Book, Paragraph

 1   I, 4 |         contrary to reason.~The statement that complete separation
 2   I, 7 | principles were three; our last statement has elucidated the difference
 3   I, 9 |     accepting on this point the statement of Parmenides. Secondly,
 4  II, 1 |         not separable except in statement) of things which have in
 5  II, 2 |      away into making an absurd statement when he said "he has the
 6  II, 3 |         the archetype, i.e. the statement of the essence, and its
 7  II, 4 |     order all that exists. This statement might well cause surprise.
 8  II, 4 |        other absurdities of the statement, it is the more absurd that
 9 III, 3 |         the mover, for the same statement will hold of "mover" and "
10 III, 5 |        enough just to make this statement and then decamp. Anything
11  IV, 1 |         whether in the way of a statement of difficulties or of a
12  IV, 1 |    limits of body; for the same statement will apply to them: where
13  IV, 2 |         that?~This concludes my statement of the reasons why space
14  IV, 3 |         may serve as a critical statement of the difficulties involved.~
15  IV, 6 |       division beyond which the statement would become untrue. If
16  IV, 9 |       that there is a void; our statement is based on the assumption
17  IV, 10|       else.~This may serve as a statement of the difficulties about
18   V, 6 |     motion has local rest. This statement, however, needs further
19 VIII, 2|       numerically one a correct statement; in fact, this may be said