uch partiticular Lines are diviible?

Qu. 19. When it is aid or implied, that uch a certain Line delineated on Paper contains more than any aignable number of Parts, whether any more in truth ought to be undertood, than that it is a Sign indifferently repreenting all finite Lines, be they ever o great. In which relative Capacity it contains, i. e. tands for more than any aignable number of Parts? And whether it be not altogether aburd to uppoe a finite Line, conidered in it elf or in its own poitive Nature, hould contain an infinite number of Parts? Qu. 20. Whether all Arguments for the infinite Diviibility of finite Extenion do