COMPOSITION AND DECOMPOSITION ARE NOT ALTERATIONS.

Shall we have to admit that composition and decomposition are

movements which exist by themselves, and analyze alteration into them?

Condensation is explained as undergoing an alteration; that means, as

becoming composite. On the other hand, rarefaction is also explained

as undergoing an alteration, namely, that of decomposition; when, for

instance, one mingles water and wine, each of these two things becomes

other than it was, and it is the composition which has operated the

alteration. We will answer that here composition and decomposition no

doubt precede certain alterations, but these alterations are something

different than compositions and decompositions. Other alterations

(certainly) are not compositions and decompositions, for neither can

condensation nor rarefaction be reduced to these movements, nor are

they composed of them. Otherwise, it would be necessary to acknowledge

the (existence of) emptiness. Besides, how could you explain blackness

and whiteness, as being composed of composition and decomposition?

This doctrine would destroy all colors and qualities, or at least,

the greater part of them; for if all alteration, that means, all

change of quality, consisted in a composition or decomposition, the

result would not be the production of a quality, but an aggregation or

disaggregation. How indeed could you explain the movements of teaching

and studying by mere "composition"?

Plotinos: Complete Works, v. 3 In Chronological Order, Grouped in Four Periods · 第 401 / 442 题