Book, Paragraph

 1      I,  5 |        equal to two right angles qua isosceles. An instance of (
 2      I,  5 |       not possess this attribute qua lines or qua numbers, but
 3      I,  5 |      this attribute qua lines or qua numbers, but qua manifesting
 4      I,  5 |        lines or qua numbers, but qua manifesting this generic
 5      I,  5 | attribute belongs to equilateral qua triangle; then our knowledge
 6      I,  5 |         it has been demonstrated qua triangle or qua isosceles?
 7      I,  5 |     demonstrated qua triangle or qua isosceles? What is the point
 8      I,  7 |        which they do not possess qua lines, i.e. in virtue of
 9      I,  12|      controversy with a geometer qua geometer the disputant confines
10      I,  13|          of the optician, either qua optician or qua mathematical
11      I,  13|           either qua optician or qua mathematical optician. Many
12      I,  19|         that all the reciprocals qua subjects stand in the same
13      I,  22|          inheres, for it was not qua white or qua a species of
14      I,  22|          it was not qua white or qua a species of white that
15      I,  22|          to be white, and did so qua wood or qua a species of
16      I,  22|           and did so qua wood or qua a species of wood and qua
17      I,  22|        qua a species of wood and qua nothing else.~If we must
18      I,  24|  attributable to its subject not qua isosceles but qua triangle,
19      I,  24|    subject not qua isosceles but qua triangle, he who knows that
20      I,  24|   attribute knows the subject as qua itself possessing the attribute,
21      I,  24|     subject is proved to possess qua triangle an attribute which
22      I,  24|         does not in fact possess qua triangle, that is not demonstration:
23      I,  24|        but if it does possess it qua triangle the rule applies
24      I,  24|         possessing its attribute qua that in virtue of which
25      I,  24|       triangles, it is isosceles qua triangle and not triangle
26      I,  24|        triangle and not triangle qua isosceles which has its
27      I,  25|      proof, because it is a sine qua non of negative demonstration.~
28      I,  27|          a science of properties qua inhering in a substratum,
29     II,  3 |      this too. Of a single thing qua single there is a single