THE NOTION OF INTELLIGENCE IMPLIES ITS POSSESSION OF ALL INTELLIGIBLES.

2. Therefore intelligible entities must not be regarded as exterior to

Intelligence, nor as impressions formed in it. Nor must we deny it the

intimate possession of truth. Otherwise, any cognition of intelligibles

is made impossible, and the reality of both them and Intelligence

itself is destroyed. Intimate possession of all its essences is the

only possible condition that will allow knowledge and truth to remain

within Intelligence, that will save the reality of the intelligibles,

that will make possible the knowledge of the essence of every thing,

instead of limiting us to the mere notion of its qualities, a notion

which gives us only the image and vestige of the object, which does

not permit us to possess it, to unite ourselves with it, to become one

with it. On this condition only, can Intelligence know, and know truly

without being exposed to forgetfulness or groping uncertainty; can it

be the location where truth will abide and essences will subsist; can

it live and think--all of which should belong to this blessed nature,

and without which nowhere could be found anything that deserved our

esteem and respect. On this condition only will Intelligence be able to

dispense with credulity or demonstration in believing realities; for

Intelligence itself consists in these very realities, and possesses

a clear self-consciousness. Intelligence sees that which is its

own principle, sees what is below it, and to what it gives birth.

Intelligence knows that in order to know its own nature, it must not

place credence in any testimony except its own; that it essentially is

intelligible reality. It therefore is truth itself, whose very being

it is to conform to no foreign form, but to itself exclusively. Within

Intelligence fuses both being, and that which affirms its existence;

thus reality justifies itself. By whom could Intelligence be convinced

of error? What demonstration thereof would be of any value? Since there

is nothing truer than truth, any proof to the contrary would depend on

some preceding proof, and while seeming to declare something different,

would in reality be begging the question.

Plotinos: Complete Works, v. 2 In Chronological Order, Grouped in Four Periods · 第 333 / 381 题