Aristote Poetics 16.10

What a Discovery is has been already stated. ¹ 20 As for kinds of Discovery, first comes the least artistic kind, which is largely used owing to incompetence—discovery by tokens.

These may be congenital, like the spear the Earth-born bear or stars, like those which Carcinus ² uses in his Thyestes ³ ;

or they may be acquired and these may be on the body, for instance, wounds, or external things like necklaces, and in the Tyro ⁴ the discovery by means of the boat.

There is a better and a worse way of using these tokens; for instance Odysseus, by means of his wound, was discovered in one way by the nurse and in another way by the swine-herds. ⁵

Discovery scenes constructed to prove the point are inartistic and so are all such scenes, but those are better which arise out of a reversal scene, as, for instance, in The Washing. ⁶

In the second place come those which are manufactured by the poet and are therefore inartistic. For instance, in the Iphigeneia ⁷ Orestes revealed himself. She was revealed to him through the letter,

but Orestes says himself what the poet wants and not what the plot requires. So this comes near to the fault already mentioned, for he might just as well have actually brought some tokens. ⁸ And there is the voice of the shuttle ⁹ In Sophocles’ Tereus.

The third kind is due to memory, to showing distress on seeing something. 1455a 1 An example of this is the scene in the Cyprians by Dicaeogenes; on seeing the picture he burst into tears ¹⁰ : and again in the Tale of Alcinous, ¹¹ hearing the minstrel he remembered and burst into tears; and thus they were recognized.

The fourth kind results from an inference; for instance, in the Choephoroe Someone like me has come; but nobody is like me except Orestes; therefore he has come. And there is Polyidus’s ¹² idea about Iphigeneia, for it is likely enough that Orestes should make an inference that, whereas his sister was sacrificed, here is the same thing happening to him. And in Theodectes’ Tydeus that having come to find a son, he is perishing himself. And the scene in the Phineidae, where on seeing the spot the women inferred their fate, that they were meant to die there for it was there that they had been exposed. ¹³

There is also a kind of fictitious discovery which depends on a false inference on the part of the audience, for instance in Odysseus the False Messenger, he said he would recognize the bow, which as a matter of fact he had not seen, but to assume that he really would reveal himself by this means is a false inference. ¹⁴

Best of all is the discovery which is brought about directly by the incidents, the surprise being produced by means of what is likely—take the scene in Sophocles’ Oedipus or in the Iphigeneia—for it is likely enough that she should want to send a letter. These are the only discovery scenes which dispense with artificial tokens, like necklaces. ¹⁵

20 In the second place come those that are the result of inference.

What Recognition is has been already explained.
We will now enumerate its kinds.
First, the least artistic form, which, from poverty of
wit, is most commonly employed — recognition by signs.

Of these some are
congenital, such as 'the spear which the earth-born race bear on
their bodies,'

or the stars
introduced by Carcinus in his Thyestes.
Others are
acquired after birth; and of these some are bodily marks,
as scars;
some external tokens, as necklaces, or the little
ark in the Tyro by which the discovery is effected.

Even
these admit of more or less skilful treatment.
Thus in
the recognition of Odysseus by his scar, the discovery is
made in one way by the nurse, in another by the swine-
herds.

The use of tokens for the express purpose of proof
— and, indeed, any formal proof with or without tokens
— is a less artistic mode of recognition.
A better kind
is that which comes about by a turn of incident, as in
the Bath Scene in the Odyssey.

Next come the recognitions invented at will by the
poet, and on that account wanting in art.
For example,
Orestes in the Iphigenia reveals the fact that he is
Orestes.
She, indeed, makes herself known by the letter;

but he, by speaking himself, and saying what the poet,
not what the plot requires.
This, therefore, is nearly
allied to the fault above mentioned: — for Orestes might
as well have brought tokens with him. And in the Tereus of
Sophocles the 'voice of the shuttle.'

