Compare Aristotel. Physic. i. 2, 185, b. 27, with the Scholia of Simplikius, p. 330, a. 331, b. 18-28, ed. Brandis.] Some things are always named or spoken of _per se_, others with reference to something else. Thus, Diversum is always different from something else: it is relative, implying a correlate.[114] In this, as well as in other points, Diversum (or Different) is a distinct Form, Genus, or Idea, which runs through all other things whatever. Each thing is different from every other thing: but it differs from them, not through any thing in its own nature, but because it partakes of the Form or Idea of Diversum or the Different.[115] So, in like manner, the Form or Idea of Idem (or Same) runs through all other things: since each thing is both different from all others, and is also the same with itself. [Footnote 114: Plato, Sophist. p. 255 C-D. [Greek: tô=n o)/ntôn ta\ me\n au)ta\ kath' au(ta/, ta/ de\ pro\s a)/llêla a)ei\ _le/gesthai_ . . . To\ d' e(/teron a)ei\ pro\s e(/teron . . . Nu=n de\ a)technô=s ê(mi=n o(/, ti per a)\n e(/teron ê)=|, sumbe/bêken e)x a)na/gkês _e(te/rou tou=to o(/per e)sti\n ei)=nai_.] These last words partly anticipate Aristotle's explanation of [Greek: ta\ pro/s ti] (Categor. p. 6, a. 38). Here we have, for the first time so far as I know (certainly anterior to Aristotle), names _relative_ and _non-relative_, distinguished as classes, and contrasted with each other. It is to be observed that Plato here uses [Greek: le/gesthai] and [Greek: ei)=nai] as equivalent; which is not very consistent with the sense which he assigns to [Greek: e)stin] in predication: see the note immediately preceding.] [Footnote 115: Plato, Sophist. p. 255 E. [Greek: pe/mpton dê\ tê\n thate/rou phu/sin lekte/on e)n toi=s ei)/desin ou)=san, e)n oi(=s proairou/metha . . . kai\ dia\ pa/ntôn ge au)tê\n au)tô=n phê/somen ei)=nai dielêluthui=an; e(\n e(/kaston ga\r e(/teron ei)=nai tô=n a)/llôn ou) dia\ tê\n au(tou= phu/sin, a)lla\ dia\ to\ _mete/chein tê=s i)de/as tê=s thate/rou_.]] [Side-note: His review of the select Five Forms.] Now motion is altogether different from rest Motion therefore _is not_ rest. Yet still motion _is_, because it partakes of existence or Ens. Accordingly, motion both _is_ and _is not_. Again, motion is different from Idem or the Same. It is therefore _not the same_. Yet still motion _is the same_; because every thing partakes of identity, or is the same with itself. Motion therefore both _is_ the same and _is not_ the same. We must not scruple to advance both these propositions. Each of them stands on its own separate ground.[116] So also motion is different from Diversum or The Different; in other words, it _is not_ different, yet still it _is_ different. And, lastly, motion is different from Ens, in other words, _it is not Ens_, or is non-Ens: yet still _it is Ens_, because it partakes of existence. Hence motion is both Ens, and Non-Ens. [Footnote 116: Plato, Sophist. pp. 255-256.]