the Earth is without the same, and owner of all those motions that in our seeming belong to the Sun and fixed Stars?
Simpl.These are the conclusions which are in dispute.
Sagr.And these two conclusions, are they not of such a nature, that one of them must necessarily be true, and the other false?
Simpl.They are so. We are in a Dilemma, one part of which must of necessity be true, and the other untrue; for between Motion and Rest, which are contradictories, there cannot be instanced a third, so as that one cannot say the Earth moves not, nor stands still; the Sun and Stars do not move, and yet stand not still.
Sagr.The Earth, the Sun, and Stars, what things are they in nature? are they petite things not worth our notice, or grand and worthy of consideration?
Simpl.They are principal, noble, integral bodies of the Universe, most vast and considerable.
Sagr.And Motion, and Rest, what accidents are they in Nature?
Simpl.So great and principal,Motion and rest principal accidents in nature. that Nature her self is defined by them.
Sagr.So that moving eternally, and the being wholly immoveable are two conditions very considerable in Nature, and indicate very great diversity; and especially when ascribed to the principal bodies of the Universe, from which can ensue none but very different events.
Simpl.Yea doubtlesse.
Sagr.Now answer me to another point. Do you believe that in Logick, Rhethorick, the Physicks, Metaphysicks, Mathematicks, and finally, in the universality of Disputations there are arguments sufficient to perswade and demonstrate to a person the fallacious, no lesse then the true conclusions?
Simpl.No Sir;Untruths cannot be demonstrated, as Truths are. rather I am very confident and certain, that for the proving of a true and necessary conclusion, there are in nature not onely one,For proof of true conclusions, many solid arguments may be produced, but to prove a falsity, none. but many very powerfull demonstrations: and that one may discusse and handle the same divers and sundry wayes, without ever falling into any absurdity; and that the more any Sophist would disturb and muddy it, the more clear would its certainty appear: And that on the contrary to make a false position passe for true, and to perswade the belief thereof, there cannot be any thing produced but fallacies, Sophisms, Paralogismes, Equivocations, and Discourses vain, inconsistant, and full of repugnances and contradictions.
Sagr.Now if eternal motion, and eternal rest be so principal accidents of Nature, and so different, that there can depend on them only most different consequences, and especially whenapplied