The third kind depends on memory when the sight of
some object awakens a feeling: as in the Cyprians of
Dicaeogenes, where the hero breaks into tears on seeing
the picture;
or again in the 'Lay of Alcinous,' where
Odysseus, hearing the minstrel play the lyre, recalls the
past and weeps;
and hence the recognition.

The fourth kind is by process of reasoning. Thus in
the Choëphori: — 'Some one resembling me has come:
no one resembles me but Orestes: therefore Orestes has
come.'
Such too is the discovery made by Iphigenia
in the play of Polyidus the Sophist.
It was a natural
reflexion for Orestes to make, 'So I too must die at the
altar like my sister.'
So, again, in the Tydeus of
Theodectes, the father says, 'I came to find my son, and
I lose my own life.'
So too in the Phineidae: the
women, on seeing the place, inferred their fate: — 'Here
we are doomed to die, for here we were cast forth.'

Again, there is a composite kind of recognition involving
false inference on the part of one of the characters, as in
the Odysseus Disguised as a Messenger.
A said that
no one else was able to bend the bow; hence B
(the disguised Odysseus) imagined that A would recognize
the bow which, in fact, he had not seen; and to bring
about a recognition by this means — the expectation that A
would recognize the bow — is false inference.

But, of all recognitions, the best is that which arises
from the incidents themselves, where the startling dis-
covery is made by natural means.
Such is that in the
Oedipus of Sophocles, and in the Iphigenia;
for it was
natural that Iphigenia should wish to dispatch a letter.
These recognitions alone dispense with the artificial aid
of tokens or amulets.

Next
come the recognitions by process of reasoning.

Discovery in general has been explained already. As
for the species of Discovery, the first to be noted is (1) the
least artistic form of it, of which the poets make most use
through mere lack of invention, Discovery by signs or marks.

Of these signs some are congenital, like the 'lance-head
which the Earth-born have on them,'
or 'stars,' such as
Carcinus brings in in his Thyestes;

others acquired after birth
—these latter being either marks on the body, e. g. scars, or
external tokens, like necklaces, or to take another sort of
instance, the ark in the Discovery in Tyro.

Even these,
however, admit of two uses, a better and a worse; the
scar of Ulysses is an instance; the Discovery of him through
it is made in one way by the nurse and in another by the
swineherds.

A Discovery using signs as a means of assu-
rance is less artistic, as indeed are all such as imply reflexion;
whereas one bringing them in all of a sudden, as in the
Bath-story, is of a better order.

Next after these are (2)
Discoveries made directly by the poet; which are inartistic
for that very reason; e.g.
Orestes' Discovery of himself in
Iphigenia: whereas his sister reveals who she is by the letter,
Orestes is made to say himself what the poet rather than
the story demands.

This, therefore, is not far removed
from the first-mentioned fault, since he might have presented
certain tokens as well. Another instance is the 'shuttle's
voice' in the Tereus of Sophocles.

(3) A third species is
Discovery through memory, from a man's consciousness
being awakened by something seen or heard. Thus in The
Cyprioe of Dicaeogenes, the sight of the picture makes
the man burst into tears; and in the Tale of Alcinous,
hearing the harper Ulysses is reminded of the past and
weeps; the Discovery of them being the result.

(4) A fourth
kind is Discovery through reasoning; e.g. in The Choephoroe:
'One like me is here; there is no one like me but Orestes;
he, therefore, must be here.' Or that which Polyidus the
Sophist suggested for Iphigenia; since it was natural for
Orestes to reflect: 'My sister was sacrificed, and I am to
be sacrificed like her.' Or that in the Tydeus of Theodectes:
'I came to find a son, and am to die myself.' Or that in
The Phinidae: on seeing the place the women inferred their
fate, that they were to die there, since they had also been
exposed there.

(5) There is, too, a composite Discovery
arising from bad reasoning on the side of the other party.
An instance of it is in Ulysses the False Messenger: he
said he should know the bow—which he had not seen;
but to suppose from that that he would know it again (as
though he had once seen it) was bad reasoning.

