1~~~~~, mor; yrr. 8. “7
read dr2r it !vi11 be convenient to supply ;K€iUOlS with LU dvq if;E 4s tu ri ri, yc‘uor, i. e. ‘ out of which is formed,’ or n hich forms
a lower class having a unity;’ ‘ which in its nature is a vhole, and
not a mere aggregate,’ Fv ri rb $vos=b rl iuri rd .,&os.mJra, ixciua.6 The end has nothing in common with the means; the final 8. 3.
cause with the conditions.’ 9 things prior and
posterior are said to have no quality in common with each other.
Of course the modern philosopher makes the opposite reflection,
that the end is inseparable from the means,’ or, ’ is only the sum
of the means ’; that causes are indistinguishable from condition ;
and equally indistinguishable from effects; ‘ that no line can be
draivn betmeen Ct priori and 2 posferiuri truth.’ The common
understanding, like ancient philosophy, rebels against this higher
view, because it can point to numberless visible instances in which
the end is separable from the means, the effect from the causes.
Both lines of reflection are constantly returning upon us, and the
opposition between them gives rise to many metaphysical problems.
It is the old difficulty, as old as the opposition of ideas to phe-
nomena, of finding the similarity where there is difference or
contrast.Just as in iii. 1.6pyduy rc n-ami npbs ri) yiyvdpcwov Cpyou mi 70;s 8qpiovpyo;r.
Governed by ob8b KO~W~U ~UTL
- The builder and his tools have
nothing in common with the work; so property has nothing in
common with the State.’
- The builder and his tools have
The connexion of this passage in which means and ends, parts 8.5-6.
and conditions are curiously combined appears to be as follow :
‘Now happiness is imparted in various degrees to states, making
them to be what they are according to the degree of happiness
which they attain, But we must also ascertain what are the con-
ditions of states, for in these we shall find their parts.’ He seems
to mean that through what is outward only we can arrive at the
true elements of the state; and that happiness, which is the end of
the state, is not to be confounded with the conditions or it. The
argument is interrupted by the seemingly irrelevant remark that the