1. Plato did not demonstrate logically the existence of Ideas: he did not believe logical proofs to be capable of reaching ideas.

2. Plato’s proof: «lntellect and experience. If data of experience are so are the data of intellect.»

Faculties and their object. Psychologic proof: Plato base on self‑analysis.

1. Psychologic proof by the study of the conditions of knowledge.

2. Ontologic proof by the study of the conditions of existence. There are the 2 inductive proofs.

3. Logical proof by the analysis of consequences, or verification of theory by its applications of all kinds: metaphysical, ethical, political. aesthetical.

                                *

Idea contains generality. Idea of Cause. (for example.) It is by beauty that beautiful things are fair, by largeness that large things are large by smallness that small things are small (Plato).

The last things are large and small because of space and of difference (i.e. differentiation, number, in my sense).

First characteristic of essence (or form) «Universality».

Second characteristic: pureness.

Socrates is at the same time, by different comparisons small and big. But largeness — in itself cannot at the same time be small and be large.

                                *

I. We know but our sensations.

II. Now can sensation come from the outside; can it be the effect of the presence of external objects? Or does it come from inside?

This formidable abstraction leaves all Hegel’s reasonings and Parmenides in the dark, and, unless the reader peruse it three or four times over with all attention, it will leave him there likewise.

Antinomistics has been misconceived both by Kant and by (Spencer?). In this science the aim should be to prove negations not affirmations, not, at the same time, that the universe is infinite and is finite, but at the same time that it is not infinite and that it is not finite. (Ética).

                                *

Being to be (...) by us has to assume the character of infinity, first stage of determination, it has to be determined somehow.

                                *

We cannot even say of Being‑in‑se that Being is Being for here is already understood the idea of Not‑Being.

For anything to come within the sphere of our knowledge (in the widest sense) it has to be determined in some way. There are 3 ways of determination, i.e. by which we determine a thing.