Kitap 7
5
Now since this seems to be possible, but it is not clear when, some thinkersThe Pythagoreans. are doubtful even in the case of the circle and the triangle, considering that it is not proper to define them by lines and continuous space, but that all these are to the circle or triangle as flesh or bone is to man, and bronze or stone to the statue; and they reduce everything to numbers, and say that the formula of line is the formula of 2.
6
And of the exponents of the Forms, some make 2 the Ideal line, and some the form of the lineThe distinction seems to be that given in Aristot. Met. 8.3.1. Some held that the line, considered absolutely, is simply twoness; others that it is twoness in length. ; for they say that in some cases the form and that of which it is the form, e.g. 2 and the form of 2, are the same; but in the case of line this is no longer so.
7
It follows, then, that there is one form of many things whose form is clearly different (a consequence which confronted the Pythagoreans tooCf. Aristot. Met. 1.5.17.), and that it is possible to make one supreme Form of everything, and not to regard the rest as forms. In this way, however, all things would be one.
8
Now we have stated that the question of definitions involves some difficulty, and have shown why this is so. Hence to reduce everything in this way and to dispose of the matter is going too far; for some things are presumably a particular form in particular matter, or particular things in a particular state.
