Ithas。
Thenitwillneitherpartakeofonemeasure，norofmany，noroffew，norofthesameatall，norbeequaltoitselforanother;norbegreaterorlessthanitself，orother？
Certainly。
Well，anddowesupposethatonecanbeolder，oryoungerthananything，orofthesameagewithit？
Whynot？
Why，becausethatwhichisofthesameagewithitselforother，mustpartakeofequalityorlikenessoftime;andwesaidthattheonedidnotpartakeeitherofequalityoroflikeness？
Wedidsayso。
Andwealsosaid，thatitdidnotpartakeofinequalityorunlikeness。
Verytrue。
Howthencanone，beingofthisnature，beeitherolderoryoungerthananything，orhavethesameagewithit？
Innoway。
Thenonecannotbeolderoryounger，orofthesameage，eitherwithitselforwithanother？
Clearlynot。
Thentheone，beingofthisnature，cannotbeintimeatall;formustnotthatwhichisintime，bealwaysgrowingolderthanitself？
Certainly。
Andthatwhichisolder，mustalwaysbeolderthansomethingwhichisyounger？
True。
Then，thatwhichbecomesolderthanitself，alsobecomesatthesametimeyoungerthanitself，ifitistohavesomethingtobecomeolderthan。
Whatdoyoumean？
Imeanthis:—Athingdoesnotneedtobecomedifferentfromanotherthingwhichisalreadydifferent;itisdifferent，andifitsdifferenthasbecome，ithasbecomedifferent;ifitsdifferentwillbe，itwillbedifferent;butofthatwhichisbecomingdifferent，therecannothavebeen，orbeabouttobe，oryetbe，adifferent—theonlydifferentpossibleisonewhichisbecoming。
Thatisinevitable。
But，surely，theelderisadifferencerelativetotheyounger，andtonothingelse。
True。
Thenthatwhichbecomesolderthanitselfmustalso，atthesametime，becomeyoungerthanitself？
Yes。
Butagain，itistruethatitcannotbecomeforalongerorforashortertimethanitself，butitmustbecome，andbe，andhavebecome，andbeabouttobe，forthesametimewithitself？
Thatagainisinevitable。
Thenthingswhichareintime，andpartakeoftime，mustineverycase，Isuppose，beofthesameagewiththemselves;andmustalsobecomeatonceolderandyoungerthanthemselves？
Yes。
Buttheonedidnotpartakeofthoseaffections？
Notatall。
Thenitdoesnotpartakeoftime，andisnotinanytime？
Sotheargumentshows。
Well，butdonottheexpressions\"was，\"and\"hasbecome，\"and\"wasbecoming，\"signifyaparticipationofpasttime？
Certainly。
Anddonot\"willbe，\"\"willbecome，\"\"willhavebecome，\"signifyaparticipationoffuturetime？
Yes。
And\"is，\"or\"becomes，\"signifiesaparticipationofpresenttime？
Certainly。
Andiftheoneisabsolutelywithoutparticipationintime，itneverhadbecome，orwasbecoming，orwasatanytime，orisnowbecomeorisbecoming，oris，orwillbecome，orwillhavebecome，orwillbe，hereafter。
Mosttrue。
Butarethereanymodesofpartakingofbeingotherthanthese？
Therearenone。
Thentheonecannotpossiblypartakeofbeing？
Thatistheinference。
Thentheoneisnotatall？
Clearlynot。
Thentheonedoesnotexistinsuchwayastobeone;forifitwereandpartookofbeing，itwouldalreadybe;butiftheargumentistobetrusted，theoneneitherisnorisone？
True。
Butthatwhichisnotadmitsofnoattributeorrelation？
Ofcoursenot。
Thenthereisnoname，norexpression，norperception，noropinion，norknowledgeofit？
Clearlynot。
Thenitisneithernamed，norexpressed，noropined，norknown，nordoesanythingthatisperceiveit。
Sowemustinfer。
Butcanallthisbetrueabouttheone？
Ithinknot。
Suppose，now，thatwereturnoncemoretotheoriginalhypothesis;
letusseewhether，onafurtherreview，anynewaspectofthequestionappears。
Ishallbeveryhappytodoso。
Wesaythatwehavetoworkouttogetheralltheconsequences，whatevertheymaybe，whichfollow，iftheoneis？
Yes。
Thenwewillbeginatthebeginning:—Ifoneis，canonebe，andnotpartakeofbeing？
Impossible。
Thentheonewillhavebeing，butitsbeingwillnotbethesamewiththeone;forifthesame，itwouldnotbethebeingoftheone;
norwouldtheonehaveparticipatedinbeing，forthepropositionthatoneiswouldhavebeenidenticalwiththepropositionthatoneisone;
butourhypothesisisnotifoneisone，whatwillfollow，butifoneis:—amInotright？
Quiteright。
Wemeantosay，thatbeinghasnotthesamesignificanceasone？
Ofcourse。
Andwhenweputthemtogethershortly，andsay\"Oneis，\"thatisequivalenttosaying，\"partakesofbeing\"？
Quitetrue。
Oncemorethenletusask，ifoneiswhatwillfollow。Doesnotthishypothesisnecessarilyimplythatoneisofsuchanatureastohaveparts？
Howso？
Inthisway:—Ifbeingispredicatedoftheone，iftheoneis，andoneofbeing，ifbeingisone;andifbeingandonearenotthesame;andsincetheone，whichwehaveassumed，is，mustnotthewhole，ifitisone，itselfbe，andhaveforitsparts，oneandbeing？
Certainly。
Andiseachoftheseparts—oneandbeingtobesimplycalledapart，ormusttheword\"part\"berelativetotheword\"whole\"？
Thelatter。
Thenthatwhichisoneisbothawholeandhasapart？
Certainly。
Again，ofthepartsoftheone，ifitis—Imeanbeingandone—doeseitherfailtoimplytheother？istheonewantingtobeing，orbeingtotheone？
Impossible。
Thus，eachofthepartsalsohasinturnbothoneandbeing，andisattheleastmadeupoftwoparts;andthesameprinciplegoesonforever，andeverypartwhateverhasalwaysthesetwoparts;forbeingalwaysinvolvesone，andonebeing;sothatoneisalwaysdisappearing，andbecomingtwo。
Certainly。
Andsotheone，ifitis，mustbeinfiniteinmultiplicity？
Clearly。
Letustakeanotherdirection。
Whatdirection？
Wesaythattheonepartakesofbeingandthereforeitis？
Yes。