Talk:Microcosm–macrocosm analogy

2634:

come to Knowledge for reading recommendations. I expect that most readers behave similarly. As for academic practice, it varies. Maybe it's different in philosophy, but in science mixing footnotes and references is rare - the expected practice is that a list of references is nothing more than an index that doesn't waste your time with extraneous text; if a citation is relevant to a footnote, then the footnote simply carries a reference which those interested can then check - something your example already does, and would still do as an efn. Mixing is messy and inconvenient for those only after the notes; readers either have always check the reflist or check every ref annotation just in-case it has a note too. Separating the functions keeps the reflist tidy, and makes the notes more noticeable: they are labelled differently, they have a separate heading which is explicitly linked in the toc, and they aren't buried in a list of refs. I honestly don't understand what's supposed to be confusing.

2517:. Is it then a reference, or a note? Moreover, I just think it's a bad idea to have one set of numbered notes and another set of lettered notes. I'm also reasoning from the point of view that those readers who are interested in the extra details contained in the notes would generally also be interested in the sources the article is based on: the combination of referencing and annotation in footnotes being a standard academic practice, people who are used to in-depth reading would look at all the refs, while other readers would most probably look at none of them. But perhaps my idea that interested readers would hover over all references/notes anyway is colored by my habitually browsing WP on a desktop or laptop rather than on a tablet or mobile phone, on which hovering is not possible? Do you really think that mobile/tablet users would sooner tap on a lettered note than on a numbered note? Is that your habitual use? 1617: 589: 2138: 568: 1518:

an average sidebar image (which as I've explained above is of course on purpose), but it does not at all jam away the text so as to make it hard to read (it takes up 1/4th and 1/3th of the text space, respectively). On my tablet and smartphone (a 1080 x 1920 8" 9:16 and a 1080 x 1920 5" 9:16), the image renders at the screen's width, below rather than to the right of the first paragraph. In general, the image behaves well and doesn't get in the way of the text on any device I own. I've requested a third opinion, if only to check on more devices.

1733:). This is much larger than average, but I've found this to be appropriate in this case because the image illustrates at a glance a number of aspects about the analogy (i.e., its concrete and literal rather than abstract and metaphorical nature), thus dispelling a common misconception and making the basic idea much easier to understand. The image would not fulfill this function if it were much smaller, because one has to see the details to understand what it represents, and because most readers would mistake it for a 1854:

cosmos, and a somewhat larger size may help with that. While I'd be very interested in an improved caption, I still think that much would be lost by reducing it to the standard size. Yes, if it would seriously break layout on a majority of screen configurations reducing size would be an obvious choice, but I suspect that Scyrme's screen configuration is precisely the one on which the image renders in the worst possible way, and not by any means the most common configuration out there.

1433:

reader would understand, and I get what you say about most people not recognizing the content of the picture. But then the question is, what damage does it do? Depending on the device used, it may sit somewhat in the way. It's also not the prettiest picture, I'll give you that. But in the end, I find that a very small price to pay in return for being able to give an admittedly minority readership an aha moment that may change their entire understanding.

2110: 451: 435: 419: 403: 387: 2562:

concise way to directly link caption to image, whereas using translations would break that direct link without being helpful - most people don't know what "empyrean" or "aetherial" mean, so "empyrean heaven" etc. would be no more meaningful than Latin. Being able to understand "heaven" here doesn't help, because most people know only 1 heaven which when read into the caption makes no sense; they end up having to click the blue link anyway.

2680:

circles indicate the division of the heavens according to the material of which they are made (very pure fire or light for the Empyrean, aether for the aetherial heaven, and the four elements for the sublunary part of heaven), not material orbs carrying around planets and stars, or carrying other such nested orbs. While it may be tempting to speak of these divisions as celestial spheres, it's a misnomer, and ultimately incorrect.

1139:

image I found about the relation between macrocosm and microcosm. The meaning of that picture can be that man live in the body of microcosm during the day time with consciousness and then give up his astral body and ego to pass into the macrocosm when he is asleep, lying in the stream of forgetfulness. "Title Macrocosm and Microcosm Author Rudolf Steiner Publisher SteinerBooks, 1986 ISBN 1621510700, 9781621510703"

500: 479: 678: 1998:

guessing a 10" or 12" 1080 x 1920 tablet?). Scyrme proposed using size 1.5 above, but I've been experimenting a bit with it at my 13" 1366 x 768 laptop (which is, after the 5–8" 1080 x 1920 screens on smartphones and smaller tablets, by far the most commonly used screen size), and at anything below 1.8 the details (e.g., the tetragrammaton, or the rays of the sun) become difficult to distinguish.

657: 783: 762: 2793:(which as far as I know is equivalent to the empyrean here) is typically listed among the spheres, so I'm not convinced it is a misnomer to refer to these bands as celestial spheres. However, I won't insist on inclusion. (As a sidenote, regarding what the empyrean contains, Fludd viewed the empyrean as being tripartite; they aren't illustrated here, but are illustrated in other diagrams.) 688: 1777:, if we're going to use this image, it makes sense for it to be larger than standard. This is a common practice for diagrams with crucial text; the text should be large enough to be legible. If that creates an image rendering that seriously breaks page layout, the best solution is to use a different image, not to have a thumbnail that needs to be clicked on to be useful. If 1498:

prominent as a typical sidebar. Furthermore, even someone focusing on the article text will find the text explicitly notes that they should direct their attention to the image. (Or did before you changed the note back into a ref, making it look like just another ref; not sure why you did that.) All things considered, the diagram remains hard to miss even scaled down a bit.

215: 1221: 289: 3530:, etc.). Because of this context it's absolutely relevant to juxtapose the microcosm/macrocosm concept to Aristotelian cosmology. However, the big thing here is that the sentence as it stands is unsourced. I know these things from my own expertise as a historian of philosophy, and I think there's a good chance that they are verifiable in RS (and thus meet 246: 2828: 946:"At §368, Socrates mentions that this virtue is “spoken as a virtue of an individual, and sometimes as the virtue of the state” and that it would be easier to discern its essence if one looked at the State because it would have a larger quantity of it and then proceeding back down into the individual to see how it appears in the smaller unit."" 299: 1443:

That effect would be entirely undone by reducing its size and expecting interested readers to click on it. It's not that there's so much to see in the picture, it's rather that by being a little oversized it forces a mental image in the back of the readers' minds which helps them to understand better what is being said in the text.

1827:, on the one hand, the layout does not look seriously broken, just a bit lopsided. On the other hand, if everyone agrees that text is not crucial, how about a standard thumbnail image and an improved caption to describe what's going on here. Even at the larger size, its relevance to the article was not immediately clear to me. 1364:). Of course the article itself is also helpful, but at least on my devices the image at size upright=2 does not distract from the text, and it makes it in fact considerably easier to understand. As I said in my edit summary, a picture says more than a thousand words here. I urge you to reconsider. Thanks! 2154:). The earth corresponds to the groin, around which the geocentric model of celestial spheres revolves; the stars and planets (except the sun) are omitted but implied, being part of the 'aetherial heaven' between the 'elemental' and 'empyrean' heavens which are also labelled. However, the figure's legs 3490:

As for removing the whole sentence, that proposal certainly has some merit. In my view the fact that the term is first attested in Aristotle is encyclopedically relevant information, but it's not placed in the right context here (which would probably be some 'Etymology' section or similar). Aristotle

3378:

Medieval philosophy was generally dominated by Aristotle, who despite having been the first to coin the term "microcosm", had posited a fundamental and insurmountable difference between the region below the moon (the sublunary world, consisting of the four elements) and the region above the moon (the

2679:

not material celestial spheres. It is not the case, for example, that the whole aetherial heaven rotates around the earth as one: only the planetary celestial spheres which are contained in that part of heaven actually turn, or perhaps at most a separate celestial sphere located at its outer rim. The

2566:

definitely needs work, but I don't see that as a reason to not link it where it's relevant; even weak articles should be linked so that they get more traffic - getting more eyes on an article improves the likelihood that the article will be bettered. I linked "heart" and "sun" to emphasise that they

1997:

Yes, it seems that there's no layout issue with size 1.8 (or even with the originally used 2.0) on the great majority of screens, and the only reason to adjust it really is the way it looks on screens like the one used by Scyrme. I agree from the screenshot that 1.8 is quite bad for such screens (I'm

1488:

As you acknowledge, the image gets in the way of the text, jamming it to one side. That "you can't can't not look at" it is exactly the problem; readers are primarily here to read, and the image gets in the way of that. I don't think that's a negligible problem, and I don't think it's worth doing for

1442:

Now it could be that the text is already doing that (I would hope so; I really wish there had been such an article when I was first exploring these subjects). But the thing with the large picture is that it does it at a glance: you can't not look at that giant, ugly human body the size of the cosmos.

