Book, Paragraph

 1  II, 1  |       appearance of the former.~It is right also that philosophy should
 2 III, 5  |       accidents of these it cannot be right to call beings.~But if this
 3  IV, 4  |        follows that all would then be right and all would be in error,
 4  IV, 4  |               it is not so, and is he right who judges both? If he is
 5  IV, 4  |             who judges both? If he is right, what can they mean by saying
 6  IV, 4  |           this kind? And if he is not right, but more right than he
 7  IV, 4  |             he is not right, but more right than he who judges in the
 8  IV, 4  |              are alike both wrong and right, one who is in this condition
 9  IV, 4  |              wrong and therefore more right. If then that which has
10  IV, 5  |            mistaken and those who are right are opposed to one another
11  IV, 5  |        question supposes, all will be right in their beliefs.~Evidently,
12  IV, 5  |              finally did not think it right to say anything but only
13  IV, 5  |            changed, but one is always right about it, and that which
14  IV, 8  |            things are at rest are not right, nor are those who say all
15   V, 30 |               its angles equal to two right angles attaches to the triangle.
16  VI, 2  |               angles are equal to two right angles".-And this happens
17 VII, 2  |             the common statements are right and which are not right,
18 VII, 2  |               right and which are not right, and what substances there
19 VII, 10 |          acute angle is a part of the right angle and the finger a part
20 VII, 10 |            angle will be prior to the right angle and finger to the
21 VII, 10 |              them. The formula of the right angle, however, does not
22 VII, 10 |            acute includes that of the right angle; for he who defines
23 VII, 10 |            defines the acute uses the right angle; for the acute is "
24 VII, 10 |             the acute is "less than a right angle". The circle and the
25 VII, 10 |              any one asks whether the right angle and the circle and
26 VII, 10 |              the circle, and "being a right angle" and the essence of
27 VII, 10 |                and the essence of the right angle is the right angle,
28 VII, 10 |             of the right angle is the right angle, then the whole in
29 VII, 10 |               parts of the individual right angle (for both the material
30 VII, 10 |          angle (for both the material right angle which is made of bronze,
31 VII, 10 |          parts); while the immaterial right angle is posterior to the
32 VII, 11 |               thinking that it is not right to define these by reference
33 VII, 12 |           definition, since it is not right to state the same things
34 VII, 12 |    differentiae, or, according to the right method, the last of these.
35 VII, 16 |             exist, in one respect are right, in giving the Forms separate
36 VII, 16 |          another respect they are not right, because they say the one
37 VIII, 3 |            juxtaposition. And this is right; for the juxtaposition or
38  IX, 7  |             substance. And it is only right that "thaten" should be
39  IX, 8  |              precedes another in time right back to the actuality of
40  IX, 9  |             the triangle equal to two right angles? Because the angles
41  IX, 9  |            one point are equal to two right angles. If, then, the line
42  IX, 9  |             semicircle in all cases a right angle? If three lines are
43  IX, 10 |               angles are equal to two right angles while at another
44   X, 3  |               difference. That we are right in this supposition is shown
45   X, 6  |             reason Anaxagoras was not right in leaving the subject with
46  XI, 2  |              Further, how can they be right who say that the first principle
47  XI, 5  |            says "man" will be no more right than he who says "not-man".
48  XI, 5  |               either more or not less right than in saying he is not
49  XI, 5  |              so that one will also be right in saying that the same
50  XI, 6  |             of white.~We could not be right, then, in accepting the
51  XI, 9  |             That what we have said is right is evident from what all
52 XII, 6  |        actuality, then, is in a sense right, and in a sense not; and
53 XII, 10 |            nor "out of contraries" is right; nor do these thinkers tell
54 XII, 10 |          school we first mentioned is right in saying that it is a principle,
55 XIII, 2 |          mathematics show that we are right. For the dimension first
56 XIII, 7 |             particular point they are right who claim that the units
57 XIII, 7 |       hypothesis their statements are right, but as a whole they are
58 XIII, 8 |              form. And in a sense the right angle is prior to the acute,
59 XIII, 8 |          because it is a part and the right angle is divided into acute
60 XIII, 8 |      expressed in the definition, the right angle, and the whole consisting
61 XIII, 8 | starting-point? As has been said, the right angle is thought to be prior
62 XIII, 8 |           acute, and the acute to the right, and each is one. Accordingly
63 XIII, 9 |              out that all of them are right in some respect, but on
64 XIII, 9 |         respect, but on the whole not right. And they themselves confirm
65 XIII, 10|               its angles equal to two right angles, unless every triangle
66 XIII, 10|               its angles equal to two right angles, nor that this man
67 XIV, 4  |               two ways of speaking is right. It would be strange if
68 XIV, 6  |               the scansion is, in the right half of the line nine syllables,