Moreover, if their plurality is posited, the absence of that plurality is impossible. Thus, the proof he uses to deny composition entails the affirmation of composition: his proof establishes the opposite of what he seeks to establish. Nothing could demonstrate the falsity of his claim more decisively.

If it is supposed that the aggregate has something besides those individual members, whatever is entailed by that which is necessary must itself be necessary. What remains, then, is a pointless dispute over whether the aggregate, if it is something additional to the number of its members, is necessary only by virtue of that number. For if ten things are posited, each necessary in itself, those ten must certainly be necessary. If each of the ten cannot cease to exist by virtue of itself, then all ten together cannot cease to exist, all the more surely.

If one thing necessary in itself is posited as joined to another thing necessary in itself, this does not introduce any weakness into either. Rather, their very conjunction is, all the more surely, a necessary concomitant of their existence. If their connection to one another is posited as a necessary concomitant of their intrinsically necessary existence, this is not impossible. For, on this supposition, nothing prevents that which is necessary in itself from having necessary things that it entails and necessary things that entail it.