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。