Kitap 13
22
Let it be granted that the 2’s in 4 are contemporaneous; yet they are prior to those in 8, and just as the 〈determinate〉 2 produced the 2’s in 4, soIn each case the other factor is the indeterminate dyad (cf. sect. 18). they produced the 4’s in 8. Hence if the original 2 is an Idea, these 2’s will also be Ideas of a sort.
23
And the same argument applies to the units, because the units in the original 2 produce the four units in 4; and so all the units become Ideas, and an Idea will be composed of Ideas. Hence clearly those things also of which these things are Ideas will be composite; e.g., one might say that animals are composed of animals, if there are Ideas of animals.
24
In general, to regard units as different in any way whatsoever is absurd and fictitious (by fictitious I mean dragged in to support a hypothesis). For we can see that one unit differs from another neither in quantity nor in quality; and a number must be either equal or unequal—this applies to all numbers, but especially to numbers consisting of abstract units.
25
Thus if a number is neither more nor less, it is equal; and things which are equal and entirely without difference we assume, in the sphere of number, to be identical. Otherwise even the 2’s in the Ideal 10 will be different, although they are equal; for if anyone maintains that they are not different, what reason will he be able to allege?
26
Again, if every unit plus another unit makes 2, a unit from the Ideal 2 plus one from the Ideal 3 will make 2—a 2 composed of different unitsWhich conflicts with the view under discussion.; will this be prior or posterior to 3? It rather seems that it must be prior, because one of the units is contemporaneous with 3, and the other with 2.The implication seems to be, as Ross says, that the Platonists will refuse to admit that there is a number between 2 and 3.
