Nam saepe oportet non modo similitudinem suam, verum etiam ipsius similitudinis rationem considerare: num, ut ait Epicurus, profectae a nobis imagines velut quaedam exuviae iugi fluore a corporibus manantes, cum leve aliquid et solidum offenderunt, illisae reflectantur et retro expressae contraversim respondeant; an, ut alii philosophi disputant, radii nostri seu mediis oculis proliquati et lumini extrario mixti atque ita uniti, ut Plato arbitratur, seu tantum oculis profecti sine ullo foris adminiculo, ut Archytas putat, seu intentu aeris acti, ut Stoici rentur, cum alicui corpori inciderunt spisso et splendido et levi, paribus angulis quibus inciderant resultent ad faciem suam reduces atque ita, quod extra tangant ac visant, id intra speculum imaginentur
For often he should contemplate not only his likeness but the cause of likeness itself. Are images projected from us, as Epicurus says, flying in a continuous stream from our bodies like a kind of skin, so that, on meeting something smooth and solid, they then rebound on impact and bounce back so as to appear reversed? Or as other philosophers maintain, do rays from us'whether because they emanate from the center of the eye, mingle and so unite with the light outside, as Plato believes, or because they merely start from the eyes without any external assistance, as Archytas thinks, or because they are driven by air pressure, as the Stoics hold', when they strike an object that is compact, shiny and smooth, do they bounce back at the angle of collision and return to the face from which they started, so that the object that they touch and contact outside the mirror becomes an image within it? .
final_alignments\Apuleius_Apologia.json