“He to whom courtesans belong,” argues our adversary, “must be a procurer: now courtesans are included in all things, therefore courtesans belong to the wise man. But he to whom courtesans belong is a procurer; therefore the wise man is a procurer.” Yes! by the same reasoning, our opponents would forbid him to buy anything, arguing, “No man buys his own property. Now all things are the property of the wise man; therefore the wise man buys nothing.” By the same reasoning they object to his borrowing, because no one pays interest for the use of his own money. They raise endless quibbles, although they perfectly well understand what we say.