the six enneads-第66节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


sion？　To　what　order　of　beings　does　it　belong？　　　　　It　obviously　is　not　spatial；　for　place；　too；　is　something　outside　it。　　　　　9。　〃A　Number；　a　Measure；　belonging　to　Movement？〃　　　　　This；　at　least；　is　plausible　since　Movement　is　a　continuous　thin；　but　let　us　consider。　　　　　To　begin　with；　we　have　the　doubt　which　met　us　when　we　probed　its　identification　with　extent　of　Movement：　is　Time　the　measure　of　any　and　every　Movement？　　　　　Have　we　any　means　of　calculating　disconnected　and　lawless　Movement？　What　number　or　measure　would　apply？　What　would　be　the　principle　of　such　a　Measure？　　　　　One　Measure　for　movement　slow　and　fast；　for　any　and　every　movement：　then　that　number　and　measure　would　be　like　the　decade；　by　which　we　reckon　horses　and　cows；　or　like　some　common　standard　for　liquids　and　solids。　If　Time　is　this　Kind　of　Measure；　we　learn；　no　doubt；　of　what　objects　it　is　a　Measure…　of　Movements…　but　we　are　no　nearer　understanding　what　it　is　in　itself。　　　　　Or：　we　may　take　the　decade　and　think　of　it；　apart　from　the　horses　or　cows；　as　a　pure　number；　this　gives　us　a　measure　which；　even　though　not　actually　applied；　has　a　definite　nature。　Is　Time；　perhaps；　a　Measure　in　this　sense？　　　　　No：　to　tell　us　no　more　of　Time　in　itself　than　that　it　is　such　a　number　is　merely　to　bring　us　back　to　the　decade　we　have　already　rejected；　or　to　some　similar　collective　figure。　　　　　If；　on　the　other　hand；　Time　is　＇not　such　an　abstraction　but＇　a　Measure　possessing　a　continuous　extent　of　its　own；　it　must　have　quantity；　like　a　foot…rule；　it　must　have　magnitude：　it　will；　clearly；　be　in　the　nature　of　a　line　traversing　the　path　of　Movement。　But；　itself　thus　sharing　in　the　movement；　how　can　it　be　a　Measure　of　Movement？　Why　should　the　one　of　the　two　be　the　measure　rather　than　the　other？　Besides　an　accompanying　measure　is　more　plausibly　considered　as　a　measure　of　the　particular　movement　it　accompanies　than　of　Movement　in　general。　Further；　this　entire　discussion　assumes　continuous　movement；　since　the　accompanying　principle；　Time；　is　itself　unbroken　＇but　a　full　explanation　implies　justification　of　Time　in　repose＇。　　　　　The　fact　is　that　we　are　not　to　think　of　a　measure　outside　and　apart；　but　of　a　combined　thing；　a　measured　Movement；　and　we　are　to　discover　what　measures　it。　　　　　Given　a　Movement　measured；　are　we　to　suppose　the　measure　to　be　a　magnitude？　　　　　If　so；　which　of　these　two　would　be　Time；　the　measured　movement　or　the　measuring　magnitude？　For　Time　＇as　measure＇　must　be　either　the　movement　measured　by　magnitude；　or　the　measuring　magnitude　itself　or　something　using　the　magnitude　like　a　yard…stick　to　appraise　the　movement。　In　all　three　cases；　as　we　have　indicated；　the　application　is　scarcely　plausible　except　where　continuous　movement　is　assumed：　unless　the　Movement　proceeds　smoothly；　and　even　unintermittently　and　as　embracing　the　entire　content　of　the　moving　object；　great　difficulties　arise　in　the　identification　of　Time　with　any　kind　of　measure。　　　　　Let　us；　then；　suppose　Time　to　be　this　〃measured　Movement；〃　measured　by　quantity。　Now　the　Movement　if　it　is　to　be　measured　requires　a　measure　outside　itself；　this　was　the　only　reason　for　raising　the　question　of　the　accompanying　measure。　In　exactly　the　same　way　the　measuring　magnitude；　in　turn；　will　require　a　measure；　because　only　when　the　standard　shows　such　and　such　an　extension　can　the　degree　of　movement　be　appraised。　Time　then　will　be；　not　the　magnitude　accompanying　the　Movement；　but　that　numerical　value　by　which　the　magnitude　accompanying　the　Movement　is　estimated。　But　that　number　can　be　only　the　abstract　figure　which　represents　the　magnitude；　and　it　is　difficult　to　see　how　an　abstract　figure　can　perform　the　act　of　measuring。　　　　　And；　supposing　that　we　discover　a　way　in　which　it　can；　we　still　have　not　Time；　the　measure；　but　a　particular　quantity　of　Time；　not　at　all　the　same　thing：　Time　means　something　very　different　from　any　definite　period：　before　all　question　as　to　quantity　is　the　question　as　to　the　thing　of　which　a　certain　quantity　is　present。　　　　　Time；　we　are　told；　is　the　number　outside　Movement　and　measuring　it；　like　the　tens　applied　to　the　reckoning　of　the　horses　and　cows　but　not　inherent　in　them：　we　are　not　told　what　this　Number　is；　yet；　applied　or　not；　it　must；　like　that　decade；　have　some　nature　of　its　own。　　　　　Or　〃it　is　that　which　accompanies　a　Movement　and　measures　it　by　its　successive　stages〃；　but　we　are　still　left　asking　what　this　thing　recording　the　stages　may　be。　　　　　