We must return to the transmitted reading, which is beyond objection. The persons referred to in want to establish that passivity, the experiencing of desire, grief, and the like, is a thing of the body and not of the soul, which, they maintain, is The climactic structure makes it plain enough that what is in dispute and has to be proved is that the soul is , and that what is assumed for the proof is that it is . It (...) is, therefore, wrong to change the text so as to make those engaging in the proof try to argue from instead of the other way round. (shrink)

We must return to the transmitted reading, which is beyond objection. The persons referred to in want to establish that passivity, the experiencing of desire, grief, and the like, is a thing of the body and not of the soul, which, they maintain, is The climactic structure makes it plain enough that what is in dispute and has to be proved is that the soul is, and that what is assumed for the proof is that it is. It is, therefore, (...) wrong to change the text so as to make those engaging in the proof try to argue from instead of the other way round. (shrink)

We must return to the transmitted reading, which is beyond objection. The persons referred to in want to establish that passivity, the experiencing of desire, grief, and the like, is a thing of the body and not of the soul, which, they maintain, is The climactic structure makes it plain enough that what is in dispute and has to be proved is that the soul is, and that what is assumed for the proof is that it is. It is, therefore, (...) wrong to change the text so as to make those engaging in the proof try to argue from instead of the other way round. (shrink)

Professor Cairns has suggested that the use of modo in Propertius 1.1.11, which has long been seen as problematic, can be understood in terms of some instances of the Greek modo, he says, here means not but , and the modo clause is prior in time to the clause that follows it just as, in his view, a Greek imperfect with can have the force of a pluperfect and refer to a time prior to that of the verb of a (...) following clause. (shrink)

Professor Cairns has suggested that the use of modo in Propertius 1.1.11, which has long been seen as problematic, can be understood in terms of some instances of the Greek modo, he says, here means not but, and the modo clause is prior in time to the clause that follows it just as, in his view, a Greek imperfect with can have the force of a pluperfect and refer to a time prior to that of the verb of a following (...) clause. (shrink)