(6) The
best of all Discoveries, however, is that arising from the
incidents themselves, when the great surprise comes about
through a probable incident, like that in the Oedipus of
Sophocles; and also in Iphigenia; for it was not improbable
that she should wish to have a letter taken home. These
last are the only Discoveries independent of the artifice
of signs and necklaces.

Next after them come Discoveries
through reasoning.

[Agnitio quid sit, ante dictum est: species autem agnitionis, et prima quidem maxime rudis, et qua plerique utuntur propter consilii inopiam, quae fit per signa.

horum autem alia innata sunt,

ut "hastam quam gestant Terrigenae" vel stellas quales in Thyeste Carcinus, alia adquisita, et horum alia in corpore, ut cicatrices, alia extra, monilia, et quemadmodum in Tyrone per scapham.

licet vero etiam his uti aut melius aut peius, sicut Ulixes per cicatricem aliter agnitus est a nutrice et aliter a subulcis:

sunt enim quae fidei causa fiunt rudiores, et quaecumque huiusmodi, sed quae ex inopinato casu, ut quae in Niptris, meliores.

secundae autem sunt quae fictae a poeta, quare rudes; sic Orestes in Iphigenia notum fecit se esse Orestem: illa enim per epistolam, ille autem ipse dicit quae vult poeta, sed non fabula.

quapropter prope abest a dicto peccato: nam nonnulla ctiam gestare poterat. atque in Sophoclis Tereo “radii vox." tertia autem quae recordatione fit,

cum aliquid conspiciens commovetur, quemadmodum illa in Cypriis Dicaeogenis, conspiciens enim picturam lacrimavit, et illa in Alcini apologo, audiens enim citharoedum et recordatus lacrimnas fudit; inde noti ficti sunt.

quarta autem quae fit per conclusionem, sicut in Chocphoris: scilicet similis aliquis venit, similis autem nemo nisi Orestes: is igitur venit. et illa Polyidi sophistae circa Iphigeniam verisimile enim Orestem concludere, quoniam soror mactata esset, se quoque mactatum iri. et quae in Theodectis Tydeo, quoniam venerit filium inventurus, se ipsum interiturum esse. et quae in Phinidis; conspicatae enim locum quod fatale erat collegerunt, scilicet in hoc sibi moriendum esse : ibi enim etiam expositae erant.

est vero etiam quaedam composita ex falsa ratiocinatione theatri, ut in Ulixe mendace nuntio: arcum enim aiebat se agniturum esse quem non viderat, illud autem, quasi per hoc agniturus esset, sic falsam rationem iniit.

omnium autem optima agnitio est quae fit ex ipsis factis, stupore per verisimilia excitato, quemadmodum illa in Sophoclis Oedipo atque in Iphigenia: nam verisimile est tradere velle litteras. tales enim solae sine fictis signis et monilibus.

proximae autem quae fiunt ex conclusione.]

Ella Ricognitione, che che ella fia n'ho io detto innazi. Spetie d'effa,& la principale,è quella, che mancando d'artificio (& nondimanco vſata da piu) fi fa ò per via di dubitatione, ò per via di ſegni. ¹

Et queſta vltima parte fi diuide in ſegni ingenerati inſieme(come è la Lancia, che ſogliono portare i figliuoli della Terra ò le ſtelle, ficome l'uſanel ſuo Thieſte Carcino) ò in ſegni acquiſtati di fuori;

parte de'quali ne ſieno ò nel corpo ſteſſo impreſsi, come ſono le margini, ò che di fuori ſe gli accoſtino, come fono le Collane: & come è nella Fauola detta Tiro la Scafa.

Poſſonſitali vſare in migliore, & in peggior modo, ſicome interuenne à Vliffe, che per via della margine fu riconoſciuto della Balia in vn modo,& da' guardiani de'porci in vnaltro. Che inuero tutte queſte ſimili ricognitioni, che in tal modo s'acquiſtano fede, mancano d'artifitio.

