the six enneads- 第59部分

andard　of　measure　or　as　something　inevitably　accompanying　Movement；　abstract　or　definite。　　　　　8。　Movement　Time　cannot　be…　whether　a　definite　act　of　moving　is　meant　or　a　united　total　made　up　of　all　such　acts…　since　movement；　in　either　sense；　takes　place　in　Time。　And；　of　course；　if　there　is　any　movement　not　in　Time；　the　identification　with　Time　becomes　all　the　less　tenable。　　　　　In　a　word；　Movement　must　be　distinct　from　the　medium　in　which　it　takes　place。　　　　　And；　with　all　that　has　been　said　or　is　still　said；　one　consideration　is　decisive：　Movement　can　come　to　rest；　can　be　intermittent；　Time　is　continuous。　　　　　We　will　be　told　that　the　Movement　of　the　All　is　continuous　＇and　so　may　be　identical　with　Time＇。　　　　　But；　if　the　reference　is　to　the　Circuit　of　the　heavenly　system　＇it　is　not　strictly　continuous；　or　equable；　since＇　the　time　taken　in　the　return　path　is　not　that　of　the　outgoing　movement；　the　one　is　twice　as　long　as　the　other：　this　Movement　of　the　All　proceeds；　therefore；　by　two　different　degrees；　the　rate　of　the　entire　journey　is　not　that　of　the　first　half。　　　　　Further；　the　fact　that　we　hear　of　the　Movement　of　the　outermost　sphere　being　the　swiftest　confirms　our　theory。　Obviously；　it　is　the　swiftest　of　movements　by　taking　the　lesser　time　to　traverse　the　greater　space　the　very　greatest…　all　other　moving　things　are　slower　by　taking　a　longer　time　to　traverse　a　mere　segment　of　the　same　extension：　in　other　words；　Time　is　not　this　movement。　　　　　And；　if　Time　is　not　even　the　movement　of　the　Kosmic　Sphere　much　less　is　it　the　sphere　itself　though　that　has　been　identified　with　Time　on　the　ground　of　its　being　in　motion。　　　　　Is　it；　then；　some　phenomenon　or　connection　of　Movement？　　　　　Let　us；　tentatively；　suppose　it　to　be　extent；　or　duration；　of　Movement。　　　　　Now；　to　begin　with；　Movement；　even　continuous；　has　no　unchanging　extent　＇as　Time　the　equable　has＇；　since；　even　in　space；　it　may　be　faster　or　slower；　there　must；　therefore；　be　some　unit　of　standard　outside　it；　by　which　these　differences　are　measurable；　and　this　outside　standard　would　more　properly　be　called　Time。　And　failing　such　a　measure；　which　extent　would　be　Time；　that　of　the　fast　or　of　the　slow…　or　rather　which　of　them　all；　since　these　speed…differences　are　limitless？　　　　　Is　it　the　extent　of　the　subordinate　Movement　＇=　movement　of　things　of　earth＇？　　　　　Again；　this　gives　us　no　unit　since　the　movement　is　infinitely　variable；　we　would　have；　thus；　not　Time　but　Times。　　　　　The　extent　of　the　Movement　of　the　All；　then？　　　　　The　Celestial　Circuit　may；　no　doubt；　be　thought　of　in　terms　of　quantity。　It　answers　to　measure…　in　two　ways。　First　there　is　space；　the　movement　is　commensurate　with　the　area　it　passes　through；　and　this　area　is　its　extent。　But　this　gives　us；　still；　space　only；　not　Time。　Secondly；　the　circuit；　considered　apart　from　distance　traversed；　has　the　extent　of　its　continuity；　of　its　tendency　not　to　stop　but　to　proceed　indefinitely：　but　this　is　merely　amplitude　of　Movement；　search　it；　tell　its　vastness；　and；　still；　Time　has　no　more　appeared；　no　more　enters　into　the　matter；　than　when　one　certifies　a　high　pitch　of　heat；　all　we　have　discovered　is　Motion　in　ceaseless　succession；　like　water　flowing　ceaselessly；　motion　and　extent　of　motion。　　　　　Succession　or　repetition　gives　us　Number…　dyad；　triad；　etc。…　and　the　extent　traversed　is　a　matter　of　Magnitude；　thus　we　have　Quantity　of　Movement…　in　the　form　of　number；　dyad；　triad；　decade；　or　in　the　form　of　extent　apprehended　in　what　we　may　call　the　amount　of　the　Movement：　but；　the　idea　of　Time　we　have　not。　That　definite　Quantity　is　merely　something　occurring　within　Time；　for；　otherwise　Time　is　not　everywhere　but　is　something　belonging　to　Movement　which　thus　would　be　its　substratum　or　basic…stuff：　once　more；　then；　we　would　be　making　Time　identical　with　Movement；　for　the　extent　of　Movement　is　not　something　outside　it　but　is　simply　its　continuousness；　and　we　need　not　halt　upon　the　difference　between　the　momentary　and　the　continuous；　which　is　simply　one　of　manner　and　degree。　The　extended　movement　and　its　extent　are　not　Time；　they　are　in　Time。　Those　that　explain　Time　as　extent　of　Movement　must　mean　not　the　extent　of　the　movement　itself　but　something　which　determines　its　extension；　something　with　which　the　movement　keeps　pace　in　its　course。　But　what　this　something　is；　we　are　not　told；　yet　it　is；　clearly；　Time；　that　in　which　all　Movement　proceeds。　This　is　what　our　discussion　has　aimed　at　from　the　first：　〃What；　essentially；　is　Time？〃　It　comes　to　this：　we　ask　〃What　is　Time？〃　and　we　are　answered；　〃Time　is　the　extension　of　Movement　in　Time！〃　　　　　On　the　one　hand　Time　is　said　to　be　an　extension　apart　from　and　outside　that　of　Movement；　and　we　are　left　to　guess　what　this　extension　may　be：　on　the　other　hand；　it　is　represented　as　the　extension　of　Movement；　and　this　leaves　the　difficulty　what　to　make　of　the　extension　of　Rest…　though　one　thing　may　continue　as　long　in　repose　as　another　in　motion；　so　that　we　are　obliged　to　think　of　one　thing　Time　that　covers　both　Rest　and　Movements；　and；　therefore；　stands　distinct　from　either。　　　　　What　then　is　this　thing　of　extension？　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　Ti