Sec.111. Dicere ... perturbatum:  for om. of esse cf. 108, etc. Antiochus:  this Bait. brackets. Unum ... alterum:  cf. 44. Esse quaedam in visis:  it was not the esse but the videri, not the actual existence of a difference, but the possibility of that difference being infallibly perceived by human sense, that the Academic denied. Cernimus:  i.e. the probably true and false. Probandi species:  a phenomenal appearance which belongs to, or properly leads to qualified approval.

Sec.Sec.112—­115.  Summary.  If I had to deal with a Peripatetic, whose definitions are not so exacting, my course would be easier; I should not much oppose him even if he maintained that the wise man sometimes opines (112).  The definitions of the real Old Academy are more reasonable than those of Antiochus.  How, holding the opinions he does, can he profess to belong to the Old Academy? (113) I cannot tolerate your assumption that it is possible to keep an elaborate dogmatic system like yours free from mistakes (114).  You wish me to join your school.  What am I to do then with my dear friend Diodotus, who thinks so poorly of Antiochus?  Let us consider however what system not I, but the sapiens is to adopt (115).

Sec.112. Campis ... exsultare ... oratio:  expressions like this are common in Cic., e.g. D.F. I. 54, De Off. I. 61, Orat. 26; cf. also Aug. Cont.  Ac. III. 5 ne in quaestionis campis tua eqitaret oratio. Cum Peripatetico:  nothing that Cic. states here is at discord with what is known of the tenets of the later Peripatetics; cf. esp.  Sext. A.M. VII. 216—­226.  All that Cic. says is that he could accept the Peripatetic formula, putting upon it his own meaning of course.  Doubtless a Peripatetic would have wondered how a sceptic could accept his formulae; but the spectacle of men of the most irreconcilable opinions clinging on to the same formulae is common enough to prevent us from being surprised at Cicero’s acceptance.  I have already suggested (n. on 18) that we have here a trace of Philo’s teaching, as distinct from that of Carneades.  I see absolutely no reason for the very severe remarks of Madvig on D.F. V. 76, a passage which very closely resembles ours. Dumeta:  same use in N.D. I. 68, Aug. Cont.  Ac. II. 6; the spinae of the Stoics are often mentioned, e.g. D.F. IV. 6. E vero ... a falso:  note the change of prep. Adhiberet:  the MSS. are confused here, and go Halm reads adderet, and Bait. follows, while Kayser proposes adhaereret, which is indeed nearer the MSS.; cf. however I. 39 adhiberet. Accessionem:  for this cf. 18 and 77. Simpliciter:  the opposite of subtiliter; cf. simpliciter—­subtilitas in I. 6. Ne Carneade quidem:  cf. 59, 67, 78, 148.