Et migliori fono quelle ricognitioni, che fi fan per via della Peripetia, come ſono quelle della Tragedia detta Nittre, Nel ſecondo luogo di bontà ſono quelle Ricogni tioni, le quali eſſendo finte da eſsi Poeti, però non man cano d'artificio;ficome è l'Oreſte nella Ifigenia, che co nobbe la forella, & fu da lei cognofciuto egli la conobbe per via d' una lettera, & da lei fu riconoſciuto per via della haſta di Pelope.

Queſte Recognitioni intal modo fatte il Poeta le finge come gli piace e; ; & non le finge effa Fauola: laonde elle caſcano ageuolmente nello errore ſopra detto.

Che egli è ben lecito di produrne alcune, ficome è nel Thereo di Sofocle prodotta la voce dalla ſcuola da teſsere. La terza ſpetie di Recognitione fi fa per via della memoria, cioè nel conofcere vna coſa mentre che vno la riguarda; ficome è nella Fauola di Diceogene chiamata Ciprii, doue colui riſguardando quella immagine dipinta, pianſe.

Et acome è nella Odiſſea quella, che è nell'Apologo d'Al cinoo; doue Vliffe vdendo il fonatore della Cetera, ritornando in memoria,pianfe; & perciò fu riconoſciuro. La quarta ſpetie d'eſſa ſi fa per via del Silogifmo, co meenella Cleofove; Che egliera cioè venuto vn certo fimile, & che nelluno l'era fimile, in fuori che Oreftes adunche egli era venuto Orefte.

Et come è detto da яя ( Polide Sofiſta di Ifigenia, Egli è, diſſe, verifimile che Oreſte haueſſe diſcorſo, che eſſendo ſtata facrificata la forella, à lui parimente doueffe incontrare il medefimo. Et come è nella Fauola di Teodette detta il Tideo;doue colui, che viene per trouare il ſuo figliuolo, è ammazzato. Et come è nella Fauola detta Fenide, do ue coloro, hauendo rifguardato il luogo,conchiuſono, quiui ſopraſtare loro il fato, che haueua predetto loro, che elle doueuon' quiui morire; conciofia che in detto luogo elle fuſsino ſtate eſpoſte:

A' queſta anchora s'aggiugne quella, che ſi fa nel Teatro per via del falfo Silo gifmo, come fi vede nello Vliſſe chiamato Non vero nuntio, che quiui è vno, che dice eſſere per conoſcer quello arco, il quale e' non haueua veduto, & quell'al tro, come ſe tale arco doueſſe da lui eſſere riconoſciuto: però vi fece la conclufion' falſa.

Ottima Ricognitione infra tutte è quella, che, dalle cofe ſteſſe nafcendo, commuoue gli animi à marauiglia per via de' verifimili; come è quella dello Edippo di Sofocle, & della Ifigenia per effer' verifimil cofa, che ella defideraffe di fcriuergli.Conciofia che tali recognitionı fole ſi facci no & ſenza ſegni finti, & ſenza gli eſtrinfechi; come fo no le collane :

& nel ſecondo luogo ſono quelle, che fi fanno per via del Silogifmo

Ac agnitio quid sit, dictum est prius. species autem agnitionis prima est, quae maxime expers est artis et qua plurimi utuntur propter penuriam,

quae per signa fit; eaque partim innata, ut lanceam quam Terrigenae ferunt, aut stellas, quales in Thyeste dicit Carcinus;

partim adventicia, aut in corpore, ut cicatrices, aut extra, ut monilia, et ut in Tyrone per scapham.

ac licet his uti vel melius vel peius, ut Ulysses per cicatricem aliter agnitus est a nutrice, aliter a subulcis.