In　any　case；　once　a　thing…　whether　by　point　or　standard　or　any　other　means…　measures　succession；　it　must　measure　according　to　time：　this　number　appraising　movement　degree　by　degree　must；　therefore；　if　it　is　to　serve　as　a　measure　at　all；　be　something　dependent　upon　time　and　in　contact　with　it：　for；　either；　degree　is　spatial；　merely…　the　beginning　and　end　of　the　Stadium；　for　example…　or　in　the　only　alternative；　it　is　a　pure　matter　of　Time：　the　succession　of　early　and　late　is　stage　of　Time；　Time　ending　upon　a　certain　Now　or　Time　beginning　from　a　Now。　　　　　Time；　therefore；　is　something　other　than　the　mere　number　measuring　Movement；　whether　Movement　in　general　or　any　particular　tract　of　Movement。　　　　　Further：　Why　should　the　mere　presence　of　a　number　give　us　Time…　a　number　measuring　or　measured；　for　the　same　number　may　be　either…　if　Time　is　not　given　us　by　the　fact　of　Movement　itself；　the　Movement　which　inevitably　contains　in　itself　a　succession　of　stages？　To　make　the　number　essential　to　Time　is　like　saying　that　magnitude　has　not　its　full　quantity　unless　we　can　estimate　that　quantity。　　　　　Again；　if　Time　is；　admittedly；　endless；　how　can　number　apply　to　it？　　　　　Are　we　to　take　some　portion　of　Time　and　find　its　numerical　statement？　That　simply　means　that　Time　existed　before　number　was　applied　to　it。　　　　　We　may；　therefore；　very　well　think　that　it　existed　before　the　Soul　or　Mind　that　estimates　it…　if；　indeed；　it　is　not　to　be　thought　to　take　its　origin　from　the　Soul…　for　no　measurement　by　anything　is　necessary　to　its　existence；　measured　or　not；　it　has　the　full　extent　of　its　being。　　　　　And　suppose　it　to　be　true　that　the　Soul　is　the　appraiser；　using　Magnitude　as　the　measuring　standard；　how　does　this　help　us　to　the　conception　of　Time？　　　　　10。　Time；　again；　has　been　described　as　some　sort　of　a　sequence　upon　Movement；　but　we　learn　nothing　from　this；　nothing　is　said；　until　we　know　what　it　is　that　produces　this　sequential　thing：　probably　the　cause　and　not　the　result　would　turn　out　to　be　Time。　　　　　And；　admitting　such　a　thing；　there　would　still　remain　the　question　whether　it　came　into　being　before　the　movement；　with　it；　or　after　it；　and；　whether　we　say　before　or　with　or　after；　we　are　speaking　of　order　in　Time：　and　thus　our　definition　is　〃Time　is　a　sequence　upon　movement　in　Time！〃　　　　　Enough：　Our　main　purpose　is　to　show　what　Time　is；　not　to　refute　false　definition。　To　traverse　point　by　point　the　many　opinions　of　our　many　predecessors　would　mean　a　history　rather　than　an　identification；　we　have　treated　the　various　theories　as　fully　as　is　possible　in　a　cursory　review：　and；　notice；　that　which　makes　Time　the　Measure　of　the　All…Movement　is　refuted　by　our　entire　discussion　and；　especially；　by　the　observations　upon　the　Measurement　of　Movement　in　general；　for　all　the　argument…　except；　of　course；　that　from　irregularity…　applies　to　the　All　as　much　as　to　particular　Movement。　　　　　We　are；　thus；　at　the　stage　where　we　are　to　state　what　Time　really　is。　　　　　11。　To　this　end　we　must　go　back　to　the　state　we　affirmed　of　Eternity；　unwavering　Life；　undivided　totality；　limitless；　knowing　no　divagation；　at　rest　in　unity　and　intent　upon　it。　Time　was　not　yet：　or　at　least　it　did　not　exist　for　the　Eternal　Beings；　though　its　being　was　implicit　in　the　Idea　and　Principle　of　progressive　derivation。　　　　　But　from　the　Divine　Beings　thus　at　rest　within　themselves；　how　did　this　Time　first　emerge？　　　　　We　can　scarcely　call　upon　the　Muses　to　recount　its　origin　since　they　were　not　in　existence　then…　perhaps　not　even　if　they　had　been。　The　engendered　thing；　Time；　itself；　can　best　tell　us　how　it　rose　and　became　manifest；　something　thus　its　story　would　run：　　　　　Time　at　first…　in　reality　before　that　〃first〃　was　produced　by　desire　of　succession…　Time　lay；　self…concentrated；　at　rest　within　the　Authentic　Existent：　it　was　not　yet　Time；　it　was　merged　in　the　Authentic　and　motionless　with　it。　But　there　was　an　active　principle　there；　one　set　on　governing　itself　and　realizing　itself　＇=　the　All…Soul＇；　and　it　chose　to　aim　at　something　more　than　its　present：　it　stirred　from　its　rest；　and　Time　stirred　with　it。　And　we；　stirring　to　a　ceaseless　succession；　to　a　next；　to　the　discrimination　of　identity　and　the　establishment　of　ever…new　difference；　traversed　a　portion　of　the　outgoing　path　and　produced　an　image　of　Eternity；　produced　Time。　　　　　For　the　Soul　contained　an　unquiet　faculty；　always　desirous　of　translating　elsewhere　what　it　saw　in　the　Authentic　Realm；　and　it　could　not　bear　to　retain　within　itself　all　the　dense　fullness　of　its　possession。　　　　　A　Seed　is　at　rest；　the　nature…principle　within；　uncoiling　outwards；　makes　way　towards　what　seems　to　it　a　large　life；　but　by　that　partition　it　loses；　it　was　a　unity　self…gathered；　and　now；　in　going　forth　from　itself；　it　fritters　its　unity　away；　it　advances　into　a　weaker　greatness。　It　is　so　with　this　faculty　of　the　S