ACTUAL DIVISION INTO PARTS WOULD BE TANTAMOUNT TO A DENIAL OF THE WHOLE.

Besides, our opponents have granted that every part of the universal

Soul conforms to the whole. Now, in continuous quantities, it is by

no means necessary that the part should resemble the whole. Thus,

in the circle and the quadrilateral (the parts are not circles or

quadrilaterals). All the parts of the divided object (from which a part

is taken) are not even similar to each other, but vary in manifold

ways, such as the different triangles of which a single triangle might

be composed. Our opponents also acknowledge that the universal Soul is

composed of parts that conform to the whole. Now, in a line, one part

might also be a line, while differing from the whole in magnitude.

But when we speak of the soul, if the difference of the part from

the whole consisted in a difference of size, the soul would be a

magnitude and a body; for then she would differentiate in quantity by

psychic characteristics. But this would be impossible if all souls be

considered similar and universal. It is evident that the soul cannot,

like magnitudes, be further divided; and even our opponents would not

claim that the universal Soul is thus divided into parts. This would

amount to destroying the universal Soul, and reducing her to a mere

name, if indeed in this system a prior universal (Soul) can at all be

said to exist. This would place her in the position of wine, which

might be distributed in several jars, saying that the part of the wine

contained in each of them is a portion of the whole.[104]

NOR IS THE SOUL A PART IN THE SENSE THAT ONE PROPOSITION IS A PART OF A

SCIENCE.

Nor should we (apply to the soul) the word "part" in the sense that

some single proposition is a part of the total science. In this

case the total science does not remain any less the same (when it

is divided), and its division is only as it were the production and

actualization of each of its component parts. Here each proposition

potentially contains the total science, and (in spite of its division),

the total science remains whole.

THE DIFFERENCE OF FUNCTIONS OF THE WORLD-SOUL AND INDIVIDUAL SOULS

MAKES ENTIRE DIVISION BETWEEN THEM IMPOSSIBLE.

If such be the relation of the universal Soul to the other souls, the

universal Soul, whose parts are such, will not belong to any particular

being, but will subsist in herself. No longer will she be the soul

of the world. She will even rank with the number of souls considered

parts. As all souls would conform to each other, they would, on the

same grounds, be parts of the Soul that is single and identical. Then

it would be inexplicable that some one soul should be Soul of the

world, while some other soul should be one of the parts of the world.

ARE INDIVIDUAL SOULS PART OF THE WORLD-SOUL AS IS THE LOCAL

CONSCIOUSNESS OF SOME PART OF THE BODY TO THE WHOLE CONSCIOUSNESS?

3. Are individual souls parts of the universal Soul as, in any living

organism, the soul that animates (or vivifies) the finger is a part of

the entire soul back of the whole animal? This hypothesis would force

us to the conclusion either that there is no soul outside of the body,

or that the whole universal Soul exists entire, not in a body, but

outside of the body of the world. This question deserves consideration.

Let us do so by an illustration.

Plotinos: Complete Works, v. 2 In Chronological Order, Grouped in Four Periods · 第 112 / 381 题