Book, Paragraph
1 I, 2| white" is one thing, "to be musical" another, yet the same thing
2 I, 5| could "white" come from "musical", unless "musical" happened
3 I, 5| from "musical", unless "musical" happened to be an attribute
4 I, 5| intermediate colour. Similarly, "musical" comes to be from "not-musical",
5 I, 5| from any thing other than musical, but from "unmusical" or
6 I, 5| white" does not pass into "musical" (except, it may be, in
7 I, 5| an intermediate colour; "musical" passes into "not-musical"-
8 I, 5| chance thing other than musical, but into "unmusical" or
9 I, 7| can say (1) "man becomes musical", (2) what is "not-musical
10 I, 7| is "not-musical becomes musical", or (3), the "not-musical
11 I, 7| not-musical man becomes a musical man". Now what becomes in (
12 I, 7| and (2)- "man" and "not musical"-I call simple, and what
13 I, 7| not-musical man becomes a musical man", both what becomes
14 I, 7| not-musical comes to be musical"; as regards the other we
15 I, 7| being a man he came to be musical" but only "the man became
16 I, 7| but only "the man became musical".~When a "simple" thing
17 I, 7| such even when he becomes musical, whereas what is not musical
18 I, 7| musical, whereas what is not musical or is unmusical does not
19 I, 7| that "the unmusical becomes musical", and that "from unmusical
20 I, 7| from unmusical he becomes musical". And so both forms are
21 I, 7| the complex, "becoming a musical man from an unmusical man",
22 I, 7| unmusical man becoming a musical man".~But there are different
23 I, 7| both subject and form. For "musical man" is composed (in a way)
24 I, 7| in a way) of "man" and "musical": you can analyse it into
25 I, 7| principles-say for example the musical and the unmusical, the hot
26 II, 3| that "a pale man" or "a musical man" were said to be the
27 II, 5| whereas the pale or the musical is the incidental cause.
28 V, 1| when we say that something musical walks, that which walks
29 VI, 9| that is to say in which a musical man is the same as a man.
|