January 22, 2007

Book Meme

I rarely do these, but since this person is a good friend, I will - I have been tagged by Lorraine. She also chose Narnia, one of my favorites. So here is my book. Unfortunately while you caught me I was cataloging our library and in Serona's philosophy section. I have read this book too (well atleast parts of it).

Find the nearest book
Open to page 123
Type lines 6-8 of said book
Tag three others

"Since it is evident that one cannot demonstrate anything except from its own principles if what is being proved belongs to it as that thing, understanding is not this - if a thing is proved from what is true and non-demonstrable and immediate. (For one can conduct a proof in this way - as Bryson proved the squaring of the circle.) For such arguments prove in virtue of a common feature which will also belong to something else; that is why the arguments also apply to other things not of the same kind. So you do not understand it as that thing but accidentally, for otherwise the demonstration would not apply to another genus too.

We understand a thing non-accidentally when we know it in virtue of that in virtue of which it belongs, from the principles of that thing as that thing - e.g. we understand having angles equal to two right angles when we know it in virtue of that to which what has been said belongs in itself, from the principles of that thing. Hence if that too belongs in itself to what it belongs to, it is necessary for the middle to be in the same genus."

Could this author use longer sentences? Okay, ANYONE know who that is? Beuller? Beuller? Come on I gave you a clue it is in Serona's philosophy collection and interesting enough for me to read. Anyone? Anyone? I will be VERY impressed if you figure this out WITHOUT google.

I tag - Socal, annointed and Jen from Little Homeschool.


  1. I have no idea, but Touchstone guesses Hume.

  2. Hume is a good guess but not right. By the way the only reason you got out of this is because you have twins and no more time to blog :)