[289] Arist., de Anim. 2.1. [290] According to Aristotle. [291] Phaedo, p. 87; Cary, 82. [292] Similar to the modern James-Lange theory of bodily emotions. [293] See iv. 4.20, 28. [294] See sect. 7, 9, 10. [295] See iv. 3.22, 23. [296] Porphyry and Ammonius in Bouillet, i. Intr. p. 60, 63, 64, 75, 79, 93, 96, 98, and note on p. 362 to 377. [297] Namely, intelligence and the reasonable soul. [298] See Bouillet, i. p. 325, 332. [299] Bouillet, Intr. p. lxxviii. [300] See Bouillet, i., note, p. 327, 341. [301] One of the three hypostases. [302] See Bouillet, i. p. lxxiii. 344-352. [303] Plato, Timaeus, p. 35; Cary, 12. [304] These images of the universal Soul are the faculties of the soul, sense-power, vegetative power, generative power or nature; see iv. 4.13, 14. [305] "Turning" means here to incline. [306] See St. Paul, Rom. for phantasy, or imagination; vii. 7-25. [307] See iv. 3.29-31, also i. 1.9; Numenius, fr. ii. 8, 19; iii. See section 10. [308] See i. 2.5. [309] iv. 3.19, 23. [310] See ii. 9.3, 4, 11, 12. [311] Fancy or representation, i. 4.10; iv. 3.3, 30, 31. [312] See 4.3.19, 23; 6.7.6.7. [313] Plato, Rep. x. p. 611; Cary, 11. [314] For this see 4.3.12, 18; 4.8. [315] Odyss. xi. 602, 5; see 4.3.27. [316] We find here a reassertion of Numenius's doctrine of two souls in man, fr. 53. [317] Bouillet observes that this book is only a feeble outline of some of the ideas developed in vi. 7, 8, and 9. The biographical significance of this might be as follows. As in the immediately preceding books Plotinos was harking back to Numenius's doctrines, he may have wished to reconcile the two divergent periods, the Porphyrian monism of vi. 7 and 8, with the earlier Amelian dualism of vi. 9. This was nothing derogatory to him; for it is well known that there was a difference between the eclectic monism of the young Plato of the Republic, and the more logical dualism of the older Plato of the Laws. This latter was represented by Numenius and Amelius; the former--combined with Aristotelian and Stoic elements--by Porphyry. Where Plato could not decide, why should we expect Plotinos to do so? And, as a matter of fact, the world also has never been able to decide, so long as it remained sincere, and did not deceive itself with sophistries, as did Hegel. Kant also had his "thing-in-itself"--indeed, he did little more than to develop the work of Plotinos. [318] As the Stoics would say. [319] Which is one of the three hypostases, ii. 9.1 and v. 1. [320] We see here Plotinos feeling the approach of this impending dissolution. [321] Arranged by Bouillet in the order of the Enneads they summarize. [322] Passages in quotation marks are from the text of Plotinos. [323] See i. 2.3. [324] See i. 2.4. [325] See i. 2.4. [326] See i. 2.6. [327] See i. 2.7. [328] See i. 2.7. [329] See i. 2.5. [330] See i. 8.1. [331] See 36.38. [332] These are the three divine hypostases, i. 8.2; ii. 9.1. [333] See ii. 2.2.