2921:

I observed exactly the same behavior as you described. The fact that it works on the talk page but not in the article makes me think this is some kind of bug in the mediawiki software. However, after playing around a bit with it, I found a workaround: it works when putting the wiki-links in the tags

2633:

sooner tap on a lettered note than numbered one; I would assume a number just links to a citation, because that's what most of them are. If I see a letter beside something interesting, I check it to see if there's more. I don't check numbers unless I see something dubious or if I'm editing - I don't

1497:

moment because they had the image immediately thrust before them. Nothing is in the way of that same minority clicking for a closer look and getting the same benefit. I could ask you the same question: what damage does it do? A size factor of 1.2 still leaves the image prominent on the page; just as

1138:

Ok, now the article is deleted to basically nothing. The notion of Microcosm and Macrocosm is so important in ancient philosophy, alchemy, astrology, and medicine. There should be some specific definition of Macrocosm and that of Microcosm, and then talk about how that is related. I just drop off an

2508:

extra information not contained in the article body. Separating these two functions would not just be artificial, it would also be arbitrary. For example, what is currently ref 1 contains an explanation of the terminology and so could be conceived of as a note, but it also refers to Allers 1944 and

2200:

sky and earth. This derives from a cosmological tradition which posited an absolute upper and an absolute lowest part of the cosmos, with the upper parts made of the most subtle (i.e., thin and fine), light, and luminous material, and the lowest part made of the most gross (i.e., thick), heavy, and

1638:

On my 16:9, 13" 1366 x 768 laptop it looks a bit less broad, but still more than broad enough for the text to look nice and attractive. On my 9:16, 8" 1080 x 1920 tablet, it just renders below the text, which is also quite okay. I suspect you have a somewhat larger than average tablet, on which the

1517:

I have a feeling that the image may render very differently on your device than it does at mine (are you on mobile? what is your screen size and aspect ratio? would resolution be relevant?). On my desktop and laptop (a 3840 × 2160 32" 16:9 and a 1366 x 768 13" 16:9) it is (much) more prominent than

3466:

With 'fragments' of presocratic philosophers one always has to be careful to take into account the fact that they are the words of authors who sometimes wrote as much as a millennium later, many of them also quite unreliable. More often than not it's unclear whether it is a paraphrase or an actual

1432:

But you're right that I'm quite familiar with the analogy now: I wrote this wiki article, and in my own original research I mostly deal with historical philosophical texts in which the microcosm-macrocosm analogy is a standard feature. Maybe I am not in a good position to evaluate what the average

1389:

I don't agree that reducing the size to 1.2 is "drastic", given that measure is both above the default and larger than the typical image on Knowledge. I think 1.2 is fairly large as it is. If anything, enlarging it to double the default in the first place seems drastic. It takes up almost half the

3562:

I see your point about Democritus being a dubious attribution now, thanks for explaining it! Allers corroborating the attribution of the first *unambiguous* use of the term to Aristotle addresses my concern about the claim as well. As for the more general juxtaposition of microcosm/macrocosm with

3517:

Now Aristotle's influence is definitely relevant for the history of the microcosm/macrocosm concept, since it are precisely the non- or anti-Aristotelian philosophers who often championed the concept, and there is a clear pattern where the concept was popular among the influential philosophers of

1395:

Without any context, I doubt most would see everything you describe in the image. In-fact, many may not even realise the circles are meant to represent the orbits of celestial bodies; all they would recognise is geometric figures overlayed onto a man who may as well be Da Vinci's Vitruvian Man. I

2894:

caused the problem to recur. Not sure why the wikilinks were misbehaving in this particular case. Weird thing is when I tried copy-pasting the thumbnail here, it worked fine, then when pasted it back into the article it was broken - even when pasted at another location. Maybe I'm being clumsy or

1687:

On your end, things look very spacious. I can see why you feel doubling the default is no trouble at all. If my end is a worst case, yours seems to be the best case. How would you feel about compromising on 1.5? It would still be larger that a typical sidebar template and therefore hard to miss,

1422:

instructive, and immediately makes some things clear which would be hard to grasp without it. I've read here and there about the microcosm-macrocosm analogy for years without getting a clear grip on what it meant, even as someone with a background in philosophy. This is because the analogy is so

3381:

as its somewhat dubious (not only the broad interpretation, but Aristotle was not dominant until the 13th century in Western Europe, ever in Byzantine philosophy, and arguably only for a couple centuries in Islamic philosophy) and a bit polemical, it isn't supported by Kraemer regardless of the

2561:

celestial spheres, and I've no idea why you're disputing it; the second heaven literally contains the Ptolemaic spheres as a subset, and later descriptions frequently include the empyrean among them as the highest sphere. The Latin terms are linked to translations/explanations; using Latin is a

1916:

is right that the image is not informative. Maybe because nowadays we are used to more "abstract" images. But it doesn't hurt either. For a small subgroup of readers that are striving to understand the topic of the article, it might save them some time, being at 1.8 rather than 1.2. So I lean a

1399:

Regardless, as I said in my edit summary, the utility of the diagram is not diminished by resizing it since a much, much larger version is only 1 click away for anyone interested in a closer look. The 1000+ words are still there; nothing is lost by resizing. I think it's better readers have the

1853:

surrounding it, which are about as large as the text and equally depend on image size to be recognizable. It's also the basic impression of a giant man the size of the cosmos: this is hard to see for most readers anyway given the stark differences between modern and premodern imaginings of the

2006:

I wonder, how does 1.7, or 1.6 look at your screen? From the screenshot at 1.8, I gather that there's just one word from the first paragraph missing, so maybe 1.7 would already meet the desirable and reasonable goal of at least showing the full first paragraph when loading the page?

3513:

in the 9th century until the Renaissance. But of course, this canon itself is the product of a modern (post 17th-century) tradition of scholarly historiographical study, and there are in fact a plethora of medieval philosophers who rejected or even simply ignored Aristotelian

3428:

itself is of undoubted reliability (this may be a problem in CiteHighlighter), but of course encyclopedias in general by their non-specialist/non-secondary nature can sometimes be off the mark. However, in this case the claim is corroborated by other sources; see for example

1186:

I think that the human being and the cosmos might be analogous because both were created by God. However, the former has the soul which was created with His breath by Him, while the latter does not. Thus, we have to be careful to think that they might not be very similar in

1745:) out of a concern to conform to default image sizes on WP and out of a concern for text readability. I've tested it on a few devices, but the image seems to behave well and doesn't get in the way of the text on any device I own. Nevertheless, I set the size at 1.8 (see 1423:

often mentioned without reference to its materialist, indeed often plastic context. The image makes that clear in a fraction of a second: this is not some esoteric abstraction, not some dreamy philosophical poetry, but a very literal, structural and material analogy.

3433:, pp. 320-321: "Aristotle opposes the μάκρος to the μικρὸς κόσμος. L. Stein has suggested that this passage gave rise to the whole microcosmistic speculation. This cannot be the case, since the idea, if not the term, is found with the predecessors of the Stagirite." 1339:

A diagram which is only meaningful to those who read Latin is not instructive, it's distracting, and most readers will find the article itself far more helpful. Anyone who can read it will find a full-sized version is conveniently just 1 click away; the utility is

3382:

reliability of that source, and probably doesn't need to be in a section on Medieval Philosophy if Aristotle isn't the first person to use the term. Plato is probably the philosopher who warrants much more coverage there and earlier as the greatest influence.

3251:

article (the ones cited), that was not even mentioned. Someday someone may expand this article and write something proper about the concept of macranthropy, but they will at the very least need sources connecting it to the concept of microcosm–macrocosm

1957:

Since you said it was fine at 1.2 and agreed that it was not so informative, did you mean to write that you lean towards 1.2? Or was 1.8 intentional? It seems odd to lean towards what's best for a small subgroup rather than the majority of readers.

2201:

dark material. However, some elements of the upper part (mostly the planets and stars) would move through the lower part in a rotating movement, thus also conveying some movement to the lower, darker parts of the cosmos (this was used to explain

2798:

I've implemented this caption and re-implemented the notelist. (I used italics rather than language tags for linked text in the caption because the latter breaks wikilinks; the caption is otherwise unchanged from the most recent proposal.)

1639:

image unfortunately renders in the worst possible way. But actually most people will be looking at it from smartphones and more average-sized tablets, as well as from 16:9 laptops and desktop screens, on which the 1.8 size all looks fine.

1356:, the feet deep in the dark part of the earth, the heart circling in the same orbit as the sun, etc. It immediately gives the reader a feel of what exactly ancient and medieval philosophers meant when they called the cosmos a 'great man' ( 1396:

noticed you've been editing this article for some time, so I wonder if your familiarity is making things seem more obvious than they would be for a typical, uninitiated reader and so you may be over-estimating how helpful this diagram is.

3567:. I'd certainly love to read a more in-depth treatment of that myself if you have any recommendations on possible sources for the claim, but I think the sentence as it stands now is fine, it gives something to expand upon in the future. 177: 1237:

1:2 was sometimes also interpreted along that line. However, please keep in mind that talk pages are not supposed to function as a discussion forum, but should instead be focused on the concrete improvement of articles (see #4 in

2049:

The only thing left to add, which I've neglected to say to avoid starting a tangential discussion, is that I don't think the caption and description on which it's based are quite right. I've started a new section to explain why

2667:, these were thought of as thick, material orbs which by their spherical movement either carried the planets and stars around, or moved other material celestial spheres embedded in them so as to create a combined movement (see 2395:

That's generally a great improvement, but it still needs some fine-tuning. I would speak of "an analogy" rather than "the analogy" (this is Fludd's model only); "correspondences" is superfluous (and perhaps a bit too

2368:

long. It could be made a bit shorter if the attribution to Fludd is moved to an efn (regarding which, I'd like to restore the notelist; I think including notes with the refs is unhelpful and makes them easy to miss).

3358:, preferring to use verb forms such as κατακοσμέω and διακοσμέω, that work is surely is the earliest surviving complete source of the concept, as arguably "microcosm-macrocosm" is the subject of the entire work. 1015:

I love that I went to this page to see what wikipedia had to say and someone was talking about self-similarity aka fractals. it was just missing the pic! I was hoping to find history and a mention of MESO. =)

2557:"The analogy" refers to the article's title, not Fludd's particular illustration of it; if you think that's unclear, the best solution would be to reverse the order, rather than use "an". The three heavens 942:

In paragraph 2, I think we need to explain that Socrates is always a character in Plato's writing - it might be a bit confusing for anyone unfamiliar with Plato's work. This is the sentence I don't like:

3507:), which preceded European scholasticism as the 'major' tradition of Western medieval philosophy. I think it's safe to say that in the Western canon, Aristotle has dominated from the compilation of the 3247:

does not belong in this article in this way at this time. It seems to me that macranthropy may be one ancient subtype of microcosm–macrocosm analogies, but in the sources that I have read when writing

3518:

late antiquity (mainly the Neoplatonists), plunged into obscurity in the Middle Ages, and came back to the fore in the Renaissance and early modern period precisely with the abandonment of Aristotle (

3117:

stub is that it not properly sourced and barely gives more than a dictionary definition. Since there is nothing useful to merge, we could instead redirect it here, but that would tend to violate the

3050:

that at least the terms 'microcosm' and 'macrocosm' are the most common identifiers for this subject. These terms are also used with regard to non-Western versions of the analogy, as for example by

2852:

templates within piped links (as I also did above), and I've never known them to cause problems. Is there any documentation on them breaking wikilinks? Do the wikilinks above not work on your end?