et sunt quidem, quae fidei causa adhibentur, magis artis expertes, etiam huiusmodi omnes. quae vero ex peripetia, ut quae in Niptris, meliores. secundae sunt quae a poëta factae sunt. itaque expertes artis, ut Orestes in Iphigenia agnovit sororem agnitus ab ipsa.

haec quidem agnita per epistolam, ille vero per signa. ac ipse quidem dicit quae vult poëta, sed non fabula.

quare a dicto peccato non longe abest (licebat enim quaedam interponere) etiam in Sophoclis Tereo radii vox. tertia agnitio est quae per memoriam fit, cum quis sentit aliquid videndo, ut quae in Cypriis Dicaeogenis: cum enim picturam inspexisset, luxit; et quae in Alcinoi apologo: citharoedum audiens et recordatus lacrimavit;

unde agniti sunt. quarta quae ex syllogismo, ut in Choephoris, quia similis quidam venit: atqui similis nullus praeterquam Orestes: ergo iste venit.

et quae Polyidis sophistae de Iphigenia: verisimile namque est Orestem ratiocinari et sororem immolatam esse et ipsi contingere immolari. et in Tydeo Theodectis, quod cum venisset ut inventurus filium, ipse periit. et quae in Phoenicibus: cum enim locum vidissent, ratiocinatae sunt fatum, quod fato statutum esset ipsis moriendum esse: etenim ibi expositae sunt.

est etiam quaedam composita ex paralogismo theatri, ut in Ulysse falso nuntio: hic enim inquit se arcum cogniturum, quem non viderat; ille vero quasi is agnovisset, propterea paralogismum fecit. omnium autem optima agnitio est, quae ex ipsis rebus est, facta consternatione per verisimilia,

ut in Sophoclis Oedipode et in Iphigenia: verisimile enim est eam velle dare litteras: tales enim solae sine factis signis et monilibus sunt.

at secundae sunt quae per syllogismum fiunt.

Anagnorisis autem quid quidem sit, dictum est prius;

species autem anagnoriseos, prima quidem inartificiosissima et qua plurima utuntur propter defectum,

que per signa. Horum autem hec quidem connaturalia, puta «lancea quam ferunt terrigene » aut «stellas » quales in Thyeste Cancros,

hec autem adventitia, et horum hec quidem in corpore, puta cicatrices, hec autem extra, puta que circa collum et que in Tyrei per skafam. —

Est autem et hiis uti aut melius aut peius, puta ' Odyseus per cicatricem alius recognitus est a trofo, et alius a sybotis;

sunt enim que quidem fidei gratia inartificialiores, et que tales omnes, hee autem ex peripeteia, sicut qui in Niptris, meliores. —

Secunde autem que poetizate a poeta, propter quod inartificiales, velut Horestes in Ifigeneia recognovit quia Horestes ; illa quidem enim per epistolam, ille autem ipse dicit que vult poeta sed non fabula,

quia prope dictum peccatum est ; licebat enim utique quedam et inferre. Et in eo qui Sophoclei Tyrei que «spate texentium vox»

aut per memoriam fore aliquid scientem, sicut qui in Cypriis ipsius Dykeogenis, videns enim scripturam flevit ; et que in Alkini apologon, audiens enim cytharistam et memoratus lacrimatus est, unde recogniti sunt. —

Quarta autem que ex sillogismo, puta in Khloiforis, quod similis aliquis venit, similis autem nullus sed aut Horestes' iste ergo venit. Et que Polyeidis sophiste de Ifigenia ; verisimile enim Horestem sillogizasse quod si soror immolata est et ipsi accidere immolari. Et in Theodecti Tvdei, quod veniens tamquam inventurus filium ipse periit. Et que in Finides ; videntes enim locum sillogizaverunt fatum, quod in hoc fatatum erat mori ipsis, et enim exposite fuerunt hic. —

Est autem quedam et composita ex paralogismo theatri, puta in Odyssee falsi nuntio ; hoc quidem enim, scilicet arcum, ait cognoscere quod non viderat, hoc autem ut per illum recognoscentem, per hoc fecisse paralogismum. —

Omnium autem optima recognitio que ex ipsis rebus stupefactione facta per verisimilia, puta quod in Sophoclei Oidipode et Ifigeneia ; verisimile enim velle imponi litteras. Tales enim sole sine poetizatis signis et collaribus. —

Secunde autem que ex sillogismo.

