Several opening or closing parentheses and quotation marks are
unmatched; Transcriber has not attempted to determine where they belong.
Page 678: A line containing "How then could one," appears to have been
partly duplicated in the original. The duplicate text, which has been
removed here, was: "Essence sence possess self-existence. How then
could".
Page 690, footnote 53 (originally 1): "he might have had noth-" does
not complete on the next line and has been changed here to "he might
have had nothing".
Page 700: The two opening parentheses in '(from its "whatness" (or,
essence[72]).' share the one closing parenthesis; unchanged.
Page 744: unmatched closing quotation mark removed after "a being is
suited by its like".
Page 804: Closing parenthesis added after "single (unitary".
Page 823: "resistance corporeal nature[15])." has no matching opening
parenthesis; unchanged here.
Page 930: Phrase beginning "(each constituting a particular
intelligence" appears to share its closing parenthesis with the phrase
"(and thus exists in itself)."
Page 935: Closing parenthesis in phrase "composite as mixtures)," does
not have a matching opening parenthesis; unchanged.
Page 984: Footnote 395 (originally 53), "corporeal form, the former
that of" originally was "corporeal form, the latter that of".
Footnote Issues:
In these notes, "anchor" means the reference to a footnote, and
"footnote" means the information to which the anchor refers. Anchors
occur within the main text, while footnotes are grouped in sequence at
the end of this eBook. The structure of the original book required some
exceptions to this, as explained below.
The original text used chapter endnotes. In this eBook, they have been
combined into a single, ascending sequence based on the sequence in
which the footnotes (not the anchors) occurred in the original book,
and placed at the end of the eBook.
Three kinds of irregularities occurred in the footnotes:
1. Some footnotes are referenced by more than one anchor, so two or
more anchors may refer to the same footnote.
2. Some anchors were out of sequence, apparently because they were
added afterwards or because they are share a footnote with another
anchor. They have been renumbered to match the numbers of the footnotes
to which they refer.