3463:: τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον καὶ ἐν τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ μικρῷ κόσμῳ ὄντι κατὰ τὸν Δημόκριτον ταῦτα θεωροῦνται ("these things are also observed in the same manner in man, who is a microcosm according to Democritus"). 3175:

has not been redirected here. Did you forget to redirect it, or did you change your mind? In any case I do not agree with redirecting it, and you should probably not be doing this without broader

1582:

While the text is still technically readable, I still find the amount of space it takes up excessive, while at 1.2 it's not nearly so intrusive and is the same size as a typical sidebar template.

1418:

It could well be that the image is primarily useful for those who already have some knowledge of Stoic philosophy, or have read a text of Plato or two. But for those readers, the image really is

3369:

to know why. In general though, outside of specialist sources I tend to find claims that such-and-such was the first to use a greek word are usually false, which is why I always check them in

3749: 3581:

And I'll be more careful about LSJ in the future as well - while I was restricting use of it as a "gut check" to remove dubious information rather than citing it as a source (which would be

833: 823: 171: 2440:; the opposition between the light upper part and the dark lower part is central to the whole way of thinking, so I would include the word "dark". I therefore propose to have it like this: 3344:- the compound word "microcosm" (which I believe would hypothetically be μικρό-κοσμος?) is not attested in Greek. If we're dealing with the use of the separate "μικρῷ κόσμῳ" the term is 3754: 68: 3649: 1348:

the concept of an analogy between parts of the human body and parts of the cosmos: the head (which the Stoics called with the same name as they called God, the head and God being the

3012:

by merging these info there. Macranthropy is a more proper term than "microcosm-macrocosm analogy", so I suggest we chuck this article there rather than that article's content here.

2266:

Illustration of an analogy between parts of the human body and parts of the cosmos: the head and the divine heavenly light, the legs and the dark earthy mass, the heart and the sun.

2209:

and the like). It's true that 'the' earth (i.e., where we live) is in the middle, but the entire lower part of the cosmos is also made of an earthy material (Fludd's 'earthy mass',

2182:

running from head-to-toe; for comparison, see another of Fludd's diagrams (right). I'm not suggesting we include all this in the caption, but I wanted to explain my reading of it.

1076:- The article is substandard and needs citations, for example in the list of cultures that "observed the golden ratio in many parts of the ordered universe both large and small" 3694: 3467:

quote, and if it's a literal quote it's often doubtful whether the author who provides the quote himself had access to a reliable source (think, in our case for example, about

799: 3574:

important, independent of the specific terminology, but if you expect others to also find the etymological information useful or relevant in this case, then I suppose that it

1692:

the diagram but also understand why it's relevant and recognise its details. I think a good caption would help much more than simply scaling things up a lot more than normal.

3744: 3679: 3664: 3654: 966:

This article has an extreme Western bias. The concept of microcosm/macrocosm is at the heart of traditional Chinese philosophy, completely unrelated to its Greek parallel.

1330:, you should not have re-reverted away from the status quo until consensus is established. It would be nice if you would keep to these established practices in the future! 885:

There are two problems with this page which I don't have time to fix right now. 1. it links to itself 2. it says nothing about the alchemical significance of the two words.

3699: 3644: 2691:" for casual readers to make the connection with the Latin text in the diagram, I will not insist on this one. However, let's then be consistent and also speak of the 320:

on Knowledge. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the

2884:

Most of the time they work, but when I copy-pasted the caption as it was the result was broken. Using italics fixed the problem; manually replacing the italics with

3684: 3669: 795: 790: 767: 2657:

Okay, let's have two sets of notes; I personally find it confusing to have both letters and numbers appear as notes, but I can see the use that you argue it has.

1233:: the Stoics believed that the cosmos originated from a breath or spirit, which they thought of as the world soul; the spirit of God hovering over the waters in 3689: 1277:

This talk page was a disorganized clutter of comments, many of them unsigned and appearing in no particular order (neither chronological nor logical), so I've

794:, a group of contributors interested in Knowledge's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our 3674: 3659: 3634: 394: 256: 3624: 357: 347: 3534:), but I wasn't writing from the sources in this particular case, and anything for which no source is given can be reasonably challenged and removed per 3362: 1281:

section headings to most of them and tried to put apparent replies in the section to which they seem to belong. I should also note that this article was

103: 1616: 1810:

the layout, but that it is distracting to many readers and that it's not so informative as to warrant such a scale. Still, I've provided a screenshot.

3724: 639: 629: 458: 410: 272: 260: 1781:

wants to assert that the current size breaks layout, let's see some screenshots demonstrating that and some suggestions for a different lead image. ~

1043:

The page completely ignores that the Greek concept of mico-macrocosm is in fact an evolution of the idea already existent in its Indo-European roots.

3739: 3709: 3639: 744: 734: 540: 442: 426: 268: 264: 3121:. I think the only two viable options are to write a reliable sourced section on the concept of macranthropy here in this article and to redirect 2675:

spheres (though the Empyrean and the sublunary heaven do not, or perhaps the Empyrean contains one sphere carrying everything below it), but they

1108:

I have written an article about macrocosm/microcosm. It is at The Free Library. This should be the standard authoritative article on the subject:

550: 192: 2042:

While I'd still prefer ≤1.5, scaling to 1.6 seems like a fair compromise (being the half-way point between 2 and 1.2). If you're fine with that,

3570:

I'll agree to disagree at least on the encyclopedic value of the first use of a particular word - I tend to think the conceptual development is

159: 3729: 2436:

may easily be misunderstood as referring to the sphere of the earth itself, so it may be better to translate to "elemental heaven" and link to

3039: 3035: 3629: 2671:). While the diagram shows the division of the heaven in three sections, these are not celestial spheres as such: as you say, these sections 322: 109: 3714: 3619: 900: 3275:

if you want other editors' opinions, but in my view it's better to leave that stub be until someone comes along and decides to expand it.

2178:). From the groin to the head there are extra circles; these are Pythagorean intervals - the 'music of the spheres'. There's actually a 1044: 1023: 870: 605: 3719: 973: 710: 3585:), I'll also be more careful about attributions of fragments and stick to unambiguous uses where the claims aren't cited by a recent 3352:, well before Aristotle. And it's a somewhat trivial piece of information - although Plato doesn't use this particular phrase in the 1905:. I have checked the image on my smartphone, my laptop, my pc and my wife's phone, the layout is fine, as it was in the "1.2 edition" 153: 3734: 516: 3487:

as a reference for this kind of thing: on Knowledge we should always be looking to actual secondary sources discussing the subject.

3704: 312: 251: 3430: 3268: 3260: 3051: 3047: 149: 48: 3552: 3289: 3197: 3143: 3072: 3043: 2936: 2866: 2778: 2531: 2294: 2093: 2021: 1868: 1763: 1653: 1532: 1470: 1378: 1299: 1256: 926: 123: 54: 1202: 596: 573: 128: 44: 1741:) and unduly ignore it (they're not very likely to click on it to enlarge). Its size has been recently reduced to 1.2 (see 199: 3304: 3226: 3212: 3162: 3104: 3017: 1092: 1062: 701: 662: 98: 2660:

Reversing the order of 'illustration' and analogy breaks the flow and is a bad idea; let's just have "the analogy" then.

1112: 1850: 1845:

It's true that it's not the text in the image which is important, but the details such as the sun and the heart, or the

507: 484: 226: 3484: 3370: 2280:, but for anyone who can read the Hebrew and Latin annotation this short description should be fairly straightforward. 1285:

on 21 January 2021, so none of these sections (except the last one above) apply to the current version of the article.

89: 2404:, which except for the sphere of the sun are not shown and should probably not be mentioned; it's probably better to 1878:

To be clear, I did not suggest cutting it down to standard size; I only argued for upscaling it by a smaller factor.

709:-related articles on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join 2723: 2600: 2467: 2335: 3461: 3445: 2137: 2397: 1806:

is arguing the illustration alone, regardless of the text, is especially informative. My argument is not that it

1749:) for the time being, because it may (?) cause problems on devices with other screen sizes and/or aspect ratios. 165: 2243:, but whose history is very obscure and has not yet been properly studied. It doesn't always play well with the 588: 567: 3593:

it was a later addition to those works but that's something I feel always requires additional qualification).

3300: 3222: 3208: 3158: 3100: 3013: 1503:

If you're still not convinced then I think we do need a third opinion, because I'm not sure what more to say.

1058: 896: 3589:(e.g. sometimes people claim a word occurring in the Odyssey/Iliad was first used by somebody else. which... 1027: 3476: 3058:

page link to various versions of the concept, and I would prefer to also keep that page for the time being.

2352:; the abdomen to the terrestrial sphere; and the legs to the earthy mass which supports this universe. From 1048: 977: 866: 133: 3397:

Hi car chasm! Thanks for opening this thread, and please accept my apologies for my bad-humored tone in my

2967:

Shäfer, Peter (2004). "In Heaven as It Is in Hell". In Boustan, Ra'anan S.; Reed, Annette Yoshiko (eds.).

