We note again that the relational theory of space from another point of view brings us back to the idea of the fundamental space-entities as being logical constructs from the relations between things. The difference is, that this paragraph is written from a more developed point of view, as it implicitly assumes the things in space, and conceives space as an expression of certain of their relations. Combining this paragraph with what has gone before, we see that the suggested procedure is first to define "things" in terms of the data of experience, and then to define space in terms of the relations between things. This procedure is explicitly assumed in the next short paragraph: "In this connection ... from the events." The gist of the remaining paragraphs of this section is contained in the paragraph at the bottom of p. 196: "The point in time ... new importance." The sentence, "We live in durations, and not in points," can be amplified by the addition, "We live in space-extensions and not in space-points." It must be noted that "whole and part" as applied to extensions in space or time must be different from the "all and some" of logic, unless we admit points to be the fundamental entities. For "spatial whole and spatial part" can only mean "all and some" if they really mean "all the points and some of the points." But if extensions and their relations are more fundamental than points, this interpretation is precluded. I suggest that "spatial whole and spatial part" is intimately connected with the fundamental relation between things from which our space ideas spring. The relation of space whole to space part has many formal properties which are identical with the properties of "all and some." Also when points have been defined, we can replace it by the conception of "all the points and some of the points." But the confusion between the two relations is fatal to sound views on the subject. _Diverse Euclidean Measure Systems_ The next section deals with the measure systems applicable to space.