principiate

plural principiates

1. The product of a principle.

   3 more examples

   Of Subſtances ſome are Principles, ſome Principiates. By Principles, I mean ſubſtances that are cauſes of other things, but are themſelves uncauſed. By Principiates (give me leave to make an Engliſh word of one not very good Latin) I mean ſubſtances that are cauſed, or compoſed of Principles. Principles make, Principiates are made to be.

   1694, Richard Burthogge, “The Idea or Notion of Substance. […]”, in An Essay upon Reason, and the Nature of Spirits, London: […] John Dunton […], →OCLC, chapter V (Of Substance), page 101

   From what hath been ſaid above, it is evident, why all Things of the Body are Principiates, that is, Contextures conſiſting of Fibres from their Principles, which are Receptacles of Love and Wiſdom, and that ſuch as the Principles are, ſuch muſt alſo the Principiates be, wherefore whitherſoever the Principles tend, the Principiates follow, they cannot be ſeparated.

   1788, Emanuel Swedenborg, translated by [Nathaniel Tucker], “As the Love Is, Such Is the Wisdom, and Consequently Such Is the Man”, in The Wisdom of Angels, Concerning Divine Love and Divine Wisdom. […], London: […] W. Chalklen, […], →OCLC, part V, paragraph 369, pages 350–351

   The Latin actualitas comes from actus, which in turn comes from agens and agere; so that, in calling a being actual, we name it in virtue of its active principle, its agency. That is why the actual principle of a being is potior, since it is more powerful than anything else that belongs to the ontological make-up of the being. In a word, then, the term actual designates a principle not a principiate, a source not a result.

   1982, Kenneth L. Schmitz, chapter IV [The Ontological Drama], in The Gift: Creation (The Aquinas Lecture, 1982), Milwaukee, Wis.: Marquette University Press, →ISBN, pages 102–103

present singular third person principiates · participle present principiating · participle past principiated · past principiated

1. transitiveTo begin; to initiate.

   Both the Kingly and Prophetical Offices of Jesus Christ are principiated in this

   1654, Edward Leigh, A Systeme or Body of Divinity

   2 more examples

   In short, the principles of any science are not proved by the science employing them. Principles are only inadequately and virtually the wholes which they principiate; otherwise, in knowing the principles, the mind would also actually know what is principiated.

   1954, Vincent Edward Smith, St. Thomas on the Object of Geometry (The Aquinas Lecture, 1953), Milwaukee, Wis.: Marquette University Press, →OCLC, pages 58–59

   According to Scotus, then, self-change is possible when one and the same thing has a form φ that grounds the active causal potency to cause equivocally another form ψ and is also in passive potency to receive φ. In the language of principles, one and the same thing has an active principle to produce a form it currently lacks and a passive principle of receiving such a form, and these two principles jointly bring about (or “principiate”) the result (In Metaph. 9, q. 14, nn. 84–5).

   2003, Peter King, “Scotus on Metaphysics”, in Thomas Williams, editor, The Cambridge Companion to Duns Scotus, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire: Cambridge University Press, →ISBN, pages 47–48

1. not comparableobsoleteHaving a beginning; of or constituting a beginning.

   All formed beings are terminate, that is, are principiate or have a beginning, and finite, or have an ending.

   1702, Gideon Harvey, “Of Corporeal, and Incorporeal Philosophy”, in The Third Edition of the Vanities of Philosophy and Physick: […], London: […] A[bel] Roper […] and R[ichard] Basset […], →OCLC, page 95

   2 more examples

   For, while we are, certainly, we cannot imagine Two diſtinct Durations; but one, which in reſpct^([sic]) to our Nature, that is principiate, mutable, and terminable, doth contain deſignable Terms; […]

   1654, Walter Charleton, “Their Assertors Subterfuge, that Eternity Is Coexistent to Time; Also Unintelligible”, in Physiologia Epicuro-Gassendo-Charltoniana: or A Fabrick of Science Natural, upon the Hypothesis of Atoms, […], part I, London: […] Tho[mas] Newcomb, for Thomas Heath, […], →OCLC, book I, chapter VII (Of Time and Eternity), section III, page 81

   [W]e are at a loſs for a ſcientificall account even of our Senſes, the moſt knowable of our facultyes. Our eyes, that ſee other things, ſee not themſelves: And thoſe principiate foundations of knowledge are themſelvs unknown.

   1661, Joseph Glanvill, “We Can Give No Account of the Manner of Sensation: nor of the Nature of the Memory. […]”, in The Vanity of Dogmatizing: Or Confidence in Opinions. […], London: […] E. C[otes] for Henry Eversden […], →OCLC, page 27