whole class of [Greek: adiaphora], which he accordingly dealt with in the
latter part of the same sentence and in the succeeding sentence. (The
remainder has its own difficulties, which I defer for the present.) Cic.
therefore is chargeable not with ignorance of Stoicism but with careless
writing. A striking parallel occurs in _D.F._ III. 52, _quae secundum locum
obtinent_, [Greek: proegmena] _id est producta nominentur, quae vel ita
appellemus, vel promota et remota_. If this language be closely pressed,
the [Greek: apoproegmena] are made of a subdivision of the [Greek:
proegmena], though no sensible reader would suppose Cic. to have had that
intention. So if his words in _D.F._ V. 90 be pressed, the _sumenda_ are
made to include both _producta_ and _reducta_, in _D.F._ III. 16
_appeterent_ includes _fugerent_, _ibid._ II. 86 the opposite of _beata
vita_ is abruptly introduced. So _D.F._ II. 88 _frui dolore_ must be
construed together, and _ibid._ II. 73 _pudor modestia pudicitia_ are said
_coerceri_, the writer's thoughts having drifted on rapidly to the vices
which are opposite to these virtues.

I now pass on to a second class of difficulties. Supposing that by _ex iis_
Cic. means _mediis_, and not _sumendis_, about which he had intended to
talk when he began the sentence; I believe that _pluris aestimanda_ and
_minoris aestimanda_ simply indicate the [Greek: axia] and [Greek: apaxia]
of the Greek, _not_ different degrees of [Greek: axia] (positive value).
That _minor aestimatio_ should mean [Greek: apaxia] need not surprise us
when we reflect (1) on the excessive difficulty there was in expressing
this [Greek: apaxia] or negative value in Latin, a difficulty I have
already observed on 36; (2) on the strong negative meaning which _minor_
bears in Latin, e.g. _sin minus_ in Cic. means "but if not." Even the
Greeks fall victims to the task of expressing [Greek: apaxia]. Stobaeus, in
a passage closely resembling ours makes [Greek: elatton axia] equivalent to
[Greek: polle apaxia] (II. 6, 6), while Sext. Emp. after rightly defining
[Greek: apoproegmena] as [Greek: ta hikanen apaxian echonta] (_Adv. Math._
XI. 62--64) again speaks of them as [Greek: ta me hikanen echonta axian]
(_Pyrrhon. Hypot._ III. 191) words which usually have an opposite meaning.
Now I contend that Cicero's words _minoris aestimanda_ bear quite as strong
a negative meaning as the phrase of Sextus, [Greek: ta me hikanen axian
echonta]. I therefore conc