3538:. So if you believe the article would be better off without the sentence, please feel free to remove it. 3034:

of this subject, while 'Macranthropy' is obscure and vague. See, for example, Google Scholar results for

892: 3509: 3424: 2500:

The reason why a separate note list is not needed and would even be confusing is that this article uses

1560: 862: 232: 1596:

Yeah, that's pretty bad. But just look at how the 1.8 size renders at my 16:9, 32", 3840 x 2160 screen:

997: 3449: 3031: 2668: 2501: 2225:

model, apparently developed into a hybrid geocentric model (i.e., incorporating the idea of rotating

1688:

especially so if given a somewhat longer, more explanatory caption which invites readers to not just

1190: 1147: 1080: 1019: 1003: 969: 914: 888: 858: 3460:

34, who actually speaks about microcosm in his own words and only attributes the idea to Democritus

992:- Repeating patterns in everything? isn't that essentially saying the world is made up of Fractals? 214: 3602: 3557: 3547: 3405: 3391: 3308: 3294: 3284: 3230: 3216: 3202: 3192: 3176: 3166: 3148: 3138: 3108: 3077: 3067: 3030:– 'Microcosm–macrocosm analogy', 'Macrocosm–microcosm analogy' or similar is without any doubt the 3021: 2941: 2931: 2904: 2871: 2861: 2808: 2783: 2773: 2643: 2536: 2526: 2378: 2299: 2289: 2191: 2127: 2122: 2098: 2088: 2059: 2026: 2016: 1991: 1986: 1967: 1943: 1928: 1923: 1887: 1873: 1863: 1840: 1819: 1790: 1768: 1758: 1701: 1658: 1648: 1591: 1537: 1527: 1512: 1475: 1465: 1409: 1383: 1373: 1304: 1294: 1261: 1251: 1206: 1177: 1151: 1128: 1096: 1066: 1052: 1031: 1007: 981: 955: 930: 922: 904: 874: 185: 79: 2213:), and was sometimes thought to consist of 'seven earths' (there are, e.g., references to this in 1120: 1084: 604:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

515:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

3598: 3404:'Microcosm' in ancient Greek is in two words μικρὸς κόσμος (or in a Stoic passage referred to by 3387: 3354: 3154: 3118: 2425: 2416:

article is in a terrible state and linking to it would obscure more than clarify (pun intended);

1831:'s explanation in this discussion helped and I could work up an improved caption based on that. ~ 1239: 1198: 1166: 993: 94: 3471:). For a discussion of DK B34 and how it relates to other Neoplatonists' use of the phrase, see 2789:

Even the planetary spheres are constituted of sub-spheres accounting for epicycles etc. and the

3475:, pp. 148-150. The idea that Democritus coined the term may have had some force in the time of 1729:

When I rewrote this article in January 2021, I purposefully set the lead image size at 2 (like

3472: 3468: 3180: 2922:

rather than the other way around. Thanks again for collaborating on creating a great caption!

2731: 2664: 2606: 2582: 2471: 2401: 2400:, and as such anachronistic); the empyrean, aetherial and elemental heavenly sections are not 2341: 2317: 2226: 2116:

Good job everybody. This discussion could be an example of how discussions should be. Cheers.

1124: 1088: 304: 75: 3483:, but would be considered naive by scholars today. In any case, please be careful with using 3263:

citing a source that macranthropy effectively is a subtype of microcosm–macrocosm analogies,

3535: 3009: 2900: 2804: 2747: 2707: 2692: 2639: 2622: 2586: 2459: 2437: 2374: 2321: 2234: 2187: 2055: 1963: 1883: 1815: 1697: 1587: 1508: 1405: 1174: 3491:

in general, and his cosmology in particular, absolutely was dominant in Arabic philosophy (

3179:. Perhaps this discussion should be somewhat more widely advertised? (for suggestions, see 3582: 2836: 2239: 2109: 1143: 855:

I would think that Lord of the Flies is a strong, obvious and well-known modern microcosm.

2482:

elemental heaven; between the legs and the dark earthy mass which supports this universe.

3054:

with regard to Chinese philosophy. Apart from that, I think that it is good to have the

3541: 3523: 3335: 3278: 3186: 3132: 3061: 2925: 2855: 2767: 2520: 2283: 2117: 2082: 2037: 2010: 1981: 1952: 1939: 1918: 1857: 1846: 1836: 1828: 1803: 1786: 1774: 1752: 1642: 1521: 1459: 1367: 1353: 1326:, you should have started a discussion after your bold edit was reverted, and that per 1288: 1245: 1226: 952: 918: 693: 3441: 3345: 1934:

I have improved the caption as there appeared to be consensus that would be helpful. ~

1352:

or 'leading part' of man and cosmos, respectively) up there in the sky underneath the

450: 434: 418: 402: 386: 3613: 3594: 3480: 3383: 3272: 2888: 2846: 2218: 1734: 1327: 1323: 1230: 1214: 1194: 3586: 3564: 3264: 3256: 3244: 3172: 3126: 3122: 3114: 3096: 3085: 3055: 3005: 2999: 2982: 2719: 2596: 2563: 2413: 2405: 2353: 2331: 2277: 2252: 2248: 2230: 2076: 1802:

The legibility of the text isn't relevant here because (1.) it's in Latin and (2.)

1453: 2575:

sun; if you think no such emphasis is needed, I don't mind delinking. How about? -

2316:

Illustration of the analogy in the correspondences between the human body and the

3361:

I didn't follow up in Kraemer at first, as it looks like Kraemer is redlisted by

3531: 3527: 2896: 2819: 2800: 2635: 2370: 2312:

That sounds plausible, but I still think the caption could be better. How about:

2206: 2183: 2051: 2001: 1975: 1959: 1911: 1879: 1824: 1811: 1778: 1693: 1583: 1504: 1401: 1315: 1170: 499: 478: 17: 3437: 3349: 2222: 1980:

for the majority of readers, there wont be any meaningful difference, I guess.

1344:

The reason why the image is instructive is not its Latin text, but the way it

683: 317: 294: 3046:(19 results). It's also pretty plain from the book and article titles in our 2895:

something is glitchy on my end; try yourself and see if it renders properly.

3496: 3453: 2479: 2202: 2179: 1935: 1832: 1797: 1782: 511:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to the 3207:

Sorry, I ahve not redirected yet. Sure, greater publicising could be done.

2251:

model which was dominant in the Middle Ages, and like many other thinkers,

2046:. I think we can delist this from the active list the 3rd opinion page now. 677: 656: 3365:? It's certainly showing that way for me though I don't know enough about 3243:

I'm sorry, but the unsourced/badly sourced, vague, and undue content form

782: 761: 3504: 3500: 3492: 2711: 2590: 2463: 2325: 2146:

The light and dark regions of diagram are not the sky and earth but day (

601: 3436:

Allers explicitly says that the term is not found before Aristotle. The

2743: 2618: 2475: 2429: 2244: 1234: 706: 316:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to 3563:

Aristotle, I'll trust your expertise that it's probably verifiable in

2466:

heaven, closest to the divine light of God; between the chest and the

2141:

Monochord; note the astronomical symbols, sun's orbit, and fixed stars

3519: 2625:; and the legs to the dark earthy mass which supports this universe. 1134:

Should be some specific definition of Macrocosm and that of Microcosm

512: 911:- alchemy is mentioned in the article, I'm presuming you edited it? 288: 245: 3376:

On the subject, i think the whole sentence here should be removed:

2432:

might be a word not everyone understands; "terrestrial sphere" for

2735: 2610: 2417: 2345: 2214: 2136: 2075:

with the compromise of setting it at 1.6. I removed this from the

1337:

the size of the lead image depicting a macro-cosmic man, writing:

1157:

Human being and the cosmos might not be very similar in structure

2969:

Heavenly Realms and Earthly Realities in Late Antique Religions

2683:

Though I think "empyrean" and "aetherial" are close enough to "

2739: 2614: 2421: 2349: 208: 39: 26: 449: 433: 417: 401: 385: 1142:

you can find more material to edit this material for sure.

798:. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our 3408:, βραχὺς κόσμος), just like it is in two words in Arabic 2706:

Illustration of the analogy between the human body and a

2474:, wherein the heart is analogous to the sun; between the 3416:. The one-word form seems to appear first in Latin with 2458:

Illustration of an analogy between the human body and a

1452:

Anyways, that's how I see it. Maybe we should ask for a

3398: 3341: 3238: 3236: 2408:

rather than Latin terms (most people don't understand "

1906: 1746: 1742: 1730: 1334: 1319: 1282: 1278: 2237:

sects, as well as in medieval Hermetic texts like the

184: 3379:

superlunary world, consisting of a fifth element)....

