§17.1Διὰ τί οἱ ἀσύμμετροι παρ’ ἀλλήλους θεωρούμενοι μείζους φαίνονται ἢ καθ’ αὑτοὺς μόνους;
Why do objects of disproportionate size, when observed next to one another, appear larger than when they are observed by themselves?
ἢ ὅτι τὸ σύμμετρόν ἐστιν ἕν, καὶ ἡ συμμετρία ὅτι μάλιστα ἓν ποιεῖ, τὸ δὲ ἓν ἀδιαίρετον βούλεται εἶναι, τὸ δὲ ἀδιαίρετον ἔλαττόν ἐστιν, ἡ δὲ ἀσυμμετρία κατὰ τὴν διαφορὰν πολλὰ ποιεῖ.
Or is it because that which is proportionate is one, and proportion makes it as much as possible one, and the one tends to be indivisible, and the indivisible is smaller, whereas disproportion produces many by virtue of difference?
καθ’ αὑτὰ μὲν οὖν θεωρούμενα μᾶλλον λανθάνει ποῖα ἄττα τὰ μεγέθη ἐστίν, παρ’ ἄλληλα δὲ οὔ.
Therefore, when they are observed by themselves, it is more difficult to notice what kind of magnitudes they are, but when they are next to one another, it is not.
τὸ μὲν οὖν ἀδιαίρετον ἓν φαίνεται, καὶ ἡ θεωρία μία ἐστὶν αὐτοῦ διὰ τὴν συμμετρίαν· τὸ δὲ ἀσύμμετρον ὡς πολλὰ ὂν θεωρίαν ποιεῖ πλείω, καὶ μείζω φαίνεται τῷ ἓν ὂν πολλὰ φαίνεσθαι·
Thus, the indivisible appears as one, and the observation of it is single because of the proportion; but the disproportionate, being many, produces more observations, and appears larger by appearing many while being one.
ἔχει γὰρ τήν τε τοῦ μεγέθους κατὰ τὴν συνέχειαν φύσιν, καὶ τὴν τοῦ ἀριθμοῦ κατὰ τὸ ἀνώμαλον τῶν μερῶν, διόπερ εἰκότως τὴν ἐξ ἀμφοῖν αὔξην ἔχον μεῖζον φαίνεται παρὰ τὸ ἁπλοῦν καὶ ἕν.
For it has both the nature of magnitude in virtue of continuity, and that of number in virtue of the inequality of the parts; wherefore, naturally, having growth from both, it appears larger than that which is simple and one.
§17.2Διὰ τί ἐπὶ μῆκος μᾶλλον τὰ ζῷα καὶ τὰ φυτὰ φύεται;
Why do animals and plants grow more in length?
ἢ ὅτι τὸ μῆκος μὲν τρὶς αὔξεται, τὸ δὲ πλάτος δίς, τὸ δὲ βάθος ἅπαξ;
Or is it because length increases three times, width twice, and depth once?
ἔστι γὰρ μῆκος τὸ ἀπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆς πρῶτον, ὥστε μόνον τε αὔξεται, καὶ ἅμα τῷ πλάτει πάλιν γινόμενον, καὶ τρίτον ἅμα τῷ βάθει.
For length is the first dimension from the beginning, so that it grows both by itself, and again together with width, and thirdly together with depth.
τὸ δὲ πλάτος δίς, καθ’ ἑαυτό τε καὶ ἅμα τῷ μεγέθει.
But width increases twice, both by itself and together with the bulk.
§17.3Πῶς τὸ πρότερον καὶ τὸ ὕστερον δεῖ λαβεῖν;
How should we understand "prior" and "posterior"?
πότερον ὥσπερ ἡμῶν οἱ ἐπὶ Τροίας καὶ ἐκείνων οἱ πρὸ αὐτῶν καὶ ἀεὶ οἱ ἐπάνω πρότεροί εἰσιν;
Is it in the same way as, for us, those at the time of Troy, and those before them, and always those further back are prior?
ἢ εἴπερ ἀρχή τίς ἐστιν καὶ μέσον καὶ τέλος τοῦ παντός, καὶ ὅταν γηράσκων τις ἐπὶ τὸ πέρας ἔλθῃ καὶ πάλιν ἐπαναστρέψῃ ἐπὶ τὴν ἀρχήν, τὰ δὲ ἐγγυτέρω τῆς ἀρχῆς πρότερα, τί κωλύει ἡμᾶς ἐν τῷ πρὸς τὴν ἀρχὴν εἶναι μᾶλλον;
Or, if there is a certain beginning, middle, and end of the universe, and when someone grows old and comes to the limit, they turn back again to the beginning, and those closer to the beginning are prior, what prevents us from being rather in the position closer to the beginning?
εἰ δὲ τοῦτο, κἂν πρότεροι εἴημεν.
And if this is so, we might even be prior.
ὥσπερ ἐπὶ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ ἑκάστου τῶν ἄστρων φορᾷ κύκλος τίς ἐστιν, τί κωλύει καὶ τὴν γένεσιν καὶ τὴν ἀπώλειαν τῶν φθαρτῶν τοιαύτην εἶναι, ὥστε πάλιν ταῦτα γίνεσθαι καὶ φθείρεσθαι;
Just as there is a certain circle in the motion of the heaven and of each of the stars, what prevents the generation and destruction of perishable things from being of such a kind that these things are generated and destroyed again?
καθάπερ καὶ φασὶ κύκλον εἶναι τὰ ἀνθρώπινα.
Just as they say that human affairs are a circle.
τὸ μὲν δὴ τῷ ἀριθμῷ τοὺς αὐτοὺς ἀξιοῦν εἶναι ἀεὶ τοὺς γινομένους εὔηθες, τὸ δὲ τῷ εἴδει μᾶλλον ἄν τις ἀποδέξαιτο· ὥστε κἂν αὐτοὶ πρότεροι εἴημεν, καὶ θείη ἄν τις τὴν τοῦ εἱρμοῦ τάξιν τοιαύτην εἶναι, ὡς πάλιν ἐπανακάμπτειν ἐπὶ τὴν ἀρχὴν καὶ συνεχὲς ποιεῖν καὶ ἀεὶ κατὰ ταὐτὰ ἔχειν.
Indeed, to claim that those who are generated are always the same in number is foolish, but one would rather accept that they are the same in species; so that we ourselves might be prior, and one might suppose that the order of the succession is of such a kind as to turn back again to the beginning and to make it continuous and always in the same state.
τοὺς γὰρ ἀνθρώπους φησὶν Ἀλκμαίων διὰ τοῦτο ἀπόλλυσθαι, ὅτι οὐ δύνανται τὴν ἀρχὴν τῷ τέλει προσάψαι, κομψῶς εἰρηκώς, εἴ τις ὡς τύπῳ φράζοντος αὐτοῦ ἀποδέχοιτο καὶ μὴ διακριβοῦν ἐθέλοι τὸ λεχθέν.
For Alcmaeon says that humans perish for this reason, because they cannot connect the beginning to the end—a clever saying, if one accepts it as spoken in outline and does not wish to scrutinize the statement strictly.
εἰ δὴ κύκλος ἐστίν, τοῦ δὲ κύκλου μήτε ἀρχὴ μήτε πέρας, οὐδ’ ἂν πρότεροι εἶεν τῷ ἐγγυτέρω τῆς ἀρχῆς εἶναι, οὔθ’ ἡμεῖς ἐκείνων οὔτ’ ἐκεῖνοι ἡμῶν.
If indeed it is a circle, and a circle has neither beginning nor end, they would not be prior by being closer to the beginning, nor would we be prior to them, nor they to us.