Selected quad for the lemma: body_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
body_n	nature_n	soul_n	unite_v	6,882	5	9.6339	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A91783	The logicians school-master: or, A comment upon Ramus logick. By Mr. Alexander Richardson, sometime of Queenes Colledge in Cambridge. Whereunto are added, his prelections on Ramus his grammer; Taleus his rhetorick; also his notes on physicks, ethicks, astronomy, medicine, and opticks. Never before published.	Richardson, Alexander, of Queen's College, Cambridge.; Thomson, Samuel, fl. 1657-1666.	1657 (1657)	Wing R1378; Thomason E1603_2; ESTC R203419	285,683	519

Now true it is that this as also the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proceed from the thing in nature yet Logick is more general than any of the rest in regard of his use for it is in it self in speech in quantity c. so that look where any art is there Logick is but it doth not follow that where Logick is there Arithmetick Geometry c. should be Again it pleased the Lord to make man his Steward under him over all the Creatures ergo in this respect it is necessary he should behold all the creatures to the imployment of the use of the principal Lord therefore he must first see them therefore must be prepared with such a faculty that he may see all things by it Now this is omnium 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That there is such an Art I shew it thus If there be reason then there is an art of it because reason is ens a primo and it is for an end therefore there must be that art that is of reasons act For the proposition I proved it before for reason was for an end for the Assumption none will deny but that there is reason if they will acknowledge themselves to be but men Our Author cals this art Dialectica which comes of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying secerno separo seligo as for example if there were many things together I would sever them and this name fitteth reasons act very well for Logick is like a fire among the Chimists for as fire will congregare homogenia and segregare heterogenia so Logick is the fire of all Arts severing in the same act that fire doth Logick from Grammar and Rhetorick from both c. and then it congregates to Logick that which is congreans to it to Grammar that which is homogenie to it c. so that when it invents it picks out homogenies it disposeth them and layes them in several places therefore this name Dialectica is very fitly given to this art that works this wonderful effect Wonderful I may call it for the Chimists can do great effects but the Logicians can do greater for they can see Gods Logick in the things and had not man faln he might have come to have seen all the wisdom of God in the Creatures Now if Logick doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is congregare homogenia and segregare heterogenia by the same effect it may fitly be so called now this art is so called saith Diog enes Laertius first by Plato if he were the Author he was more ancient than Aristotle and antiquity should have honour with good reason if we have any reason nay Geometry is so called from its subject rather not metiri from antiquity but Zenophon in his fourth book of remembrances saith that Socrates was Platoes School-master and he never writ any thing but Plato alwayes so that Socrates might read it and Zenophon hear it for he was his Schollar for Zenophon Plato fuere aequales and Diogenes Laertius might read it in Plato as he had noted it from Socrates and the Oracle witnesseth that Socrates was the wisest man in his time and he was more wise than Aristotle for Plato that was Socrates Schollar was his Master so that for this name we see how fitly it agrees to this art and also the confirmation of it from antiquity Now Aristotle cals it Logick I do not deny but the name is good but it is later as Laertius witnesseth that Aristotle gave it first but it is from the subject ●eason as the names of most arts are Arithmetick of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 numerus Geometry of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 terra c. but it doth not so lively name this art as Dialectica doth which names the life and delivers the quintessence of Logick so that Logica as it is conjugate of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 names it well but doth not set it out with that vigour that Dialectica doth So thus we see the reason of the name Est Ars. What art is we have heard before this it is every thing hath an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is accomplished by many petty 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which causes the precepts of art to be answerable thereunto so that Logicks main end is bene disserere bene invenire and bene judicare are the petty acts of it Now if Logica and Dialectica shew the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and frame of mans reason and direct it to the chief end its happiness where the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 esteth then it is ars at ergo Est ars bene disserendi First disserendi for the explanation of the word dissero comes of dis and sero sero signifies first to sow and dis a sunder or dissero that makes disserui to sow asunder whether it be so used I find not I for my part ever read it in this Logical signification and that which I told you of concerning dialectica is true 〈◊〉 his that as there was things to be sown and a sati● secernendorum and a sowing them asunder so there are first semina which are arguments in invention Secondly a satio of them that is a disposing of them Axiomatically and syllogistically and lastly a disserio that is a disposing of them according to true method and order so that in this disserere we have the nature of reason quite through as we had in Dialectica So that this name delivers also to us very fitly the very soul of Logick for as in mans body there is a soul or a form per quam res est id quod est a caeteris rebus distinguitur so there is of this art or rather of the subject of it reason and as in other things the Lord hath wrought so cunningly that we cannot see their forms but onely the next acts to the formes so here our Author desireth to give to us the form of reason which because he cannot do therefore he delivers it by the final cause the next act to the form so that when he saith dialectica est ars bene disserendi he means it is such an art that hath such a form that doth bene disserere therefore I conclude thus if this be the happiness the act and soul of reason then it is defined fitly Ars bene disserendi at ergo Bene. Here it is an adverb for Grammar here doth declare some controversie and an adverb is a part of speech joyned to the verb to shew his signification therefore bene is here added to make perfect the act of this disserere ergo bene disserere is not two things but one thing and this is a commendation in defining arts to break the forms of them as little as we can because the form is but one argument and if we put two or more words into the form we break it into so many peices Now for the reason of bene in a Art this it is Art is the rule of

