Measuring infinity and thinking being and nonbeing

Use in the book

Mind is said to have no fixed place or grade insofar as it traverses all grades in knowing. Ficino then argues that defining infinity requires some proportion between mind and the infinity known. Since finite and infinite have no proportion in the relevant sense, the knowing power must itself be infinite in a qualified way. Time measuring motion supplies a comparison: if motion were endless, the successive measure would also be endless; stable intellectual comprehension of infinity is presented as an even stronger case.

The conclusion depends on Ficino's premise that knowledge requires a proportional matching of knower and object. It should not be silently recast as a modern proof that defining “infinite” gives a thinker infinite information. His own repeated qualifications indicate a power of intellectual reach rather than identity with God's absolute nature.

Being and nonbeing give another example. Mind understands creation and destruction and describes both termini. It also conceives common being as communicated in many modes. The immeasurable distance it “traverses” concerns this conceptual range; understanding creation is not itself an act of efficiently creating an external substance.

The passage then turns from knowledge to desire: bodily hunger is readily satisfied, but ambition or desire for divine knowledge seems unbounded. That change of argumentative route leads to the closing account of divine enlargement.

Places to read

1. VIII.16.3Proportional cognition of infinity is followed by thought’s passage between being and nonbeing and by insatiable desire.

Translation in this edition

The apparatus emphasizes aequatio and aequatur as equality language. Qualifiers such as ut ita loquar and quodammodo remain essential. The correction percurrit immensum keeps the verb’s complete traversal image; it does not make nonbeing a place.

aequatio

aequatio. Printed forms: aequationem.

A matching or correspondence, here between mind and what it knows. Ficino argues that knowledge is perfected through a certain correspondence and that knowing infinity therefore requires a qualified matching capacity. This is a premise of his philosophical argument, not a claim that defining infinity yields infinitely much information. References: VIII.16.3. See Measuring infinity and thinking being and nonbeing.

creatio / interitus

creatio / interitus. Printed forms: creationem; esse; Esse; interitum; non esse.

Creation from nonbeing and destruction in the reverse direction. Mind conceptually spans both termini; the immeasurable interval is not physical space, and understanding creation is not efficiently creating. References: VIII.16.3. See Measuring infinity and thinking being and nonbeing.

invenire / reperire

invenire / reperire. Printed forms: inveniendum; invenies; invenimus; invenire; invenit; invenitur; inventa; reperisse; reperit; reperitur; reperiunt; reperta.

To find or discover a structure or explanation. Finding bodily proportion does not amount to discovering sensing and understanding; the object discovered matters to the claim. References: VII.4.1, VII.12.1. See Proportion, health, strength and beauty.

Finding or discovering, in inquiry, analysis and the enlargement of thought. Mathematical principles are not found by sense in matter, whereas mind discovers principles and can conceive a higher finite grade before reaching the infinite source. References: VIII.1.5, VIII.2.1, VIII.2.7, VIII.3.7, VIII.4.2, VIII.13.1, VIII.16.1, VIII.16.2, VIII.16.3. See Measuring infinity and thinking being and nonbeing.

mensura / metiri / proportio / aequare

mensura / metiri / proportio / aequare. Printed forms: aequatur; mensuram; metitur; proportionem.

Measure, measuring, proportion and correspondence in knowing. Ficino argues that apprehending infinity requires a qualified matching power; this premise is not a modern theorem equating a definition with infinite information. References: VIII.16.3. See Measuring infinity and thinking being and nonbeing.