Book,  Chapter

 1     II,  IV  |         question for or against a vacuum. But my question is,—whether
 2     II,  IV  |       their very disputes about a vacuum plainly demonstrate, as
 3     II,  XIII|    questions in philosophy.~21. A vacuum beyond the utmost bounds
 4     II,  XIII|          of annihilation proves a vacuum. Farther, those who assert
 5     II,  XIII|        admit the possibility of a vacuum. For, it is evident that
 6     II,  XIII|          dispute for or against a vacuum, do thereby confess they
 7     II,  XIII|       they have distinct ideas of vacuum and plenum, i.e. that they
 8     II,  XIII|   absurdly whenever they speak of vacuum; since it is impossible
 9     II,  XIII|         be without extension. For vacuum, whether we affirm or deny
10     II,  XIII|           it.~23. Motion proves a vacuum. But not to go so far as
11     II,  XIII|           s omnipotency to find a vacuum, the motion of bodies that
12     II,  XIII|           the real existence of a vacuum, but the idea of it; which
13     II,  XIII|        dispute whether there be a vacuum or no. For if they had not
14     II,  XIII|     concerning the existence of a vacuum, this is plain to me—that
15    III,  X   | vegetative souls, abhorrence of a vacuum, intentional species, &c.,
16     IV,  VII |      demonstrate that there is no vacuum, i.e. no space void of body,
17     IV,  VII |        and sound.~13. Instance in vacuum. But if another should come
18     IV,  VII |  demonstrate, that there may be a vacuum or space without a body,
19     IV,  VII |          viz. that there may be a vacuum, and that there cannot be
20     IV,  VII |        and that there cannot be a vacuum, by these two certain principles,
21     IV,  VII |           above mentioned about a vacuum. So that whilst men take
22     IV,  VIII|            and “body is body”; “a vacuum is a vacuum,” and “a vortex
23     IV,  VIII|          is body”; “a vacuum is a vacuum,” and “a vortex is a vortex”; “