perhaps one might reasonably raise the question whether there is any place where what is corruptible becomes incorruptible, as fire does in the upper regions where it meets with no opposite. opposites destroy each other, and hence accidentally, by their destruction, whatsoever is attributed to them is destroyed. but no opposite in a real substance is accidentally destroyed, because real substance is not predicated of any subject. hence a thing which has no opposite, or which is situated where it has no opposite, cannot be destroyed. for what will that be which can destroy it, if destruction comes only through contraries, but no contrary to it exists either absolutely or in the particular place where it is? but perhaps this is in one sense true, in another sense not true, for it is impossible that anything containing matter should not have in any sense an opposite. heat and straightness can be present in every part of a thing, but it is impossible that the thing should be nothing but hot or white or straight; for, if that were so, attributes would have an independent existence. hence if, in all cases, whenever the active and the passive exist together, the one acts and the other is acted on, it is impossible that no change should occur. further, this is so if a waste product is an opposite, and waste must always be produced; for opposition is always the source of change, and refuse is what remains of the previous opposite. but, after expelling everything of a nature actually opposed, would an object in this case also be imperishable? no, it would be destroyed by the environment.

if then that is so, what we have said sufficiently accounts for the change; but, if not, we must assume that something of actually opposite character is in the changing object, and refuse is produced.

hence accidentally a lesser flame is consumed by a greater one, for the nutriment, to wit the smoke, which the former takes a long period to expend, is used up by the big flame quickly.

hence [too] all things are at all times in a state of transition and are coming into being and passing away. the environment acts on them either favourably or antagonistically, and, owing to this, things that change their situation become more or less enduring than their nature warrants, but never are they eternal when they contain contrary qualities; for their matter is an immediate source of contrariety, so that if it involves locality they show change of situation, if quantity, increase and diminution, while if it involves qualitative affection we find alteration of character.