36 



motions are simple, thus also those things are most contrary 

 of which the motions are most contrary. And this may 

 occasion some one to wonder at Aristotle, who, in what he 

 says ahout motion, places earth as most contrary to fire; 

 but in what he says about powers, he makes the most re- 

 mote of similar natures to be more friendly than those 

 that are proximate, when they are moved with most con- 

 trary motions. For, as the elements have contrary places 

 in their positions, as they have contrary motions in lations, 

 as they have contrary powers, gravity and levity, through 

 which motions subsist in their forms, thus also they have 

 contrary passive qualities. Aristotle himself likewise mani- 

 fests that earth is contrary to fire. For wishing to show 

 that it is necessary there should be more bodies than one, he 

 says: "Moreover, if earth exists, it is also necessary that fire 

 should exist. For in things, one of the contraries of which 

 naturally is, the other likewise has a natural subsistence." 

 So that neither was he able after any other manner to show 

 that there are more elements than one, than by asserting 

 that fire is contrary to earth. 



" Further still, as the elements are solids, how can they be 

 bound together through one medium ? For this is impossible 

 in solids, as we have before observed. Hence those who 

 assert these things, neither speak mathematically nor physi- 

 cally, but unavoidably err in both these respects. For phy- 

 sical are derived from mathematical entities. Timaus there- 

 fore alone, or any other who rightly follows him, neither attri- 

 butes one or two powers alone to the elements, but triple powers ; 

 tojire indeed tenuity of parts, acuteness, and facility of motion; 

 to air, tenuity of parts, obtuseness, and facility of motion; to 

 water, grossness of parts, obtuseness, and facility of motion; and 

 to earth, grossness of parts, obtuseness, and difficulty of motion. 