2971:. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 269–271. 705:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 600:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 3373:, which will generally be able to invalidate them. 1310:

Size of the lead image depicting a macro-cosmic man

368: 3452:(6th century; our article is problematic: compare 2581:The analogy illustrated in the human body and the 3750:Low-importance Classical Greece and Rome articles 2264:Perhaps the way to fix this is to change it into 57:for general discussion of the article's subject. 3755:All WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome pages 808:Knowledge:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome 3650:Mid-importance philosophy of religion articles 2217:65:12), just like the upper part consists of ' 1542:I'm on a tablet and at 1.8 it looks like this: 811:Template:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome 2509:thereby supports the main text speaking of a 198: 8: 3095:Noted. I agree. Instead, What about merging 2196:Actually, it's probably both day and night, 3695:Mid-importance Medieval philosophy articles 3259:article, as long as there is no content in 2755: 2748: 2724: 2712: 1167:Talk pages are not a blog's comment section 3745:C-Class Classical Greece and Rome articles 3680:Mid-importance Ancient philosophy articles 3665:Mid-importance Eastern philosophy articles 3655:Philosophy of religion task force articles 3240:. To repeat what I said in my edsums here: 2824:thanks for that, it's really awesome now! 2364:It's a bit longer, but I don't think it's 1390:text space, and jams the lead to one side. 1161: 756: 651: 562: 473: 365: 240: 1559: 1057:Agreed. Hence the below merger proposal. 3048:Microcosm–macrocosm analogy#Bibliography 2462:of the cosmos: between the head and the 1908:. I was not disturbed by the image. But 3700:Medieval philosophy task force articles 3645:C-Class philosophy of religion articles 2958: 1612: 1556: 758: 653: 564: 475: 242: 212: 3685:Ancient philosophy task force articles 3670:Eastern philosophy task force articles 3377: 2764:I hope we can agree on this proposal, 2705: 2669:Aristotelian physics#Celestial spheres 2580: 2457: 2315: 2265: 2255:was probably using elements from both. 326:about philosophy content on Knowledge. 2710:cosmos: the head is analogous to the 2589:cosmos: the head is analogous to the 2504:, which contain both short citations 1400:choice of whether to zoom in or not. 791:WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome 7: 3690:C-Class Medieval philosophy articles 2825: 2754:; the legs to the dark earthy mass ( 2412:", but do understand "heaven"); the 1917:little bit towards the 1.8 version. 1322:, I feel I should tell you that per 1218: 1113:Macrocosm/Microcosm in Doric Thought 788:This article is within the scope of 699:This article is within the scope of 594:This article is within the scope of 505:This article is within the scope of 310:This article is within the scope of 3675:C-Class Ancient philosophy articles 3660:C-Class Eastern philosophy articles 3635:Mid-importance metaphysics articles 231:It is of interest to the following 47:for discussing improvements to the 3625:Mid-importance Philosophy articles 3129:page as it is for the time being. 2998:Proposed merge of this article to 2832:One thing though: I regularly use 2221:'. This ultimately derives from a 1119:I hope this clears up some issues. 1104:New article on Macrocosm/microcosm 814:Classical Greece and Rome articles 25: 3329:Microcosm in Greek and Aristotle. 3725:Low-importance Theology articles 3008:page would not be burdened with 2826: 2760:) which supports this universe. 2108: 1615: 1219: 781: 760: 686: 676: 655: 587: 566: 498: 477: 332:Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy 297: 287: 244: 213: 69:Click here to start a new topic. 3740:Low-importance Judaism articles 3710:High-importance Occult articles 3640:Metaphysics task force articles 3119:principle of least astonishment 1562:File:Screenshot micro-macro.png 1072:Substandard and needs citations 828:This article has been rated as 739:This article has been rated as 634:This article has been rated as 545:This article has been rated as 352:This article has been rated as 335:Template:WikiProject Philosophy 2942:17:37, 23 September 2021 (UTC) 2905:15:42, 23 September 2021 (UTC) 2872:15:13, 23 September 2021 (UTC) 2809:14:54, 23 September 2021 (UTC) 2784:01:30, 23 September 2021 (UTC) 2644:23:00, 22 September 2021 (UTC) 2537:21:17, 22 September 2021 (UTC) 2379:19:29, 22 September 2021 (UTC) 2300:00:49, 22 September 2021 (UTC) 2192:20:47, 21 September 2021 (UTC) 2162:) of earthy microcosmic mass ( 2128:06:09, 22 September 2021 (UTC) 2099:23:31, 21 September 2021 (UTC) 2060:21:19, 21 September 2021 (UTC) 2027:16:46, 21 September 2021 (UTC) 1992:15:41, 21 September 2021 (UTC) 1968:14:13, 21 September 2021 (UTC) 1944:12:21, 21 September 2021 (UTC) 1929:07:06, 21 September 2021 (UTC) 1888:02:08, 21 September 2021 (UTC) 1874:00:37, 21 September 2021 (UTC) 1841:23:16, 20 September 2021 (UTC) 1820:22:52, 20 September 2021 (UTC) 1791:21:31, 20 September 2021 (UTC) 1769:18:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC) 1702:02:08, 21 September 2021 (UTC) 1659:00:37, 21 September 2021 (UTC) 1592:22:52, 20 September 2021 (UTC) 1538:18:49, 20 September 2021 (UTC) 1513:15:58, 20 September 2021 (UTC) 1476:02:19, 20 September 2021 (UTC) 1410:01:18, 20 September 2021 (UTC) 1384:23:45, 19 September 2021 (UTC) 614:Knowledge:WikiProject Theology 1: 3730:WikiProject Theology articles 3309:04:52, 18 February 2023 (UTC) 3295:22:10, 17 February 2023 (UTC) 3231:19:31, 17 February 2023 (UTC) 3217:19:21, 12 December 2022 (UTC) 3203:16:20, 12 December 2022 (UTC) 3167:15:18, 12 December 2022 (UTC) 3078:12:35, 26 November 2022 (UTC) 3040:"macrocosm-microcosm analogy" 3036:"microcosm-macrocosm analogy" 3022:16:41, 25 November 2022 (UTC) 2276:This is of course borderline 2166:) which statuminate/prop-up ( 1849:above the man's head and the 1067:16:43, 25 November 2022 (UTC) 1032:09:23, 27 December 2012 (UTC) 1008:00:26, 18 December 2008 (UTC) 982:14:22, 11 November 2007 (UTC) 719:Knowledge:WikiProject Judaism 713:and see a list of open tasks. 617:Template:WikiProject Theology 608:and see a list of open tasks. 519:and see a list of open tasks. 66:Put new text under old text. 3630:C-Class metaphysics articles 3149:18:21, 1 December 2022 (UTC) 3125:to it, or to just leave the 3109:13:09, 1 December 2022 (UTC) 1097:23:51, 3 February 2011 (UTC) 1053:03:27, 21 October 2010 (UTC) 875:16:53, 24 October 2006 (UTC) 722:Template:WikiProject Judaism 525:Knowledge:WikiProject Occult 3715:WikiProject Occult articles 3620:C-Class Philosophy articles 3269:Microcosm–macrocosm analogy 3261:Microcosm–macrocosm analogy 2697:and explicitly mention the 1489:the sake of a minority who 1305:09:43, 29 August 2021 (UTC) 1262:09:54, 29 August 2021 (UTC) 1207:07:50, 29 August 2021 (UTC) 1178:15:30, 30 August 2021 (UTC) 1152:04:12, 5 October 2017 (UTC) 528:Template:WikiProject Occult 74:New to Knowledge? Welcome! 