The English works of Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury, Volume 07 (of 11)
Thomas Hobbes · en
The cause why you have performed nothing in any of your books (saving
that in your _Elenchus_ you have spied a few negligences of mine, which
I need not be ashamed of) is this, that you understood not what is
_quantity_, _line_, _superficies_, _angle_, and _proportion_; without
which you cannot have the science of any one proposition in geometry.
From this one and first definition of Euclid, “_a point is that whereof
there is no part_,” understood by Sextus Empiricus, as you understand
it, that is to say misunderstood, Sextus Empiricus had utterly destroyed
most of the rest, and demonstrated, that in geometry there is no
science, and by that means you have betrayed the most evident of the
sciences to the sceptics. But as I understand it for _that whereof no
part is reckoned_, his arguments have no force at all, and geometry is
redeemed. If a line have no latitude, how shall a cylinder rolling on a
plane, which it toucheth not but in a line, describe a superficies? How
can you affirm that any of those things can be without quantity, whereof
the one may be greater or less than the other? But in the common contact
of divers circles the external circle maketh with the common tangent a
less angle of contact than the internal. Why then is it not quantity? An
angle is made by the concourse of two lines from several regions,
concurring, by their generation, in one and the same point. How then can
you say the angle of contact is no angle? One measure cannot be
applicable at once to the angle of contact, and angle of conversion. How
then can you infer, if they be both angles, that they must be
homogeneous? Proportion is the relation of two quantities. How then can
a quotient or fraction, which is quantity absolute, be a proportion? But
to come at last to your _Epiphonema_ , wherein, though I have perfectly
demonstrated all those propositions concerning the proportion of
parabolasters to their parallelograms, and you have demonstrated none of
them (as you cannot now but plainly see), but committed most gross
paralogisms, how could you be so transported with pride, as insolently
to compare the setting of them forth as mine, to the act of him that
steals a horse, and comes to the gallows for it. You have read, I think,
of the gallows set up by Haman. Remember therefore also who was hanged
upon it.