navstokgap

Duns Scotus, Opus Oxoniense II d.2: time not composed of indivisibles, and space not composed of points (Vivès 1891)

Companion source

Source: Internet Archive operaomni11duns; local OCR excerpt .txt, lines 29238–30800 and 40800–41600 of the archive’s _djvu.txt, retrieved 2026-09-08. The Toronto scan operaomnia11dunsuoft under the same volume number holds Book IV material and was set aside. Metadata: Joannis Duns Scoti Opera omnia, Vivès edition, vol. 11 (Paris, 1891), Quaestiones in secundum librum Sententiarum, distinctio II: quaestio II, whether something really distinct from the angel’s existence measures its duration, containing the argument that the flux of the now would be composed of indivisibles, with Physics VI cited; and the later question on the angel’s local motion, containing the argument that motion over a space would require the space to be composed of points, “quod est falsum”. The Vivès scholia are interleaved with the text. Extraction: archive.org OCR of an 1891 printing; question headings are damaged, running heads read “DIST. II. QUAESTIO II”; the concentric-circles argument was not located by keyword in this volume. Rights: public domain.

Source digest

The excerpts give the scholastic form of the two cut questions: whether time is composed of indivisible nows, argued from Aristotle’s proof that an indivisible cannot move, and whether a continuum traversed by local motion is composed of points, which the Doctor denies. They are the Latin counterpart of Physics VI.9 and of the Mohist endpoint, and the setting in which the kalām atom reported by Maimonides and Aquinas was refuted geometrically.

Passage anchors

Coverage and limits

Reading level passage for the two anchored arguments on OCR text; metadata for the surrounding questions. The geometric refutation with concentric circles known from the Vatican edition remains to be located in this printing.