49:Microcosm–macrocosm analogy 3771: 3603:19:18, 4 August 2023 (UTC) 2158:described as two columns ( 1129:20:25, 4 August 2011 (UTC) 1115:online at The Free Library 834:project's importance scale 745:project's importance scale 640:project's importance scale 551:project's importance scale 358:project's importance scale 3720:C-Class Theology articles 3558:14:09, 22 July 2023 (UTC) 3448:B34, which is taken from 3392:03:25, 22 July 2023 (UTC) 2722:of God; the chest to the 2599:of God; the chest to the 2334:of God; the chest to the 2164:molis microcosmicæ terreæ 1737:-like image (which it is 956:17:15, 31 July 2007 (UTC) 931:17:15, 31 July 2007 (UTC) 827: 805:Classical Greece and Rome 776: 768:Classical Greece and Rome 738: 671: 633: 582: 544: 493: 457: 441: 425: 409: 393: 364: 351: 282: 239: 104:Be welcoming to newcomers 33:Skip to table of contents 3735:C-Class Judaism articles 3458:Prolegomena philosophiae 3171:Hi FatalSubjectivities, 3157:. I am redirecting now. 2987:Utriusque cosmi historia 2358:Utriusque cosmi historia 2324:cosmos: the head to the 905:16:42, 12 May 2007 (UTC) 32: 3705:C-Class Occult articles 3271:in my view. Take it to 3267:should not redirect to 3153:I think this would not 2470:heaven occupied by the 369:Associated task forces: 3578:belong in the article. 2756: 2749: 2725: 2713: 2142: 1283:rewritten from scratch 454: 438: 422: 411:Philosophy of religion 406: 390: 313:WikiProject Philosophy 221:This article is rated 99:avoid personal attacks 3510:Theology of Aristotle 3425:Encyclopaedia Judaica 3113:The problem with the 3042:(222 results) versus 2140: 1006:comment was added at 453: 437: 421: 405: 389: 124:Neutral point of view 3367:Encyclopedia Judaica 2738:is analogous to the 2613:is analogous to the 2348:is analogous to the 2044:I think this settled 1725:Summary by Apaugasma 1273:Refactored talk page 597:WikiProject Theology 129:No original research 3301:FatalSubjectivities 3223:FatalSubjectivities 3209:FatalSubjectivities 3159:FatalSubjectivities 3101:FatalSubjectivities 3014:FatalSubjectivities 2663:With regard to the 2502:annotated footnotes 2174:) at right angles ( 1059:FatalSubjectivities 1039:Indo-European roots 702:WikiProject Judaism 459:Medieval philosophy 338:Philosophy articles 3440:fragment cited by 3084:Proposed merge of 3038:(486 results) and 2730:, occupied by the 2143: 988:Repeating patterns 508:WikiProject Occult 455: 443:Ancient philosophy 439: 427:Eastern philosophy 423: 407: 391: 323:general discussion 227:content assessment 110:dispute resolution 71: 3469:pseudo-Democritus 3052:Raphals 2015–2020 2732:classical planets 2718:, closest to the 2665:celestial spheres 2607:classical planets 2595:, closest to the 2583:celestial spheres 2472:classical planets 2402:celestial spheres 2342:classical planets 2330:, closest to the 2318:celestial spheres 2278:original research 2227:celestial spheres 2176:ad angulos rectus 2170:) this universe ( 1318:! With regard to 1269: 1268: 1193:comment added by 1100: 1083:comment added by 1022:comment added by 984: 972:comment added by 949:See what I mean? 917:comment added by 891:comment added by 861:comment added by 851:Lord of the Flies 848: 847: 844: 843: 840: 839: 755: 754: 751: 750: 650: 649: 646: 645: 620:Theology articles 561: 560: 557: 556: 472: 471: 468: 467: 464: 463: 305:Philosophy portal 207: 206: 90:Assume good faith 67: 38: 37: 16:(Redirected from 3762: 3556: 3550: 3544: 3339: 3293: 3287: 3281: 3201: 3195: 3189: 3147: 3141: 3135: 3076: 3070: 3064: 2990: 2979: 2973: 2972: 2963: 2940: 2934: 2928: 2893: 2887: 2870: 2864: 2858: 2851: 2845: 2841: 2835: 2831: 2830: 2829: 2823: 2782: 2776: 2770: 2759: 2752: 2750:cœlum elementare 2728: 2716: 2701:in our caption. 2694:cœlum elementare 2623:sublunary sphere 2605:occupied by the 2535: 2529: 2523: 2460:geocentric model 2438:sublunary sphere 2434:cœlum elementare 2340:occupied by the 2298: 2292: 2286: 2235:Jewish-Christian 2133:Captioning Fludd 2112: 2097: 2091: 2085: 2041: 2025: 2019: 2013: 2005: 1979: 1956: 1915: 1872: 1866: 1860: 1801: 1767: 1761: 1755: 1657: 1651: 1645: 1619: 1565: 1563: 1536: 1530: 1524: 1474: 1468: 1462: 1382: 1376: 1370: 1333:You drastically 1303: 1297: 1291: 1260: 1254: 1248: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1209: 1162: 1099: 1077: 1034: 1011: 967: 933: 907: 877: 816: 815: 812: 809: 806: 785: 778: 777: 772: 764: 757: 727: 726: 725:Judaism articles 723: 720: 717: 696: 691: 690: 689: 680: 673: 672: 667: 659: 652: 622: 621: 618: 615: 612: 591: 584: 583: 578: 570: 563: 533: 532: 529: 526: 523: 502: 495: 494: 489: 481: 474: 376: 366: 340: 339: 336: 333: 330: 307: 302: 301: 300: 291: 284: 283: 278: 275: 248: 241: 224: 218: 217: 209: 203: 202: 188: 119:Article policies 40: 27: 21: 3770: 3769: 3765: 3764: 3763: 3761: 3760: 3759: 3610: 3609: 3548: 3542: 3539: 3363:Citehighlighter 3333: 3331: 3285: 3279: 3276: 3193: 3187: 3184: 3139: 3133: 3130: 3090: 3068: 3062: 3059: 3003: 2995: 2994: 2993: 2980: 2976: 2966: 2964: 2960: 2932: 2926: 2923: 2891: 2885: 2862: 2856: 2853: 2849: 2843: 2839: 2833: 2827: 2817: 2774: 2768: 2765: 2527: 2521: 2518: 2290: 2284: 2281: 2240:Sirr al-khaliqa 2135: 2089: 2083: 2080: 2035: 2017: 2011: 2008: 1999: 1973: 1950: 1909: 1864: 1858: 1855: 1795: 1759: 1753: 1750: 1727: 1722: 1649: 1643: 1640: 1625: 1624: 1623: 1620: 1571: 1570: 1569: 1566: 1561: 1528: 1522: 1519: 1493:have a similar 1466: 1460: 1457: 1374: 1368: 1365: 1312: 1295: 1289: 1286: 1275: 1270: 1252: 1246: 1243: 1220: 1188: 1180: 1159: 1136: 1106: 1078: 1074: 1041: 1017: 1001: 990: 964: 940: 912: 886: 883: 856: 853: 813: 810: 807: 804: 803: 770: 724: 721: 718: 715: 714: 692: 687: 685: 665: 619: 616: 613: 610: 609: 576: 547:High-importance 531:Occult articles 530: 527: 524: 521: 520: 488:High‑importance 487: 374: 337: 334: 331: 328: 327: 303: 298: 296: 276: 254: 225:on Knowledge's 222: 145: 140: 139: 138: 115: 85: 23: 22: 18:Talk:Olam katan 15: 12: 11: 5: 3768: 3766: 3758: 3757: 3752: 3747: 3742: 3737: 3732: 3727: 3722: 3717: 3712: 3707: 3702: 3697: 3692: 3687: 3682: 3677: 3672: 3667: 3662: 3657: 3652: 3647: 3642: 3637: 3632: 3627: 3622: 3612: 3611: 3608: 3607: 3606: 3605: 3579: 3568: 3524:Paracelsianism 3515: 3488: 3464: 3434: 3421: 3412:and in Hebrew 3402: 3348:being used by 3330: 3327: 3326: 3325: 3324: 3323: 3322: 3321: 3320: 3319: 3318: 3317: 3316: 3315: 3314: 3313: 3312: 3311: 3253: 3241: 3219: 3089: 3082: 3081: 3080: 3044:"macranthropy" 3032:wp:common name 3002: 2996: 2992: 2991: 2974: 2957: 2956: 2952: 2951: 2950: 2949: 2948: 2947: 2946: 2945: 2944: 2912: 2911: 2910: 2909: 2908: 2907: 2877: 2876: 2875: 2874: 2812: 2811: 2795: 2794: 2726:cœlum æthereum 2714:cœlum empyreum 2655: 2654: 2653: 2652: 2651: 2650: 2649: 2648: 2647: 2646: 2627: 2609:, wherein the 2602:cœlum æthereum 2592:cœlum empyreum 2577: 2576: 2546: 2545: 2544: 2543: 2542: 2541: 2540: 2539: 2491: 2490: 2489: 2488: 2487: 2486: 2485: 2484: 2448: 2447: 2446: 2445: 2444: 2443: 2442: 2441: 2386: 2385: 2384: 2383: 2382: 2381: 2362: 2344:, wherein the 2337:cœlum æthereum 2327:cœlum empyreum 2313: 2305: 2304: 2303: 2302: 2271: 2270: 2269: 2268: 2259: 2258: 2257: 2256: 2172:eius universum 2134: 2131: 2106: 2105: 2104: 2103: 2102: 2101: 2065: 2064: 2063: 2062: 2047: 2030: 2029: 1971: 1970: 1947: 1946: 1899: 1898: 1897: 1896: 1895: 1894: 1893: 1892: 1891: 1890: 1847:tetragrammaton 1726: 1723: 1721: 1718: 1717: 1716: 1715: 1714: 1713: 1712: 1711: 1710: 1709: 1708: 1707: 1706: 1705: 1704: 1672: 1671: 1670: 1669: 1668: 1667: 1666: 1665: 1664: 1663: 1662: 1661: 1622: 1621: 1614: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1608: 1607: 1606: 1605: 1604: 1603: 1602: 