4. RELATION; THE STOICS CONFUSE THE NEW WITH THE ANTERIOR.

31. If the Stoics did not, along with the other discussed categories,

reduce relation to a common kind, there might be good grounds to

examine whether they attributed substantial (or, hypostatic) reality

to these manners of "being"; for often, they do not attribute to them

any. But what is to be said of their confusing things new and anterior

in one same classification? This is evidently an absurdity; for surely

one and two must exist before the half or the double.

As to the philosophers (Plato, for instance), who have taught other

opinions about essences and their principles, considered as finite or

infinite, corporeal or incorporeal, or both simultaneously corporeal

or incorporeal, we will examine each of these opinions separately,

considering also the historic objections of the ancient (philosophers).

Plotinos: Complete Works, v. 3 In Chronological Order, Grouped in Four Periods · 第 288 / 442 题