Consider this sentence from Seneca's De Brevitate Vitae: "inde Aristotelis cum rerum natura exigentis minime conveniens sapienti viro lis". The sentence introduces a quotation attributed to Aristotle, but that's not pertinent to my question. I think: exigentis depends on Aristotelis (both genitive); the sense of exigere here is to deliberate or consider; and "cum rerum natura" says something about what Aristotle was considering, but I can't make sense of "cum." Translating it temporally would fit the context, but I though cum can be temporal only as part of a clause with a finite verb -- can "cum" be temporal with a participle like exigentis? Translating cum prepositionally "with the nature of things" sounds awkward in English; we would say "about" or "concerning," I suppose. But maybe this is a situation in which the meaning of the Latin preposition when used with exigere just does not align exactly with its usual English equivalent. We might say: "I was struggling with that concept" and maybe the sense of cum is similar here. Any help greatly appreciated.
Oxford Latin Dictionary, exigo, 10, e:
(intr., w. cum) to expostulate (with a person)
I suspect that may not have been helpful, so let's consult Merriam-Webster on "expostulate":
to reason earnestly with a person for purposes of dissuasion or remonstrance
This usage seems related to exigere as discussing with someone, but it has acquired a more negative connotation, including disapproval and/or reproach.
Seneca's criticism of Aristotle is that he was complaining about how the world works (rerum natura), something a good Stoic philosopher would never do.