‏وقد تكلم ايضا فى الاستدلال واما انواع الاستدلالات فمنها اولا ذلك الذى هو بلا صناعة وهو الذى يستعمله كثيرون بسبب السل بتوسط العلامات

‏ما كان منها متهيية فبمنزلة الحرية التى كان يتمسك بها المعروفون بقاغانس

‏او الكواكب بمنزلة التى ٮٮواسطس الشبيهة بالسرطان ومنها ما هى مقناة بمنزلة التى تمسك باليد وتوضع على الجسم بمنزلة الطوق فى العنق والسيف باليد

‏وقد يمكن ان تستعمل هذه اما بالفاضلة منها واما بالرذلة بمنزلة ما عرف اودوسوس بالبثرة التى كانت فى رجله من مربيته على جهة اخرى ومما حرره على جهة اخرى

‏وذلك ان منها ما هو فى امر التصديق اكثر فى باب الصناعة وجميع هذه التى هى امثالها ومنها ما يوجد فيها الادارة والتقليب اكثر مثل ان هذه التى تكون بالتغسل اجود

‏والثوانى التى علمها الشاعر لهذا السبب بلا صناعة مثل جانب المعروفة بباغانيا وهو الذى به استدلت اباغانيا انه ارسطس وذلك انه اما تلك فبالرسالة الى ذاك واما هذا فيخبر بما يريده الشاعر لا الخرافة وحكاية الحديث

‏ولهذا السبب صار هذا بالقرب من الزلل الذى خبر به وقد يوجد اخر يقتصب بحسب هذا الراى وهذه فيما قاله سوفقلس من انه سمع صوت ساعد ممتهن

‏والثالث هو ان يكون ينال الانسان ان يحس عند ما يرى كالحال فيما كان باهل ديقوغانس فى قبرس فانه قال انه لما راى الكتابات بكا وكذلك امر اهل القينس من القول فانه لما سمع العواد وتذكر دمع ومن هنالك عرف بعضهم بعضا

‏واما الرابع فما يخطر بالفكر بمنزلة انه اتا من هو شبيه بالمكفنين لانسان ولم يات احد يشبه الا ارسطس فهذا اذا هو الذى اتا واما السوفسطانى فعند ما نظر فى لامور نظرا كثيرا قبل ايباغانيا على الحقيقة ظن بارسطس انه هو نفسه فكر ان اخته ذبحت وانه عرض انها انما كانت تضحى له وقال ايضا ثااودقطس انه عندما لسفينيدس من انها عند ما جات ونظرت الى الموضع فكرت فى باب القضا واخطر به ببالها انه جميعهن بهذا قضى عليهم ان يمتن وذلك انهم ٮٮحرحوں بالامر

‏وقد يوجد ضرب اخر ايضا مركب الماخوذ من مغالطة القياس التى لثااطرن بمنزلة فيما دون من امر اودوسيا ذلك المبشر الطاهر وذلك ان من القوس زعم انه ليس يمكن انسان اخر فقد قال ذلك الشاعر والخير ايضا الذى اتى فى ذلك قد خبر فيه في امر القوس ليعرف ما لم يروا ما القول انه بتوسط ذاك كاٮٮ ٮعرف ففى هذا كانت المغالطة فى القياس

‏غير ان الاستدلال الفاضل على كل شى فهى الماخوذة من امور الفعل الارادى ولذلك مثل هذا ارى سوفقلس فى اوديفس وفى ايباغانيا ايضا وذلك انه قد كان يريد على الحقيقة ان يدون فى ذلك كلام وذلك ان هذه الامور هى وحدها فقط بلا اشيا معمولة وبلا اشيا فى العنق

