§1.9#1περὶ μὲν οὖν τῶν Πυθαγορείων ἀφείσθω τὰ νῦν (ἱκανὸν γὰρ αὐτῶν ἅψασθαι τοσοῦτον)·
Let the discussion of the Pythagoreans be dismissed for the present (for it is sufficient to have touched upon them to this extent).
οἱ δὲ τὰς ἰδέας αἰτίας τιθέμενοι πρῶτον μὲν ζητοῦντες τωνδὶ τῶν ὄντων λαβεῖν τὰς αἰτίας ἕτερα τούτοις ἴσα τὸν ἀριθμὸν ἐκόμισαν, ὥσπερ εἴ τις ἀριθμῆσαι βουλόμενος ἐλαττόνων μὲν ὄντων οἴοιτο μὴ δυνήσεσθαι, πλείω δὲ ποιήσας ἀριθμοίη (σχεδὸν γὰρ ἴσα—ἢ οὐκ ἐλάττω—ἐστὶ τὰ εἴδη τούτοις περὶ ὧν ζητοῦντες τὰς αἰτίας ἐκ τούτων ἐπʼ ἐκεῖνα προῆλθον· καθʼ ἕκαστον γὰρ ὁμώνυμόν τι ἔστι καὶ παρὰ τὰς οὐσίας, τῶν τε ἄλλων ἔστιν ἓν ἐπὶ πολλῶν, καὶ ἐπὶ τοῖσδε καὶ ἐπὶ τοῖς ἀϊδίοις)·
But those who posit the Ideas as causes, in the first place, seeking to grasp the causes of these existing things, introduced other things equal in number to these, as if someone wishing to count should think that he could not do so while the things were fewer, but should count after making them more. For the Forms are almost equal in number to—or not fewer than—these things, seeking the causes of which they proceeded from them to those; for in each case there is something homonymous besides the substances, and of the other things there is a one over many, both in the case of these and of the eternal ones.
ἔτι δὲ καθʼ οὓς τρόπους δείκνυμεν ὅτι ἔστι τὰ εἴδη, κατʼ οὐθένα φαίνεται τούτων· ἐξ ἐνίων μὲν γὰρ οὐκ ἀνάγκη γίγνεσθαι συλλογισμόν, ἐξ ἐνίων δὲ καὶ οὐχ ὧν οἰόμεθα τούτων εἴδη γίγνεται.
And further, according to none of the ways in which we show that the Forms exist do they appear to be proved; for from some of them no necessary conclusion arises, and from others there arise Forms even of things of which we do not think there are Forms.
κατά τε γὰρ τοὺς λόγους τοὺς ἐκ τῶν ἐπιστημῶν εἴδη ἔσται πάντων ὅσων ἐπιστῆμαι εἰσί, καὶ κατὰ τὸ ἓν ἐπὶ πολλῶν καὶ τῶν ἀποφάσεων, κατὰ δὲ τὸ νοεῖν τι φθαρέντος τῶν φθαρτῶν· φάντασμα γάρ τι τούτων ἔστιν.
For according to the arguments from the sciences there will be Forms of all things of which there are sciences, and according to the 'one over many' and the negations there will be Forms even of negations, and according to the thinking of something when it has been destroyed there will be Forms of destructible things; for there is some image of these.
ἔτι δὲ οἱ ἀκριβέστεροι τῶν λόγων οἱ μὲν τῶν πρός τι ποιοῦσιν ἰδέας, ὧν οὔ φαμεν εἶναι καθʼ αὑτὸ γένος, οἱ δὲ τὸν τρίτον ἄνθρωπον λέγουσιν.
And further, of the more accurate arguments, some make Ideas of relations, of which we say there is no independent genus, and others speak of 'the third man'.
ὅλως τε ἀναιροῦσιν οἱ περὶ τῶν εἰδῶν λόγοι ἃ μᾶλλον εἶναι βουλόμεθα τοῦ τὰς ἰδέας εἶναι· συμβαίνει γὰρ μὴ εἶναι τὴν δυάδα πρώτην ἀλλὰ τὸν ἀριθμόν, καὶ τὸ πρός τι τοῦ καθʼ αὑτό, καὶ πάνθʼ ὅσα τινὲς ἀκολουθήσαντες ταῖς περὶ τῶν ἰδεῶν δόξαις ἠναντιώθησαν ταῖς ἀρχαῖς. —ἔτι κατὰ μὲν τὴν ὑπόληψιν καθʼ ἣν εἶναί φαμεν τὰς ἰδέας οὐ μόνον τῶν οὐσιῶν ἔσται εἴδη ἀλλὰ πολλῶν καὶ ἑτέρων (καὶ γὰρ τὸ νόημα ἓν οὐ μόνον περὶ τὰς οὐσίας ἀλλὰ καὶ κατὰ τῶν ἄλλων ἐστί, καὶ ἐπιστῆμαι οὐ μόνον τῆς οὐσίας εἰσὶν ἀλλὰ καὶ ἑτέρων, καὶ ἄλλα δὲ μυρία συμβαίνει τοιαῦτα)·
And in general, the arguments concerning the Forms destroy the very things which we wish to exist more than the existence of the Ideas; for it follows that the dyad is not first but number is, and that the relative is prior to the absolute, and all those things which some, by following the opinions about the Ideas, have opposed to the principles. — And further, according to the assumption on which we say that the Ideas exist, there will be Forms not only of substances but of many other things (for the concept is one not only concerning substances but also concerning other things, and sciences exist not only of substance but also of other things, and ten thousand other such things happen).
