Plato · thesis 5>18

Thesis 5>18

Latin

Quicquid dicant caeteri Platonici de rationalis animae partium distinctione, assero ego si < >, id est rationalem partem, in < > et < > diuidamus, eandem partem ut phantasiae coniungitur < > dici, ut intellectui < >, ut sibiipsi < >.

Copy-text: Farmer 1998, line 22452

Apparatus (Farmer): 1486 coeteri | 1487 omits blank space after sibiipsi

The angle-bracketed blanks reproduce genuine lacunae already present in the 1486 and 1487 prints, not an OCR defect; the sheet's mixed bracket glyphs are normalised here to '< >'. The 1487 print also drops the blank space after 'sibiipsi' (farmer1998:22469, 22528).

English

Whatever other Platonists say about the division of parts within the rational soul, I hold that if we divide < >—that is, the rational part—into < > and < >, that same part, insofar as it is joined to the imagination, is called < >; insofar as it is joined to the intellect, < >; and insofar as it is joined to itself, < >.

Farmer notes that the Greek terms Pico intended for the blanks are already missing in the early prints, and that Kieszkowski's and Biondi's supplements from Stobaeus are unjustified (farmer1998:22523-22529). Sense checked against farmer1998:22509.

Translation: machine-drafted 2026-09-26 by TRANSLATOR-T07b; sense checked against farmer1998:22509; awaiting human check

Attribution: Pico's own opinion (section 5>, conclusions on the doctrine of Plato) · Pico's stance: endorses

Farmer's cross-references

• 1.6 Anima separata intelligit per species sıbi a principio sui esse concreatas, quibus dum est in corpore aut nunquam aut raro utitur.
• 17.1 Cognoscere actum suum non est commune cuilibet sensui exteriori, sed humanis sensibus est speciale.
• 5>19 Possibile est ut pars rationalis animae nostrae, quam secundum peripateticos possibilem intellectum uoco, ad hoc perueniat, ut sine coniunct