Par.

 1 1 |    knowledge. And if, in this discussion, I use any argument which
 2 6 |    leaving no ambiguity in my discussion up to this point, I may
 3 6 | supreme Nature which is under discussion. Therefore, it is not even
 4 7 |         THERE now remains the discussion of that whole class of beings
 5 15|    attention be turned to the discussion of other kinds of predication.~
 6 21|      to prosecute in a single discussion, because they advanced on
 7 21| investigated independently in discussion directed on itself alone.~
 8 21|       times.~If, then, as our discussion has proved, it neither so
 9 22|  unlikeness of the objects of discussion. For in the latter case
10 29|   compelled to a more careful discussion of this expression by the
11 60|       Being. ~BUT, while this discussion engages our attention, I
12 61|      already disclosed in our discussion. For the Father, even though
13 65|   truth may be reached in the discussion of an ineffable subject. ~
14 65|       whatever conclusion our discussion has reached regarding it
15 65|     how can it be such as our discussion has shown? Or, could it
16 65|      established in this very discussion, namely, that the supreme
17 65|     disprove the truth of our discussion thus far concerning the
18 73|      an understanding through discussion. But that no being is unjustly