Book, Paragraph

 1   I, 1 |          are to study growth and "alteration". We must inquire what each
 2   I, 1 |          of them is; and whether "alteration" is to be identified with
 3   I, 1 |     unqualified coming-to-be" is "alteration", while others maintain
 4   I, 1 |       while others maintain that "alteration" and coming-to-be are distinct.
 5   I, 1 |      assert that coming-to-be is "alteration", and that whatever "comes-to-be"
 6   I, 1 |    distinguish coming-to-be from "alteration". To this latter class belong
 7   I, 1 | coming-tobe and passing-away are "alteration". For they must affirm that
 8   I, 1 |          one, must maintain that "alteration" is distinct from coming-to-be:
 9   I, 1 |          they too must recognize "alteration" as a fact distinct from
10   I, 1 |         is easy to perceive. For "alteration" is a fact of observation.
11   I, 1 |    original reals" than one make "alteration" impossible. For "alteration,
12   I, 1 |      alteration" impossible. For "alteration, as we assert, takes place
13   I, 1 |      qualities. Yet this is what "alteration" essentially is.~It follows,
14   I, 1 |        growth and diminution, or "alteration"; further, that the being
15   I, 1 |          matter and the being of "alteration" stand and fall together.
16   I, 1 |   together. For if the change is "alteration", then the substratum is
17   I, 1 |          things is one, there is "alteration".~Empedocles, indeed, seems
18   I, 2 |          change, viz. growth and "alteration". For though, no doubt,
19   I, 2 |           conditions under which "alteration" or growth are attributable
20   I, 2 |          the "figures", and make "alteration" and coming-to-be result
21   I, 2 |           and "association", but "alteration" by their "grouping" and "
22   I, 2 |    coming-to-be is distinct from "alteration", and (ii) that, whereas
23   I, 2 |     coming-to-be at all or it is "alteration": or else we must endeavour
24   I, 2 |         is possible to construct "alteration" and coming-to-be with them,
25   I, 2 |         in what is continuous is "alteration". On the contrary, this
26   I, 2 |          that all such change is "alteration": whereas in fact there
27   I, 2 |         accidents, there will be "alteration".~"Dissociation" and "association"
28   I, 4 |         between coming-to-be and "alteration"-for we maintain that these
29   I, 4 |           these occurs; there is "alteration" when the substratum is
30   I, 4 |          occurrence is no longer "alteration". It is a coming-to-be of
31   I, 4 |     Otherwise the change will be "alteration." Suppose, e.g. that the
32   I, 4 |    Consequently such changes are "alteration." When the change from contrary
33   I, 4 |           i.e. in quality, it is "alteration": but, when nothing persists,
34   I, 4 |         occurrence and (ii) what "alteration" is: but we have still to
35   I, 5 |       from coming-to-be and from "alteration", and ii) what is the process
36   I, 5 |         the sphere of quality is "alteration"-both growth and "alteration"
37   I, 5 |      alteration"-both growth and "alteration" being changes from what
38   I, 5 |           though the quality (in "alteration") and the size (in growth)
39   I, 5 |        principle applies also to "alteration". Flesh is said to have
40   I, 6 |          the monists make use of "alteration": but) without an agent
41   I, 8 |    through their pores, so) "all "alteration" and all "passion" take
42   I, 8 |         passing-away" as well as "alteration". For the primary bodies
43   I, 9 |        For this theory abolishes "alteration": but we see the same body
44   I, 10|             resulting from their "alteration".~
45  II, 1 |           we have also discussed "alteration", and explained what "altering"
46  II, 1 |       dissociation", or to their "alteration", the coming-to-be and passing-away
47  II, 1 |           is only the results of "alteration" which retain the name of
48  II, 1 |           thinkers assert, since "alteration" would then have been impossible),
49  II, 4 |        there would not have been "alteration, since "alteration" is change
50  II, 4 |          been "alteration, since "alteration" is change in respect to
51  II, 5 |           persist) there will be "alteration" instead of coming-to-be.
52  II, 5 |       change of that kind (a) is "alteration", and (b) is not what is
53  II, 10|    ungenerated, and incapable of "alteration"; and if the circular movements
54  II, 11|         process (coming-to-be or "alteration" or any kind of change whatever)