<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0059.tlg009.perseus-eng2:139</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0059.tlg009.perseus-eng2:139</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text xml:lang="eng"><body><div type="translation" n="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0059.tlg009.perseus-eng2" xml:lang="eng"><div type="textpart" subtype="section" resp="perseus" n="139"><milestone unit="page" resp="Stephanus" n="139"/><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="139a"/><p><said who="#Cephalos" rend="merge"><label>Ceph.</label><said>Then it does not change its place by going anywhere or into anything, nor does it revolve in a circle, nor change.</said><said>Apparently not.</said><said>Then the one is without any kind of motion.</said><said>It is motionless.</said><said>Furthermore, we say that it cannot be in anything.</said><said>We do.</said><said>Then it is never in the same.</said><said>Why is that?</said><said>Because it would then be in that with which the same is identical.</said><said>Certainly.</said><said>But we saw that it cannot be either in itself or in anything else.</said><said>No, it cannot.</said><said>Then the one is never in the same.</said><milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="139b"/><said>Apparently not.</said><said>But that which is never in the same is neither motionless nor at rest.</said><said>No, it cannot be so.</said><said>The one, then, it appears, is neither in motion nor at rest.</said><said>No, apparently not.</said><milestone ed="P" unit="para"/><said>Neither, surely, can it be the same with another or with itself; nor again other than itself or another.</said><said>Why not?</said><said>If it were other than itself, it would be other than one and would not be one.</said><said>True.</said><said>And, surely, if it were the same with another, it would be that other, and would not be itself; <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="139c"/> therefore in this case also it would not be that which it is, namely one, but other than one.</said><said>Quite so.</said><said>Then it will not be the same as another, nor other than itself.</said><said>No.</said><said>But it will not be other than another, so long as it is one.  For one cannot be other than anything; only other, and nothing else, can be other than another.</said><said>Right.</said><said>Then it will not be other by reason of being one, will it?</said><said>Certainly not.</said><said>And if not for this reason, not by reason of itself; and if not by reason of itself, not itself; but since itself is not other at all, <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="139d"/> it will not be other than anything.</said><said>Right.</said><said>And yet one will not be the same with itself.</said><said>Why not?</said><said>The nature of one is surely not the same as that of the same.</said><said>Why?</said><said>Because when a thing becomes the same as anything, it does not thereby become one.</said><said>But why not?</said><said>That which becomes the same as many, becomes necessarily many, not one.</said><said>True.</said><said>But if the one and the same were identical, whenever anything became the same it would always become one, and when it became one, the same.</said><said>Certainly.</said><said>Then if the one is the same with itself, <milestone unit="section" resp="Stephanus" n="139e"/> it will not be one with itself; and thus, being one, it will not be one; this, however, is impossible; it is therefore impossible for one to be either the other of other or the same with itself.</said><said>Impossible.</said><said>Thus the one cannot be either other or the same to itself or another.</said><said>No, it cannot.</said></said></p></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>