The philosophical and mathematical commentaries of Proclus on the first book of Euclid's elements (Vol. 1 of 2) : $b To which are added, A history of the restoration of Platonic theology, by the latter Platonists: And a translation from the Greek of Proclus's Theological elements
Plato · en
should be able to transmit the same passion to the principal, or be at
all sentient. For how can that which is void of sense, receive passion,
and convey it entire to a sentient part? Besides, if passion accedes
to the principal, it either falls on one of its parts, and so either
one part alone will be sentient, and the rest without sensation, and
consequently superfluous, or there must be innumerable and dissimilar
sensations; for if the sensation of each of the parts singly, is the
same with the aggregate of them all, of what use is a multitude of
parts? But if the sensations are various, a man may say, as it were, I
am primarily sentient in this place, and secondarily in another; and
every sentient part besides the first, will be ignorant where sensation
is most powerful: or perhaps (from such an hypothesis) every part of
the soul will be equally deceived, each part thinking the passion to
arise in the place where it is situated. But if not the principal
part alone, but every part of the soul be sentient, a principal part
is superfluous for the purpose of sensation; and if the soul be
divisible like magnitude, how is it able to recognize, as belonging
to one subject, the qualities which flow, as it were, through many
senses, as through the eyes and ears? For that part of the soul which
is perceptive through the eyes, distinguishes nothing but colours;
that which energises through the ears, nothing but sounds; and that
which acts through the medium of the touch, nothing but the surfaces
of bodies: what is it then which perceives all these properties of
bodies united in one subject, or what is that which perceives any thing
as a certain one? For unless the intentions of the senses, and of
sensible objects, were collected together in one, the soul could never
be able to judge of the peculiar and different properties of bodies:
Hence it is necessary that the soul should be, as it were, a general
centre; that the several senses should be extended on all sides to
this, similar to lines verging from the circumference of a circle to
the centre; and that a power of this kind, comprehending all things;
should be truly one. For if the soul was any thing divisible, and the
intentions of the senses reached the soul, and ended in its essence
like the extremities of various lines, they must either again concur
in one and the same as a medium, or have different situations, in such
a manner that each sense may perceive different from one another:
as if, for instance, the sense of sight should perceive the form of
Socrates, and the sense of hearing recognize his voice; that essence
which pronounces the whole to be one person, that of Socrates, must
be something different from each of the senses. Hence it is necessary
that the soul should be an indivisible essence; for if she possessed
magnitude, she must be divided along with every sensible object she
perceives; so that one part of the soul would perceive a certain part