umpta_: the two premisses are in Gk. called together [Greek: lemmata],
separately [Greek: lemma] and [Greek: proslepsis] (_sumptio et adsumptio_
_De Div_ II. 108). _Orationis_: as Faber points out, Cic. does sometimes
use this word like _ratio_ ([Greek: syllogismos]), cf. _De Leg._ I. 48
_conclusa oratio_. Fab. refers to Gell. XV. 26. _Profiteatur_: so [Greek:
hypischneisthai] is often used by Sext. e.g. _A.M._ VIII. 283.
_Patefacturum_: n. on 26, [Greek: ekkalyptein, ekkalyptikos, delotikos]
(the last in Sext. _A.M._ VIII. 277) often recur in Greek. _Primum esse ...
nihil interesse_: there is no inconsistency. Carneades allowed that _visa_,
_in themselves_, might be true or false, but affirmed that human faculties
were incapable of distinguishing those _visa_ which proceed from real
things and give a correct representation of the things, from those which
either are mere phantoms or, having a real source, do not correctly
represent it. Lucullus confuses _essential_ with _apparent_ difference.
_Non iungitur_: a supposed case of [Greek: diartesis], which is opposed to
[Greek: synartesis] and explained in Sext. _A.M._ VIII. 430.

Sec.45. _Assentati_: here simply = _assensi_. _Praeteritis_: here used in the
strong participial sense, "in the class of things passed over," cf. _in
remissis_ _Orat._ 59. _Primum igitur ... sed tamen_: for the slight
anacoluthia cf. Madv. _Gram._ 480. _Iis qui videntur_: Goer. _is qui
videtur_, which is severely criticised by Madv. _Em._ 150. For Epicurus'
view of sensation see n. on 79, 80.

Sec.Sec.46--48. Summary. The refusal of people to assent to the innate
clearness of some phenomena ([Greek: enargeia]) is due to two causes,
(1) they do not make a serious endeavour to see the light by which
these phenomena are surrounded, (2) their faith is shaken by sceptic
paradoxes (46). The sceptics argue thus: you allow that mere phantom
sensations are often seen in dreams, why then do you not allow what is
easier, that two sensations caused by two really existing things may be
mistaken the one for the other? (47). Further, they urge that a phantom
sensation produces very often the same effect as a real one. The
dogmatists say they admit that mere phantom sensations _do_ command
assent. Why should they not admit that they command assent when they so
closely resemble real ones as to be indistinguishable from them? (48)

Sec.46. _Circumfusa sint_: Goer. ret