17

OverviewVersionsHelp

Here you can see all page revisions and compare the changes have been made in each revision. Left column shows the page title and transcription in the selected revision, right column shows what have been changed. Unchanged text is highlighted in white, deleted text is highlighted in red, and inserted text is highlighted in green color.

3 revisions
gnox at May 19, 2018 06:19 PM

17

32

which Mr. Henry Rosher James translate in 24 that imitate
the swing of the original very well, but miss the point. By a
geographical fiction Boëthius represents that the Tigris and
the Euphrates flow from a common lake. Now suppose
a boat to be wrecked in that lake and one part of it is carried down
the Tigris the other part down the Euphrates and where
these rivers, after being separate for hundred of miles
flow together again, these two parts of the
boats are dashed against one another. There is a fortuitous
event if there ever was one; and yet says Boethius the
currents forced them to move just as they did so that there
was no chance about it. True the existential events were
governed by law. But when we speak of chance it is a question
of cause. Now it is the ineluctable blunder of a nominalist, as
Boëthius was, to talk of the cause of an event. But it is not an
existential event that has a cause. It is the fact, which is the

17

32

which Mr. Henry Rother James translate in 24 that imitate the swing of the original very well, but miss the point.
By a geographical fiction Boethus represents that the Tugrus and the Euphrates floor from a common lake.
Now suppose a boat to be wrecked in that lake and one part of it is carried down the Tigris the other part down the Euphrates and where these rivers after being seperate for hundred of miles flow together again, these two parts of the boats are dashed against one another.
There is a fortuitous event if there ever was one; and yet says Boethus the currents forced them to move just as they did so that there was no chance about it.
True the existential events were governed by law.
But when we speak of chance it is a question of cause.
Now it is the ineluctable blunder of nomilalist, as Boethus was, to talk of the cause of an event.
But it is not an existential event that has a cause.
It is the fact, which is the