is not divisible but is a single unit, so that argument cannot be valid. If, however, the smallest body does not consist of two atoms, then this argument is invalid. Thus, one of the two arguments is invalid: either the one by which he denied corporeality or the one by which he denied the atom. The invalidity of either entails the invalidity of the other.

The sixth point is to say: Regarding your argument against the indivisible atom and your claim that everything occupying space is divisible, you have acknowledged that this argument is evenly matched by its counterpart and that you have not ascertained the truth of the matter.

It may then be said: Your statement, “It has been established that whatever is divisible is not one,” is not valid according to these thinkers’ position. They say that a body is one in itself, just as it is one in sensory perception: it is one continuous whole, not composed of indivisible atoms. Thus, they describe it as one even though they say it is divisible. In their view, its divisibility does not preclude describing it as one or calling it one. Indeed, they go even further in applying the description of unity, saying: “one in genus, one in species, and one as an individual.”