cannot so perfectly see fish Water is most cold and moist by reason of the forms act being more active than the form of earth But how then is it most cold Because though the form act more than the form of earth yet the matter doth so strongly reagere that 't is more sensibly cold because of the greater action and passion even as when a ball or a stone is cast forcibly unto me if I meet it with my hand it doth more sensibly agere than if I take it gent ly in my hand 'T is also moist because it being exceedingly cold is also moist and moisture causeth softness so that softness is a quality arising from moisture and is properly of the air and secondly of the water The earth is most dry because the form of it is so little active cannot extend it ergo to make it fluid and so it makes it dry Fire is more fluid than the earth but not so dry air having heat which doth extend moisture makes it most moist but not dry Again t is cold but not actually as water because the form doth not act so much upon it as the form of water upon water Again hence the earth is most solid and least porous of any of the elements Again the earth is most dark and opake of all the elements the air and water are capable of light and opacitie because the creatures that live in them have a sensible life and should have light and darkness night and day Thus much of the elements simply considered as they are elements now there is not only an apposition of them but a kind of imperfect misture for they cannot give sapor and such other qualities as they have but as they are mista Ergo we shall hear of them again in the meteors as also of the regions of the air and of mare and of other rivers which are meteors Elementarium Elementare est quod ex elementis est Ergo for its matter 't is made immediately of the materiale principium and for the forme of it 't is made proximè ex formis elementorum Obj. But then the forms of things should be composed Answ So they are even as the body is composed of many parts which are composed of many similar parts which contain both matter and form Again Mistio est miscibilium alteratorum unio Ergo 't is mistio that makes a thing unum then must the forms be mista and so composite for that makes the thing unum Now for those that say the forms of things are from the influences I would ask them What it is that unites the matter and form together for in Logick we know there is nothing betwixt the matter and the form Some say that spirit is the vinculum of the soul and body yea but the soul is not the form and again what shall unite them in a stone where there is no such spirit Object 2. Some deny the forms of the elements to be in the mist But if they be not how do they return into the elements again and again 't is granted by all that the qualities are there ergo their forms must be there and the elements are actu in the mist yea and are agents there as we shall hear hereafter in mistione Now the greatest objection I find against this is this say they How can things without life cause things to live There may be a vivens of them because anima vegetiva and sensitiva are nourished by nutriment for spiritus vitalis is the vegetative soul which is nourished by humidum radicale and hath air predominating in it and spirit us animalis is that sensitive soul which is nourished by moisture and heat and hath fire predominating in it and the common people do use to say that these do vanescere in auras and the spiritus animalis is made of the vital spirit and the vital spirit is made of a natural spirit which ariseth from the meat which we eat ergo if these can nourish and keep life they can also cause life If they shall say the vital spirit is not made of the natural then it must be made of nothing and so should be eternal in nature Keckerman saith the elements are corpora incompleta which is most false for they should not exist but in composites but they do in themselves for they are effects I rather chuse this word elementarium than mistum because mistum is but an adjunct to it Elementarium est quod est ex elementis and so the first matter but at the second hand and hence it appears that the elements go into the mistum But the greatest Objection that ever I met with concerning this is that How can things which have not life cause life Yes For life is but an act and a composite act Again life is preserved and maintained by the elements ergo may be caused by them so the animal spirits are made of the vital and the vital of the elements not only as they are acts but also as they are membra for there is no other soul in Plants and Beasts for they are next to the reasonable soul Now if they shall say these spirits vital and animal be not made of the elements but of some other thing I would ask them Of what of the spirits which are in the meat Then the forms of Plants and Beasts must be made of the forms of Herbs and of such things as they feed on if they will say they be made of the influences they are then either accidents which cannot be forms or substances if substances then they should be portions of the matter and forme of the Stars and then the stars should not remain the same thing Mistio they say is alteratorum unio so that in the framing of the forms of things there must be an alteration and another forme distinct from any of these forms from whence it did arise even as in a Chest made of boards I cannot in propriety of speech call them boards but a Chest made of these boards So in the things that are mist I cannot say the elements forms are their forms but t is a mist forme composed of the elements which are incomplete in the mist So that true 't is there is an alteration but a generation also though generation will not serve the turn because there is not a corruption of the elements which make the things neither indeed do generation and corruption go alwayes together for when a chicken is made of an egg there is not a corruption but a perfecting of the egg neither is there acquisitio novae formae but veteris perfectio And the elements are members of the elementaries but a part of fire is not a membrum of fire but part of the matter and form of fire Now here is the chief question How these are in the mist First of all the elements by the mutual action and passion of their matter and forme are holden together