1601: 1600: 1599: 1598: 1597: 1568: 1567: 1558: 1555: 1554: 1553: 1552: 1551: 1550: 1549: 1548: 1547: 1546: 1545: 1544: 1543: 1500: 1499: 1481: 1480: 1479: 1478: 1447: 1446: 1445: 1444: 1437: 1436: 1435: 1434: 1427: 1426: 1425: 1424: 1413: 1412: 1397: 1392: 1391: 1311: 1308: 1274: 1271: 1267: 1266: 1265: 1264: 1227:Pneuma (Stoic) 1182: 1181: 1165: 1160: 1158: 1155: 1135: 1132: 1117: 1116: 1105: 1102: 1073: 1070: 1040: 1037: 1036: 1035: 989: 986: 963: 960: 939: 936: 935: 934: 893:132.162.142.52 882: 879: 852: 849: 846: 845: 842: 841: 838: 837: 830:Low-importance 826: 820: 819: 817: 786: 774: 773: 771:Low‑importance 765: 753: 752: 749: 748: 741:Low-importance 737: 731: 730: 728: 711:the discussion 698: 697: 694:Judaism portal 681: 669: 668: 666:Low‑importance 660: 648: 647: 644: 643: 636:Low-importance 632: 626: 625: 623: 606:the discussion 592: 580: 579: 577:Low‑importance 571: 559: 558: 555: 554: 543: 537: 536: 534: 517:the discussion 503: 491: 490: 482: 470: 469: 466: 465: 462: 461: 456: 446: 445: 440: 430: 429: 424: 414: 413: 408: 398: 397: 392: 382: 381: 379: 377: 371: 370: 362: 361: 354:Mid-importance 350: 344: 343: 341: 309: 308: 292: 280: 279: 277:Mid‑importance 249: 237: 236: 230: 219: 205: 204: 142: 141: 137: 136: 131: 126: 117: 116: 114: 113: 106: 101: 92: 86: 84: 83: 72: 63: 62: 59: 58: 52: 36: 35: 30: 24: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3767: 3756: 3753: 3751: 3748: 3746: 3743: 3741: 3738: 3736: 3733: 3731: 3728: 3726: 3723: 3721: 3718: 3716: 3713: 3711: 3708: 3706: 3703: 3701: 3698: 3696: 3693: 3691: 3688: 3686: 3683: 3681: 3678: 3676: 3673: 3671: 3668: 3666: 3663: 3661: 3658: 3656: 3653: 3651: 3648: 3646: 3643: 3641: 3638: 3636: 3633: 3631: 3628: 3626: 3623: 3621: 3618: 3617: 3615: 3604: 3600: 3596: 3592: 3588: 3584: 3580: 3577: 3573: 3569: 3566: 3561: 3560: 3559: 3554: 3551: 3545: 3537: 3533: 3529: 3525: 3521: 3516: 3512: 3511: 3506: 3502: 3498: 3494: 3489: 3486: 3482: 3478: 3474: 3470: 3465: 3462: 3459: 3455: 3451: 3447: 3443: 3439: 3435: 3432: 3427: 3426: 3422: 3419: 3415: 3411: 3407: 3403: 3400: 3396: 3395: 3394: 3393: 3389: 3385: 3380: 3374: 3372: 3368: 3364: 3359: 3357: 3356: 3351: 3347: 3343: 3337: 3328: 3310: 3306: 3302: 3298: 3297: 3296: 3291: 3288: 3282: 3274: 3270: 3266: 3262: 3258: 3254: 3250: 3246: 3242: 3239: 3237: 3234: 3233: 3232: 3228: 3224: 3220: 3218: 3214: 3210: 3206: 3205: 3204: 3199: 3196: 3190: 3182: 3178: 3174: 3170: 3169: 3168: 3164: 3160: 3156: 3152: 3151: 3150: 3145: 3142: 3136: 3128: 3124: 3120: 3116: 3112: 3111: 3110: 3106: 3102: 3098: 3094: 3093: 3092: 3091: 3087: 3083: 3079: 3074: 3071: 3065: 3057: 3053: 3049: 3045: 3041: 3037: 3033: 3029: 3026: 3025: 3024: 3023: 3019: 3015: 3011: 3007: 3001: 2997: 2988: 2984: 2978: 2975: 2970: 2962: 2959: 2955: 2943: 2938: 2935: 2929: 2920: 2919: 2918: 2917: 2916: 2915: 2914: 2913: 2906: 2902: 2898: 2890: 2883: 2882: 2881: 2880: 2879: 2878: 2873: 2868: 2865: 2859: 2848: 2838: 2821: 2816: 2815: 2814: 2813: 2810: 2806: 2802: 2797: 2796: 2792: 2791:primum mobile 2788: 2787: 2786: 2785: 2780: 2777: 2771: 2762: 2761: 2758: 2753: 2751: 2745: 2741: 2737: 2734:(wherein the 2733: 2729: 2727: 2721: 2717: 2715: 2709: 2702: 2700: 2696: 2695: 2690: 2686: 2681: 2678: 2674: 2670: 2666: 2661: 2658: 2645: 2641: 2637: 2632: 2628: 2626: 2624: 2620: 2616: 2612: 2608: 2604: 2603: 2598: 2594: 2593: 2588: 2584: 2579: 2578: 2574: 2570: 2567:refer to the 2565: 2560: 2556: 2555: 2554: 2553: 2552: 2551: 2550: 2549: 2548: 2547: 2538: 2533: 2530: 2524: 2516: 2512: 2507: 2503: 2499: 2498: 2497: 2496: 2495: 2494: 2493: 2492: 2483: 2481: 2477: 2473: 2469: 2465: 2461: 2456: 2455: 2454: 2453: 2452: 2451: 2450: 2449: 2439: 2435: 2431: 2427: 2423: 2419: 2415: 2411: 2407: 2403: 2399: 2398:Swedenborgian 2394: 2393: 2392: 2391: 2390: 2389: 2388: 2387: 2380: 2376: 2372: 2367: 2363: 2361: 2359: 2355: 2351: 2347: 2343: 2339: 2338: 2333: 2329: 2328: 2323: 2319: 2314: 2311: 2310: 2309: 2308: 2307: 2306: 2301: 2296: 2293: 2287: 2279: 2275: 2274: 2273: 2272: 2267: 2263: 2262: 2261: 2260: 2254: 2250: 2246: 2242: 2241: 2236: 2232: 2228: 2224: 2220: 2219:seven heavens 2216: 2212: 2208: 2204: 2199: 2195: 2194: 2193: 2189: 2185: 2181: 2177: 2173: 2169: 2165: 2161: 2157: 2153: 2150:) and night ( 2149: 2145: 2144: 2139: 2132: 2130: 2129: 2126: 2125: 2121: 2120: 2115: 2111: 2100: 2095: 2092: 2086: 2078: 2074: 2071: 2070: 2069: 2068: 2067: 2066: 2061: 2057: 2053: 2048: 2045: 2039: 2034: 2033: 2032: 2031: 2028: 2023: 2020: 2014: 2003: 1996: 1995: 1994: 1993: 1990: 1989: 1985: 1984: 1977: 1969: 1965: 1961: 1954: 1949: 1948: 1945: 1941: 1937: 1933: 1932: 1931: 1930: 1927: 1926: 1922: 1921: 1913: 1907: 1904: 1889: 1885: 1881: 1877: 1876: 1875: 1870: 1867: 1861: 1852: 1848: 1844: 1843: 1842: 1838: 1834: 1830: 1826: 1823: 1822: 1821: 1817: 1813: 1809: 1805: 1799: 1794: 1793: 1792: 1788: 1784: 1780: 1776: 1773: 1772: 1771: 1770: 1765: 1762: 1756: 1748: 1744: 1740: 1736: 1735:Vitruvian Man 1732: 1724: 1720:Third opinion 1719: 1703: 1699: 1695: 1691: 1686: 1685: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1680: 1679: 1678: 1677: 1676: 1675: 1674: 1673: 1660: 1655: 1652: 1646: 1637: 1636: 1635: 1634: 1633: 1632: 1631: 1630: 1629: 1628: 1627: 1626: 1618: 1613: 1595: 1594: 1593: 1589: 1585: 1581: 1580: 1579: 1578: 1577: 1576: 1575: 1574: 1573: 1572: 1564: 1557: 1541: 1540: 1539: 1534: 1531: 1525: 1516: 1515: 1514: 1510: 1506: 1502: 1501: 1496: 1492: 1487: 1486: 1485: 1484: 1483: 1482: 1477: 1472: 1469: 1463: 1455: 1454:third opinion 1451: 1450: 1449: 1448: 1441: 1440: 1439: 1438: 1431: 1430: 1429: 1428: 1421: 1417: 1416: 1415: 1414: 1411: 1407: 1403: 1398: 1394: 1393: 1388: 1387: 1386: 1385: 1380: 1377: 1371: 1363: 1359: 1358:makranthropos 1355: 1351: 1347: 1342: 1341: 1340:undiminished. 1336: 1331: 1329: 1325: 1321: 1317: 1309: 1307: 1306: 1301: 1298: 1292: 1284: 1280: 1272: 1263: 1258: 1255: 1249: 1241: 1236: 1232: 1231:Stoic physics 1228: 1216: 1212: 1211: 1210: 1208: 1204: 1200: 1196: 1192: 1184: 1183: 1179: 1176: 1172: 1168: 1164: 1163: 1156: 1154: 1153: 1149: 1145: 1140: 1133: 1131: 1130: 1126: 1122: 1114: 1111: 1110: 1109: 1103: 1101: 1098: 1094: 1090: 1086: 1082: 1071: 1069: 1068: 1064: 1060: 1055: 1054: 1050: 1046: 1045:71.190.182.22 1038: 1033: 1029: 1025: 1024:98.194.82.194 1021: 1014: 1013: 1012: 1009: 1005: 999: 995: 987: 985: 983: 979: 975: 971: 961: 959: 957: 954: 950: 947: 944: 937: 932: 928: 924: 920: 916: 910: 909: 908: 906: 902: 898: 894: 890: 880: 878: 876: 872: 868: 864: 863:166.109.0.209 860: 850: 835: 831: 825: 822: 821: 818: 801: 797: 793: 792: 787: 784: 780: 779: 775: 769: 766: 763: 759: 746: 742: 736: 733: 732: 729: 712: 708: 704: 703: 695: 684: 682: 679: 675: 674: 670: 664: 661: 658: 654: 641: 637: 631: 628: 627: 624: 607: 603: 599: 598: 593: 590: 586: 585: 581: 575: 572: 569: 565: 552: 548: 542: 539: 538: 535: 518: 514: 510: 509: 504: 501: 497: 496: 492: 486: 483: 480: 476: 460: 452: 448: 447: 444: 436: 432: 431: 428: 420: 416: 415: 412: 404: 400: 399: 396: 388: 384: 383: 380: 378: 373: 372: 367: 363: 359: 355: 349: 346: 345: 342: 325: 324: 319: 315: 314: 306: 295: 293: 290: 286: 285: 281: 274: 270: 266: 262: 258: 253: 250: 247: 243: 238: 234: 228: 220: 216: 211: 210: 201: 197: 194: 191: 187: 183: 179: 176: 173: 170: 167: 164: 161: 158: 155: 151: 148: 147:Find sources: 144: 143: 135: 134:Verifiability 132: 130: 127: 125: 122: 121: 120: 111: 107: 105: 102: 100: 96: 93: 91: 88: 87: 81: 77: 76:Learn to edit 73: 70: 65: 64: 61: 60: 56: 50: 46: 42: 41: 34: 31: 29: 28: 19: 3590: 3575: 3571: 3508: 3457: 3423: 3417: 3413: 3410:ʿālam ṣaghīr 3409: 3375: 3366: 3360: 3353: 3332: 3265:Macranthropy 3257:Macranthropy 3248: 3245:Macranthropy 3177:wp:consensus 3173:Macranthropy 3127:Macranthropy 3123:Macranthropy 3115:Macranthropy 3097:macranthropy 3086:macranthropy 3056:Macranthropy 3027: 3006:Macranthropy 3004: 3000:macranthropy 2989:, 1617–1621. 