‏والثانى من القياس

‏وقد تكلم فيها كلاما كافيا فى الاقاويل التى اتى بها وقد تكلم ايضا فى الاستدلال واما انواع الاستدلالات فمنها اولا ذلك الذى هو بلا صناعة وهو الذى يستعمله كثيرون بسبب السل بتوسط العلامات

‏ما كان منها متهيية فبمنزلة الحرية التى كان يتمسك بها المعروفون بقاغانس او الكواكب بمنزلة التى ٮٮواسطس الشبيهة بالسرطان ومنها ما هى مقناة بمنزلة التى تمسك باليد وتوضع على الجسم بمنزلة الطوق فى العنق والسيف باليد

‏وقد يمكن ان تستعمل هذه اما بالفاضلة منها واما بالرذلة بمنزلة ما عرف اودوسوس بالبثرة التى كانت فى رجله من مربيته على جهة اخرى ومما حرره على جهة اخرى وذلك ان منها ما هو فى امر التصديق اكثر فى باب الصناعة وجميع هذه التى هى امثالها ومنها ما يوجد فيها الادارة والتقليب اكثر مثل ان هذه التى تكون بالتغسل اجود

‏والثوانى التى علمها الشاعر لهذا السبب بلا صناعة مثل جانب المعروفة بباغانيا وهو الذى به استدلت اباغانيا انه ارسطس وذلك انه اما تلك فبالرسالة الى ذاك واما هذا فيخبر

‏بما يريده الشاعر لا الخرافة وحكاية الحديث

‏ولهذا السبب صار هذا بالقرب من الزلل الذى خبر به وقد يوجد اخر يقتصب بحسب هذا الراى

‏وهذه فيما قاله سوفقلس من انه سمع صوت ساعد ممتهن

‏والثالث هو ان يكون ينال الانسان ان يحس عند ما يرى كالحال فيما كان باهل ديقوغانس فى قبرس فانه قال انه لما راى الكتابات بكا وكذلك امر اهل القينس من القول فانه لما سمع العواد وتذكر دمع ومن هنالك عرف بعضهم بعضا

‏واما الرابع فما يخطر بالفكر بمنزلة انه اتا من هو شبيه بالمكفنين لانسان ولم يات احد يشبه الا ارسطس فهذا اذا هو الذى اتا

‏واما السوفسطانى فعند ما نظر فى لامور نظرا كثيرا قبل ايباغانيا على الحقيقة ظن بارسطس انه هو نفسه فكر ان اخته ذبحت وانه عرض انها انما كانت تضحى له

‏وقال ايضا ثااودقطس

‏انه عندما لسفينيدس من انها عند ما جات ونظرت الى الموضع فكرت فى باب القضا واخطر به ببالها انه جميعهن بهذا قضى عليهم ان يمتن وذلك انهم ٮٮحرحوں بالامر

‏وقد يوجد ضرب اخر ايضا مركب الماخوذ من مغالطة القياس التى لثااطرن بمنزلة فيما دون من امر اودوسيا ذلك المبشر الطاهر وذلك ان من القوس زعم انه ليس يمكن انسان اخر فقد قال ذلك الشاعر والخير ايضا الذى اتى فى ذلك قد خبر فيه في امر القوس ليعرف ما لم يروا ما القول انه بتوسط ذاك كاٮٮ ٮعرف ففى هذا كانت المغالطة فى القياس

‏غير ان الاستدلال الفاضل على كل شى فهى الماخوذة من امور الفعل الارادى ولذلك مثل هذا ارى سوفقلس فى اوديفس وفى ايباغانيا ايضا وذلك انه قد كان يريد على الحقيقة ان يدون فى ذلك كلام

‏وذلك ان هذه الامور هى وحدها فقط بلا اشيا معمولة وبلا اشيا فى العنق

‏والثانى من القياس