Diotimos Library · Renaissance Collection · Bilingual Edition
Marsilio Ficino’s Platonic Theology, Volume II
Books V–VIII · Latin with an independent English translation
Explore the LexiconSwipe or use the arrow keys.
Latin Page · Branch 119 of 191
Book VII · Chapter 1 · § 1
Latin
p. 232Prima ratio. Corpus non capit imagines aptas ad sensum.
Nescio quo pacto in superiori argumentatione incidimus in secundam disputationis huius partem, in qua probaturi sumus propositum nostrum per potentiam sentiendi. Sic igitur hanc partem ulterius prosequamur. Corpus, si quando suscipit quicquam, modo suscipit corporali: partes videlicet rei in suis partibus; neque potest rem maiorem quam sit ipsum capere, quemadmodum cera a sigillo figuram suscipiens numquam ampliorem figuram quam ipsa sit accipit. Quod si haberet cera sensum quo figurae magnitudinem iudicaret, tantam plane iudicaret quantam haberet. Neque potest aliam rursus figuram accipere nisi vel amittat priorem vel utrasque ita in se confundat, ut vix invicem discernantur. Sic anima, si corpus sit, per oculum corporum imagines modo suscipiet corporali, ita ut imago Platonis in oculo Socratis non maior sit quam Socratis oculus. Ita Socratis anima non maiorem putabit esse Platonem quam suus sit oculus, vel certe non maiorem quam sit cerebrum in quod ab oculo transferetur imago, tandem non maiorem quam sit Socratici corporis magnitudo. Anima enim Socratis, si magna est, non est suo corpore maior. Ideo, si in se tota Platonis imaginem suscipit, non maiorem suscipit quam sit ipsa; quapropter nihil umquam maius existimabit esse Socratico corpore. Quin etiam, quando Xenophontis et Alcibiadis et Phaedri imagines accipit, tunc vel amittit Platonis imaginem vel ita habet cunctas deinde confusas, ut alium illorum ab alio non discernat.
Marsilio Ficino’s Platonic Theology, Volume II: Book VII
p. 233First argument. A body does not receive images suited to sensation.
I do not know how, in the course of the preceding argument, we entered upon the second part of this inquiry, in which we intend to prove our proposition from the power of sensation. Let us now pursue this part further. Whenever a body receives anything, it receives it in a bodily manner: the parts of the thing in its own parts. Nor can it contain anything larger than itself, just as wax receiving an impression from a seal never receives a figure larger than the wax itself. If wax possessed a sense by which it judged the size of the figure, it would plainly judge the figure to be only as large as the impression it contained. Nor can wax receive another figure unless it either loses the first or so confuses both within itself that they can scarcely be distinguished from one another. Accordingly, if the soul is a body, it will receive the images of bodies through the eye only in a bodily manner, so that the image of Plato in Socrates' eye will be no larger than Socrates' eye. Socrates' soul will therefore suppose Plato to be no larger than his own eye—or at any rate no larger than the brain to which the image is transferred from the eye, and ultimately no larger than Socrates' body. For if Socrates' soul has magnitude, it is no larger than his body. Hence, if the whole soul receives Plato's image within itself, the image it receives is no larger than the soul itself; therefore it will never judge anything to be larger than Socrates' body. Moreover, when it receives images of Xenophon, Alcibiades, and Phaedrus, it must either lose the image of Plato or thereafter hold all the images so confused together that it cannot distinguish one man from another.
Socrates
Reading Marsilio Ficino’s Platonic Theology, Volume II · Book VII · VII.1.1
Ask about a concept, passage, contradiction, or connection.
Socrates will begin with this book and its sources.About This Reading Edition
Volume II continues Ficino’s inquiry into the immortality of the soul through Books V–VIII. Its arguments consider the rational soul’s self-motion, its relation to the body, sensation, and the powers of the mind. The Latin and independent English translation follow the supplied edition’s facing pages and matching comparison units.
Historical Text and Translation
The Latin reading text is independently established from the Florence 1482 editio princeps (M1482), collated against the Paris 1559 printing (G1559), with the Paris 1641 Opera used only as a late control. Abbreviations are expanded, spelling and punctuation are conservatively normalized, and consequential readings are recorded in the apparatus.
About Diotimos Editions
Diotimos Editions prepared this independent English translation in the voice established in Volume I, preserving Ficino’s argumentative sequence, metaphors, technical distinctions, repetitions, conditions, purposes, and qualifications. Editorial notes and witness variants accompany their passages as numbered notes. The edition and source statement, contents, and reading guidance are also retained. The source locator register remains available in the downloadable edition.
Rights
Ficino’s Latin source work is in the public domain. The 2026 English translation and Diotimos editorial matter are original to this edition and remain © 2026 Diotimos.
- PDF editionComplete Volume II — PDF
- Word editionComplete Volume II — Word
- public-domain-base-witnessFlorence 1482 editio princeps — Bayerische Staatsbibliothek
- collating-witness-cc-by-4.0Paris 1559 printing — Universidad Complutense de Madrid
- late-control-and-ocr-aidParis 1641 Opera printing — Internet Archive