quaer V31PRESACTIVEIND1S enim CONJ cur ADVPOS ill PRON61ACCSF solv VPAR31GENPXPRESACTIVEPPL ration N31ACCSF minus ADVCOMP efficac ADJ31ACCSCPOS put V11PRESACTIVESUB2S qu PRON10NOMPF quia CONJ praescienti N11ACCSF non ADV ess VPAR31VOCSMPERFPASSIVEPPL futur ADJ11DATPXPOS r N51DATPF caus N11ACCSF necessitat N31GENSF existim V11PRESACTIVEIND3S nihil N99XXN imped V41PRESPASSIVEINF0X praesci VPAR31NOMPNPRESACTIVEPPL arbitri N24GENSN libertat N31ACCSF put V11PRESACTIVEIND3S
For I ask, why do you think that explanation of those solving the problem less than effectual which, since it considers that foreknowledge is not the cause of any necessity for future events, thinks the freedom of the will not at all restricted by foreknowledge?
final_alignments\Boethius_Philosophy_Book5.json