DeLogica Ariftotelt»» afr

Rationem vcrb effetantttm qvidmedium inter Senfus (f InteUe-$hum,feu cjfe tantum A$um animalem,Phantaflicum ImaginativitPotentU aSenftbus dependentem,mediuminter InteUecium Spiri-tua/em,£f Senfus Animales, confeqventerRationem nonejfe Spiri-tualem,nec Lucidam,fcut efl lntel/ecius,(qvi nifiper Peccatum Ori-ginale ejfet Vuheratus ,intuitive potius Res injpicerct, prout fttntin fe, abscfc Difcttrftt £f Confeqventiis, fuut Adam cenfetur intellc-xijfe Rerum Naturas ante P cccatum,qvando Nomina impofuit cun-Bis Animalibus:) fed efle obfcuriflimamj fallaciffimam,cx Pecca-toprovenicntern, ex merisSenfibus dependentem,qva; milliesfalli poflit. Deni% neceffe illamDEI Luccrnam,feu Lumen VultusDivini in nobis,necDElImagine?n ,fedhas Prarogativas competcrefolilntelleftui, Anim&effentiali. Probat h<ec omnia ex eo , qvodAnima a Corpore feparata , baheat omnino IntcUeclttm in fe , non.<verb Rathnem , qvia non difcurrit ibi per Pr&miffas , indedcduffias Conclufones, fcd intuitive intuetur, qv£ cognofcit, vi-de Helmontium §. Adamicuslntelle&us.

Ergolntelleclusot Ratio in Anima non funt cadem, fedlongediverfaj Vide hanc Conclufionem fufifiime dedu<ftamab Authore §. Venatio Scientiarum, a.n. j6,&feqv: ex qvi-bus feqvitnr, qvod Argumentatio Ariftotelica in mera Ratio-ne, ejusqve Animali fenfuali Difcurfu fundata, non fit adeocerta,infallibilis,indubia, fed in plerisqve fit tantum opinati-va,confeqventer nonadeo fubfiftat in jaclata praerogativa,Ge-nitricis, Matris& Magiftraeornnium Scientiarum.

s*

Conchtfio hujus Se&iomf.

Non immeritd igitur S. Hieronymus comparat ArtemSyllogifandi Plagis /Egypti & Demonftrationes Logicas vocatCyniphes /Egypti, Apoftolus vero Paulus voluit eas prorfusefte vitandas, dieens: nihilpcr Contentionern agentes, fcrlis^

C s tonten*