κατὰ δὲ τὸ ἀναγκαῖον καὶ τὰς δόξας τὰς περὶ αὐτῶν, εἰ ἔστι μεθεκτὰ τὰ εἴδη, τῶν οὐσιῶν ἀναγκαῖον ἰδέας εἶναι μόνον.
But according to necessity and the opinions about them, if the Forms are participable, it is necessary that there are Ideas of substances only.
οὐ γὰρ κατὰ συμβεβηκὸς μετέχονται ἀλλὰ δεῖ ταύτῃ ἑκάστου μετέχειν ᾗ μὴ καθʼ ὑποκειμένου λέγεται (λέγω δʼ οἷον, εἴ τι αὐτοδιπλασίου μετέχει, τοῦτο καὶ ἀϊδίου μετέχει, ἀλλὰ κατὰ συμβεβηκός· συμβέβηκε γὰρ τῷ διπλασίῳ ἀϊδίῳ εἶναι), ὥστʼ ἔσται οὐσία τὰ εἴδη· ταὐτὰ δὲ ἐνταῦθα οὐσίαν σημαίνει κἀκεῖ·
For they are not participated in accidentally, but each thing must participate in them insofar as it is not said of a subject (I mean, for example, if something participates in 'the double itself', this also participates in 'the eternal', but accidentally; for it is accidental to the double to be eternal), so that the Forms will be substances; and the same words signify substance both here and there.
ἢ τί ἔσται τὸ εἶναι τι παρὰ ταῦτα, τὸ ἓν ἐπὶ πολλῶν;
Otherwise, what will the 'one over many' be, which exists besides these things?
καὶ εἰ μὲν ταὐτὸ εἶδος τῶν ἰδεῶν καὶ τῶν μετεχόντων, ἔσται τι κοινόν (τί γὰρ μᾶλλον ἐπὶ τῶν φθαρτῶν δυάδων, καὶ τῶν πολλῶν μὲν ἀϊδίων δέ, τὸ δυὰς ἓν καὶ ταὐτόν, ἢ ἐπί τʼ αὐτῆς καὶ τῆς τινός; )·
And if the form of the Ideas and of those participating in them is the same, there will be something common (for why should 'dyad' be one and the same in the case of destructible dyads, and the many but eternal ones, any more than in the case of the dyad itself and a certain dyad?).
εἰ δὲ μὴ τὸ αὐτὸ εἶδος, ὁμώνυμα ἂν εἴη, καὶ ὅμοιον ὥσπερ ἂν εἴ τις καλοῖ ἄνθρωπον τόν τε Καλλίαν καὶ τὸ ξύλον, μηδεμίαν κοινωνίαν ἐπιβλέψας αὐτῶν. —πάντων δὲ μάλιστα διαπορήσειεν ἄν τις τί ποτε συμβάλλεται τὰ εἴδη τοῖς ἀϊδίοις τῶν αἰσθητῶν ἢ τοῖς γιγνομένοις καὶ φθειρομένοις· οὔτε γὰρ κινήσεως οὔτε μεταβολῆς οὐδεμιᾶς ἐστὶν αἴτια αὐτοῖς.
But if the form is not the same, they would be homonymous, and it would be just as if someone were to call both Callias and a piece of wood 'man', without having observed any community between them. — But of all things one would be most at a loss as to what the Forms contribute to the eternal ones among sensible things, or to those that are generated and destroyed; for they are causes of no motion or change to them.
ἀλλὰ μὴν οὔτε πρὸς τὴν ἐπιστήμην οὐθὲν βοηθεῖ τὴν τῶν ἄλλων (οὐδὲ γὰρ οὐσία ἐκεῖνα τούτων· ἐν τούτοις γὰρ ἂν ἦν), οὔτε εἰς τὸ εἶναι, μὴ ἐνυπάρχοντά γε τοῖς μετέχουσιν· οὕτω μὲν γὰρ ἂν ἴσως αἴτια δόξειεν εἶναι ὡς τὸ λευκὸν μεμιγμένον τῷ λευκῷ, ἀλλʼ οὗτος μὲν ὁ λόγος λίαν εὐκίνητος, ὃν Ἀναξαγόρας μὲν πρῶτος Εὔδοξος δʼ ὕστερον καὶ ἄλλοι τινὲς ἔλεγον (ῥᾴδιον γὰρ συναγαγεῖν πολλὰ καὶ ἀδύνατα πρὸς τὴν τοιαύτην δόξαν)·
Nor indeed do they assist in any way towards the science of other things (for they are not the substance of these, otherwise they would be in them), nor towards their existence, since they do not exist in the participating things; for in this way they might perhaps seem to be causes, as white mixed with a white thing, but this argument is very easily upset, which Anaxagoras first and Eudoxus later and some others said (for it is easy to collect many impossible consequences against such an opinion).
ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐδʼ ἐκ τῶν εἰδῶν ἐστὶ τἆλλα κατʼ οὐθένα τρόπον τῶν εἰωθότων λέγεσθαι.
Nor indeed are other things from the Forms in any of the ways that are commonly said.
τὸ δὲ λέγειν παραδείγματα αὐτὰ εἶναι καὶ μετέχειν αὐτῶν τἆλλα κενολογεῖν ἐστὶ καὶ μεταφορὰς λέγειν ποιητικάς.
And to say that they are 'patterns' and that other things 'participate' in them is to use empty words and to speak in poetic metaphors.
τί γάρ ἐστι τὸ ἐργαζόμενον πρὸς τὰς ἰδέας ἀποβλέπον;
For what is that which works, looking towards the Ideas?