§2.1.7Οὐκ ἄρα ἔστιν ἐξ ἄλλου γένους μεταβάντα δεῖξαι, οἷον τὸ γεωμετρικὸν ἀριθμητικῇ.
Therefore, it is not possible to prove by passing from one genus to another, as for example a geometrical problem by arithmetic.
τρία γάρ ἐστι τὰ ἐν ταῖς ἀποδείξεσιν, ἓν μὲν τὸ ἀποδεικνύμενον, τὸ συμπέρασμα (τοῦτο δʼ ἐστὶ τὸ ὑπάρχον γένει τινὶ καθʼ αὑτό), ἓν δὲ τὰ ἀξιώματα (ἀξιώματα δʼ ἐστὶν ἐξ ὧν)· τρίτον τὸ γένος τὸ ὑποκείμενον, οὗ τὰ πάθη καὶ τὰ καθʼ αὑτὰ συμβεβηκότα δηλοῖ ἡ ἀπόδειξις.
For there are three things in demonstrations: one is what is demonstrated, the conclusion (and this is what belongs to some genus in itself); another is the axioms (and axioms are that from which [the demonstration proceeds]); and third is the underlying genus, whose properties and essential accidents the demonstration makes clear.
ἐξ ὧν μὲν οὖν ἡ ἀπόδειξις, ἐνδέχεται τὰ αὐτὰ εἶναι· ὧν δὲ τὸ γένος ἕτερον, ὥσπερ ἀριθμητικῆς καὶ γεωμετρίας, οὐκ ἔστι τὴν ἀριθμητικὴν ἀπόδειξιν ἐφαρμόσαι ἐπὶ τὰ τοῖς μεγέθεσι συμβεβηκότα, εἰ μὴ τὰ μεγέθη ἀριθμοί εἰσι· τοῦτο δʼ ὡς ἐνδέχεται ἐπί τινων, ὕστερον λεχθήσεται.
Now, that from which the demonstration proceeds may be the same; but where the genus is different, as with arithmetic and geometry, it is not possible to apply arithmetic demonstration to the accidental properties of magnitudes, unless magnitudes are numbers—how this is possible in some cases will be discussed later.
ἡ δʼ ἀριθμητικὴ ἀπόδειξις ἀεὶ ἔχει τὸ γένος περὶ ὃ ἡ ἀπόδειξις, καὶ αἰ ἄλλαι ὁμοίως.
But arithmetic demonstration always keeps to the genus about which the demonstration is, and likewise with the other sciences.
ὥστʼ ἢ ἀπλῶς ἀνάγκη τὸ αὐτὸ εἶναι γένος ἢ πῇ, εἰ μέλλει ἡ ἀπόδειξις μεταβαίνειν.
Thus, the genus must either be simply the same or the same in some respect, if the demonstration is to pass from one to the other.
ἄλλως δʼ ὅτι ἀδύνατον, δῆλον· ἐκ γὰρ τοῦ αὐτοῦ γένους ἀνάγκη τὰ ἄκρα καὶ τὰ μέσα εἶναι.
Otherwise, that it is impossible is clear; for the extreme terms and the middle terms must be from the same genus.
εἰ γὰρ μὴ καθʼ αὑτά, συμβεβηκότα ἔσται.
For if they are not in themselves, they will be accidental properties.
διὰ τοῦτο τῇ γεωμετρίᾳ οὐκ ἔστι δεῖξαι ὅτι τῶν ἐναντίων μία ἐπιστήμη, ἀλλʼ οὐδʼ ὅτι οἱ δύο κύβοι κύβος· οὐδʼ ἄλλῃ ἐπιστήμῃ τὸ ἑτέρας, ἀλλʼ ἢ ὅσα οὕτως ἔχει πρὸς ἄλληλα ὥστʼ εἶναι θάτερον ὑπὸ θάτερον, οἷον τὰ ὀπτικὰ πρός γεωμετρίαν καὶ τὰ ἁρμονικὰ πρὸς ἀριθμητικήν.
For this reason, it is not possible to show by geometry that there is a single science of contraries, nor even that two cubes make a cube; nor is it possible for one science to prove the property of another, except for those sciences which are so related to each other that one is subordinate to the other, as optics is to geometry and harmonics to arithmetic.
οὐδʼ εἴ τι ὑπάρχει ταῖς γραμμαῖς μὴ ἧ γραμμαὶ καὶ ἐκ τῶν ἀρχῶν τῶν ἰδίων, οἷον εἰ καλλίστη τῶν γραμμῶν ἡ εὐθεῖα ἢ εἰ ἐναντίως ἔχει τῇ περιφερεῖ· οὐ γὰρ ἧ τὸ ἴδιον γένος αὐτῶν, ὑπάρχει, ἀλλʼ ᾗ κοινόν τι.
Nor if any property belongs to lines not insofar as they are lines and from their own proper principles, as for instance whether the straight line is the most beautiful of lines, or whether it is contrarily related to the curved line; for these belong to them not insofar as they are of their proper genus, but insofar as they share some common feature.
§2.1.8Φανερὸν δὲ καὶ ἐὰν ὦσιν αἱ προτάσεις καθόλου ἐξ ὧν ὁ συλλογισμός, ὅτι ἀνάγκη καὶ τὸ συμπέρασμα ἀΐδιον εἶναι τῆς τοιαύτης ἀποδείξεως καὶ τῆς ἀπλῶς εἰπεῖν ἀποδείξεως.
It is also clear that if the premises from which the syllogism proceeds are universal, the conclusion of such a demonstration, and of demonstration simply so called, must also be eternal.
οὐκ ἔστιν ἄρα ἀπόδειξις τῶν φθαρτῶν οὐδʼ ἐπιστήμη ἁπλῶς, ἀλλʼ οὕτως ὥσπερ κατὰ συμβεβηκός, ὅτι οὐ καθʼ ὅλου αὐτοῦ ἐστιν ἀλλὰ ποτὲ καὶ πώς.
Therefore, there is no demonstration of perishable things, nor any science of them simply, but only as it were accidentally, because it is not of the thing universally, but only at some time and in a certain way.
ὅταν δʼ ᾖ, ἀνάγκη τὴν ἑτέραν μὴ καθόλου εἶναι πρότασιν καὶ φθαρτήν—φθαρτὴν μὲν ὅτι ἔσται καὶ τὸ συμπέρασμα οὔσης, μὴ καθόλου δὲ ὅτι τῷ μὲν ἔσται τῷ δʼ οὐκ ἔσται ἐφʼ ὧν–ὥστ᾿ οὐκ ἔστι συλλογίσασθαι καθόλου, ἀλλʼ ὅτι νῦν.
And when there is [such a demonstration], one of the premises must not be universal and must be perishable—perishable because the conclusion will also be so when the premise is, and not universal because the property will belong to some of the subjects but not to others—so that it is not possible to reason universally, but only that it is so now.
ὁμοίως δʼ ἔχει καὶ περὶ ὁρισμούς, ἐπείπερ ἐστὶν ὁ ὁρισμὸς ἢ ἀρχὴ ἀποδείξεως ἢ ἀπόδειξις θέσει διαφέρουσα ἢ συμπέρασμά τι ἀποδείξεως.
It is the same also with definitions, since a definition is either a principle of demonstration, or a demonstration differing in position, or a certain conclusion of a demonstration.
αἱ δὲ τῶν πολλάκις γινομένων ἀποδείξεις καὶ ἐπιστῆμαι, οἷον σελήνης ἐκλείψεως, δῆλον ὅτι ᾗ μὲν τοιοῦδʼ εἰσίν, ἀεὶ εἰσίν, ᾗ δʼ οὐκ ἀεί, κατὰ μέρος εἰσίν.
As for demonstrations and sciences of things that happen repeatedly, such as an eclipse of the moon, it is clear that insofar as they are of such a character, they are eternal, but insofar as they are not eternal, they are particular.
ὥσπερ δʼ ἡ ἔκλειψις, ὡσαύτως τοῖς ἄλλοις.
And as it is with an eclipse, so it is with the other cases.