2986: 2983:Robert Fludd 2977: 2968: 2961: 2953: 2790: 2763: 2757:molis terreæ 2720:divine light 2703: 2699:molis terreæ 2698: 2693: 2688: 2684: 2682: 2676: 2672: 2662: 2659: 2656: 2630: 2601: 2597:divine light 2591: 2572: 2568: 2564:Divine light 2558: 2514: 2510: 2505: 2433: 2414:divine light 2409: 2365: 2357: 2354:Robert Fludd 2336: 2332:divine light 2326: 2249:Aristotelian 2238: 2231:late antique 2211:molis terreæ 2210: 2197: 2175: 2171: 2168:statuminatur 2167: 2163: 2159: 2155: 2151: 2147: 2123: 2118: 2113: 2107: 2072: 2043: 1987: 1982: 1972: 1924: 1919: 1902: 1900: 1807: 1738: 1728: 1689: 1494: 1490: 1419: 1361: 1357: 1349: 1345: 1343: 1338: 1332: 1313: 1276: 1189:— Preceding 1185: 1141: 1137: 1118: 1107: 1079:— Preceding 1075: 1056: 1042: 1018:— Preceding 991: 974:75.69.75.230 965: 962:Western bias 951: 948: 945: 941: 913:— Preceding 887:— Preceding 884: 881:Two problems 857:— Preceding 854: 829: 796:project page 789: 740: 700: 635: 595: 546: 506: 353: 321: 311: 233:WikiProjects 195: 189: 181: 174: 168: 162: 156: 146: 118: 43:This is the 3595:- car chasm 3528:Hermeticism 3473:this source 3444:is in fact 3431:Allers 1944 3418:microcosmus 3384:- car chasm 3255:As for the 3155:wp:astonish 2965:See, e.g., 2704:Like this: 2515:great order 2511:small order 2426:over-linked 2406:use English 2233:Jewish and 2207:hot springs 2160:duæ columnæ 1903:3rd Opinion 1362:insan kabir 1354:name of God 1350:hegemonikon 1346:illustrates 1240:WP:NOTFORUM 1225:Please see 1169:applies. -- 1002:—Preceding 968:—Preceding 395:Metaphysics 257:Metaphysics 172:free images 55:not a forum 3614:Categories 3514:cosmology. 3438:Democritus 3414:olam katan 3350:Democritus 3252:analogies. 3181:WP:APPNOTE 2954:References 2708:geocentric 2587:geocentric 2571:heart and 2360:, 1617–21. 2322:geocentric 2223:flat earth 1901:Here from 1279:just added 1187:structure. 1144:HillmanHan 958:Moonpilot 329:Philosophy 318:philosophy 252:Philosophy 3543:Apaugasma 3536:WP:BURDEN 3497:al-Farabi 3342:this edit 3336:Apaugasma 3280:Apaugasma 3188:Apaugasma 3134:Apaugasma 3063:Apaugasma 3010:WP:WEIGHT 2927:Apaugasma 2857:Apaugasma 2769:Apaugasma 2689:aethereum 2522:Apaugasma 2480:sublunary 2468:aetherial 2285:Apaugasma 2245:Ptolemaic 2203:volcanism 2180:monochord 2084:Apaugasma 2038:Apaugasma 2012:Apaugasma 1953:Cinadon36 1859:Apaugasma 1829:Apaugasma 1804:Apaugasma 1775:Apaugasma 1754:Apaugasma 1644:Apaugasma 1523:Apaugasma 1461:Apaugasma 1369:Apaugasma 1290:Apaugasma 1247:Apaugasma 953:Moonpilot 919:Moonpilot 800:talk page 112:if needed 95:Be polite 45:talk page 3583:WP:SYNTH 3505:Averroes 3501:Avicenna 3493:al-Kindi 3401:earlier. 3346:attested 3299:alright 3028:Bad idea 2685:empyreum 2478:and the 2464:empyrean 2114:Comment: 1215:Ruby2021 1203:contribs 1195:Ruby2021 1191:unsigned 1093:contribs 1081:unsigned 1020:unsigned 970:unsigned 938:Socrates 927:contribs 915:unsigned 901:contribs 889:unsigned 871:contribs 859:unsigned 611:Theology 602:Theology 574:Theology 273:Medieval 261:Religion 80:get help 53:This is 51:article. 3355:Timaeus 3235:Undone 2746:to the 2744:abdomen 2742:); the 2687:" and " 2673:contain 2621:to the 2619:abdomen 2573:literal 2569:literal 2476:abdomen 2430:abdomen 2119:Cinadon 2073:I agree 1983:Cinadon 1920:Cinadon 1335:reduced 1235:Genesis 1121:WHEELER 1085:Txensen 1004:undated 832:on the 743:on the 716:Judaism 707:Judaism 663:Judaism 638:on the 549:on the 356:on the 269:Ancient 265:Eastern 223:C-class 178:WP refs 166:scholar 3591:maybe 3520:Ficino 3479:& 3399:revert 3099:here? 2897:Scyrme 2837:transl 2820:Scyrme 2801:Scyrme 2636:Scyrme 2617:; the 2371:Scyrme 2184:Scyrme 2079:list. 2052:Scyrme 2050:below. 2002:Scyrme 1976:Scyrme 1960:Scyrme 1912:Scyrme 1880:Scyrme 1825:Scyrme 1812:Scyrme 1808:breaks 1779:Scyrme 1694:Scyrme 1584:Scyrme 1505:Scyrme 1402:Scyrme 1328:WP:QUO 1324:WP:BRD 1316:Scyrme 1314:Hello 1213:Hello 1171:Calton 994:Sp!der 522:Occult 513:occult 485:Occult 229:scale. 150:Google 3587:WP:RS 3576:does 3572:more 3565:WP:RS 3481:Kranz 3477:Diels 3450:David 3406:Philo 3221:Done 2981:From 2736:heart 2631:would 2611:heart 2585:of a 2418:heart 2410:cœlum 2346:heart 2320:of a 2253:Fludd 2229:) by 2215:Quran 1851:glory 1491:might 193:JSTOR 154:books 108:Seek 3599:talk 3549:talk 3532:WP:V 3388:talk 3305:talk 3286:talk 3249:this 3227:talk 3213:talk 3194:talk 3163:talk 3140:talk 3105:talk 3088:here 3069:talk 3018:talk 2933:talk 2901:talk 2889:lang 2863:talk 2847:lang 2842:and 2805:talk 2775:talk 2640:talk 2528:talk 2513:and 2428:but 2424:are 2420:and 2375:talk 2291:talk 2188:talk 2148:dies 2090:talk 2056:talk 2018:talk 1964:talk 1940:talk 1936:Kvng 1884:talk 1865:talk 1837:talk 1833:Kvng 1816:talk 1798:Kvng 1787:talk 1783:Kvng 1760:talk 1747:here 1743:here 1731:here 1698:talk 1650:talk 1588:talk 1529:talk 1509:talk 1467:talk 1420:very 1406:talk 1375:talk 1320:this 1296:talk 1253:talk 1229:and 1199:talk 1175:Talk 1148:talk 1125:talk 1089:talk 1063:talk 1049:talk 1028:talk 998:talk 978:talk 923:talk 897:talk 867:talk 541:High 186:FENS 160:news 97:and 3485:LSJ 3456:), 3454:SEP 3442:LSJ 3371:LSJ 3340:Re 3273:AfD 2985:'s 2740:sun 2677:are 2615:sun 2559:are 2506:and 2422:sun 2366:too 2356:'s 2350:sun 2198:and 2156:are 2152:nox 1739:not 1690:see 1495:aha 1242:). 1000:) 824:Low 735:Low 630:Low 348:Mid 200:TWL 3616:: 3601:) 3540:☿ 3526:, 3522:, 3503:, 3499:, 3495:, 3446:DK 3390:) 3307:) 3277:☿ 3229:) 3215:) 3185:☿ 3183:) 3165:) 3131:☿ 3107:) 3060:☿ 3020:) 2924:☿ 2903:) 2892:}} 2886:{{ 2854:☿ 2850:}} 2844:{{ 2840:}} 2834:{{ 2807:) 2766:☿ 2642:) 2629:I 2519:☿ 2377:) 2282:☿ 2205:, 2190:) 2124:36 2081:☿ 2077:3O 2058:) 2009:☿ 1988:36 1966:) 1942:) 1925:36 1886:) 1856:☿ 1839:) 1818:) 1789:) 1751:☿ 1700:) 1641:☿ 1590:) 1520:☿ 1511:) 1458:☿ 1456:? 1408:) 1366:☿ 1360:, 1287:☿ 1244:☿ 1217:! 1205:) 1201:• 1173:| 1150:) 1127:) 1095:) 1091:• 1065:) 1051:) 1030:) 980:) 929:) 925:• 903:) 899:• 873:) 869:• 375:/ 271:/ 267:/ 263:/ 259:/ 255:: 180:) 78:; 3597:( 3555:) 3553:☉ 3546:( 3420:. 3386:( 3338:: 3334:@ 3303:( 3292:) 3290:☉ 3283:( 3225:( 3211:( 3200:) 3198:☉ 3191:( 3161:( 3146:) 3144:☉ 3137:( 3103:( 3075:) 3073:☉ 3066:( 3016:( 2939:) 2937:☉ 2930:( 2899:( 2869:) 2867:☉ 2860:( 2822:: 2818:@ 2803:( 2781:) 2779:☉ 2772:( 2638:( 2534:) 2532:☉ 2525:( 2373:( 2297:) 2295:☉ 2288:( 2247:- 2186:( 2096:) 2094:☉ 2087:( 2054:( 2040:: 2036:@ 2024:) 2022:☉ 2015:( 2004:: 2000:@ 1978:: 1974:@ 1962:( 1955:: 1951:@ 1938:( 1914:: 1910:@ 1882:( 1871:) 1869:☉ 1862:( 1835:( 1814:( 1800:: 1796:@ 1785:( 1766:) 1764:☉ 1757:( 1696:( 1656:) 1654:☉ 1647:( 1586:( 1535:) 1533:☉ 1526:( 1507:( 1473:) 1471:☉ 1464:( 1404:( 1381:) 1379:☉ 1372:( 1302:) 1300:☉ 1293:( 1259:) 1257:☉ 1250:( 1197:( 1146:( 1123:( 1087:( 1061:( 1047:( 1026:( 1010:. 996:( 976:( 921:( 895:( 865:( 836:. 802:. 747:. 642:. 553:. 360:. 235:: 196:· 190:· 182:· 175:· 169:· 163:· 157:· 152:( 82:. 20:)

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index