ARGYROPYLUS | BESSARIO

...[en]tirety original: "tum," likely completing "totum" from the previous page, odd and even, one and multitude, right and left, male and female, that which is at rest and that which is moved, straight and curved, light and darkness, good and evil, square and oblong.

¶ In this way, Alcmaeon of Croton A 5th-century BCE medical theorist and philosopher who was one of the first to practice dissection. also seems to have thought; for either he took this opinion from them, or they from him. For Alcmaeon was active when Pythagoras was already an old man; and he proposed a similar view. Indeed, he says that most human things come in pairs, calling them "contrarieties"—not defined as the Pythagoreans did, but any whatever, such as white and black, sweet and bitter, good and evil, great and small. He, therefore, spoke indefinitely about the rest.

¶ But the Pythagoreans stated both how many and what these contrarieties are.

¶ From both of these, then, one can gather this much: that the principles of things are contraries; and from the Pythagoreans, specifically how many and what they are. However, how it is possible for these to be reduced to the causes already mentioned Aristotle is referring to his four causes: material, formal, efficient, and final. has not been clearly articulated by them. Yet they seem to arrange these elements in the category of matter original: "materiei specie"; for they say that substance is composed and fashioned out of these, as from the things inherent within it.

¶ From these early thinkers who claimed there are many elements of nature, one can sufficiently perceive their intent. There are others, however, who spoke of the universe as if it were of a single nature; yet they did not all speak in the same way, neither regarding the excellence of the theory nor regarding that which is according to nature. Indeed, the discourse concerning them is by no means suited to the present consideration of causes. For they do not behave like certain natural philosophers who, having assumed the "One" to be the existing thing, nevertheless generate things from it as from matter; these speak in a different way. For while the others, in generating the universe, add motion, these [monists] say the universe is immobile.

¶ Nevertheless, this much may be said as it is suited to our consideration. For Parmenides The most famous of the Eleatic philosophers, who argued that change is an illusion and reality is a single, unchanging 'One'. seems to have touched upon the "One" according to reason, while Melissus An Eleatic philosopher who defended Parmenides' views but argued the "One" must be infinite in space. touched upon it according to matter. For this reason, the former says the "One" is finite, while the latter says it is infinite. Xenophanes, however, was the first before these to introduce the "One" (for Parmenides is said to have been his pupil); yet he said nothing clearly, nor does he seem to have touched upon either of these natures, but looking toward the whole heaven:

...[en]tirety, odd/even, one/many, right/left, male/female, rest/motion, straight/curved, light/darkness, good/evil, square/longer on one side.

¶ In the same way also Alcmaeon 57
Alcmaeon

of Croton seems to have thought; and either he borrowed this opinion from them, or they from him. For Alcmaeon lived in the time of the now-elderly Pythagoras, and he asserted things similarly to them. For he says that human affairs are for the most part divided into two: calling them "contrarieties," though not (as they did) distinct ones, but whatever they might be—for instance, white and black, sweet and bitter, good and evil, small and great. Thus, he poured out an indistinct discourse regarding the rest. The Pythagoreans, however, asserted both how many and what the contrarieties are.

¶ From both of these, therefore, 58 one can only accept this: that the principles of beings are contraries. But how many and what they are, can be found from the others alone. Truly, how those are applied to the stated causes has not been clearly determined by them. They seem, however, to place the elements in the category of matter. For they say substance consists of and is shaped from these as intrinsic parts.

¶ Thus, from these 59 ancient thinkers who say there are many elements of nature, one can sufficiently observe their mind. But there are those who have asserted that the universe is as if it were one nature, yet not all in the same way. Neither in regard to what is good, nor to what is according to nature. In the present consideration of causes, therefore, their discourse is in no way fitting. For they do not, like some of the physicists, assume that "Being" itself is one and yet generate things from the one as from matter; rather, these speak in another way. For while the physicists, when they generate the universe, add motion, these say it is immobile.

¶ Nevertheless, it is to some extent 60 proper to the present investigation. For Parmenides seems to have touched upon the "One" according to reason; Melissus, however,
Parmenides. Melissus. Xenophanes.

according to matter. Wherefore the former says it is finite, while the latter says it is infinite. Xenophanes, although prior to these, had posited the "One" (for Parmenides is said to have been his listener); yet he said nothing clearly, and seems to have touched upon neither of these natures, but looking toward the whole heaven: