On Generation and corruption   

is'. But if that is their character, it is impossible they should

not be affected by one another: the 'slightly-hot indivisible', e.g.

will inevitably suffer action from one which far exceeds it in heat.

Again, if any 'indivisible' is 'hard', there must also be one which is

'soft': but 'the soft' derives its very name from the fact that it

suffers a certain action-for 'soft' is that which yields to pressure.

II. But further, not only is it paradoxical (i) that no property

except figure should belong to the 'indivisibles': it is also

paradoxical (ii) that, if other properties do belong to them, one only

of these additional properties should attach to each-e.g. that this

'indivisible' should be cold and that 'indivisible' hot. For, on

that supposition, their substance would not even be uniform. And it is

equally impossible (iii) that more than one of these additional

properties should belong to the single 'indivisible'. For, being

indivisible, it will possess these properties in the same point-so

that, if it 'suffers action' by being chilled, it will also, qua

chilled, 'act' or 'suffer action' in some other way. And the same line

of argument applies to all the other properties too: for the

difficulty we have just raised confronts, as a necessary

consequence, all who advocate 'indivisibles' (whether solids or

planes), since their 'indivisibles' cannot become either 'rarer' or

'derser' inasmuch as there is no void in them.

III. It is a further paradox that there should be small

'indivisibles', but not large ones. For it is natural enough, from the

ordinary point of view, that the larger bodies should be more liable

to fracture than the small ones, since they (viz. the large bodies)

are easily broken up because they collide with many other bodies.

But why should indivisibility as such be the property of small, rather

than of large, bodies?

IV. Again, is the substance of all those solids uniform, or do

they fall into sets which differ from one another-as if, e.g. some

of them, in their aggregated bulk, were 'fiery', others earthy'? For