The Organon. Aristotle PDF

Transcription

1 The Organon Aristotle

2 Edited by Roger Bishop Jones ISBN-10: ISBN-13: Most recent amendment: January 1st 2016

3 Contents Contents iii Preface Volume 1 CATEGORIAE 1 Book I The Categories Contents Summary Ch. 1 Equivocal, univocal and derivative names Ch. 2 Presence and predication Ch. 3 Subclasses and predicability Ch. 4 Terms and Categories Ch. 5 Substance Ch. 6 Quantity Ch. 7 Relation Ch. 8 Quality Ch. 9 Action, affection, position, time, place, state Ch. 10 Opposite, contrary, privative, positive Ch. 11 Contrary Ch. 12 Prior Ch. 13 Simultaneous Ch. 14 Motion Ch. 15 To have xiii Volume 2 DE INTERPRETATIONE 35 Book I On Interpretation Contents Summary Ch. 1 Language, thought, truth Ch. 2 Nouns Ch. 3 Verbs Ch. 4 Sentences and propositions Ch. 5 Simple and composite propositions Ch. 6 Affirmation, denial, contradictories

4 iv CONTENTS Ch. 7 Universal and individual subjects Ch. 8 Single affirmations Ch. 9 Necessity and contradiction, fatalism Ch. 10 Affirmation or denial requires a noun and a verb.. 45 Ch. 11 Concerning the unity of affirmations Ch. 12 Asserting or denying possibility, contingency, impossibility, necessity Ch. 13 Possibility and contingency Ch. 14 Contrary and contradictory Volume 3 ANALYTICA PRIORIA 59 Book I The syllogism defined STRUCTURE OF THE SYLLOGISM PRELIMINARY DISCUSSIONS Ch. 1 Perfect and imperfect syllogisms Ch. 2 Premisses, their modes and conversions EXPOSITION OF THE THREE FIGURES Ch. 3 Necessary and possible premisses Ch. 4 The first figure Ch. 5 The second figure Ch. 6 The third figure Ch. 7 The relation between the figures Ch. 8 Necessity, actuality and possibility Ch. 9 Syllogisms with some necessary premisses Ch. 10 The second figure with one necessary premiss Ch. 11 The third figure with one necessary premiss Ch. 12 Simple conclusions and necessary conclusions Ch. 13 Proof of or from possibility Ch. 14 Reasoning about possibilities Ch. 15 Possibility, impossibility Ch. 16 One premiss necessary, the other problematic Ch. 17 Second figure, both premisses problematic Ch. 18 One premiss assertoric, the other problematic Ch. 19 One necessary, other problematic, negative necessary 84 Ch. 20 Both or only one of the premisses is problematic.. 86 Ch. 21 One premiss pure, the other problematic Ch. 22 One necessary, other problematic, premisses affirmative SUPPLEMENTARY DISCUSSIONS Ch. 23 Every syllogism is formed through these figures.. 89 Ch. 24 One premiss must be affirmative, one universal Ch. 25 Every demonstration proceeds through three terms 91

5 CONTENTS v Ch. 26 What sort of problem is difficult to prove MODE OF DISCOVERY OF ARGUMENTS Ch. 27 How to reach the principles relative to the problem 94 Ch. 28 To establish something about a whole, look to the subjects Ch. 29 Impossible conclusions and ostensive syllogisms.. 98 Ch. 30 On method, in relation to choice of premisses Ch. 31 Division into classes is a small part of the method. 100 ANALYSIS OF ARGUMENTS Ch. 32 Reducing syllogisms to the figures Ch. 33 On the necessity of syllogistic inference Ch. 34 Not setting out the terms of the premiss well Ch. 35 Terms need not be single words Ch. 36 Relations between the terms in a syllogism Ch. 37 Predication and categories Ch. 38 Terms repeated in the premisses Ch. 39 Exchanging terms Ch. 40 Good and The Good Ch. 41 Transitivity of belonging Ch. 42 On figures Ch. 43 Proving some part of a definition Ch. 44 We must not try to reduce hypothetical syllogisms. 108 Ch. 45 Reduction of syllogisms between figures Ch. 46 not to be this and to be not-this differ in meaning 111 Book II Properties and defects of the syllogism, arguments akin to syllogism PROPERTIES Ch. 1 The reason common to all syllogisms Ch. 2 Reaching true conclusions from false premisses Ch in the second figure Ch in the third figure Ch. 5 Circular and reciprocal proof Ch in the second figure Ch in the third figure Ch. 8 Conversion of syllogisms Ch in the second figure Ch in the third figure Ch. 11 The syllogism per impossibile Ch in the second figure Ch in the third figure Ch. 14 Demonstration per impossibile differs from ostensive proof

6 vi CONTENTS Ch. 15 Drawing a conclusion from opposed premisses DEFECTS Ch. 16 Begging the question Ch. 17 Proof by reductio Ch. 18 A false argument depends on its first false statement 139 Ch. 19 Do not allow the same term twice in premisses Ch. 20 When refutation will be possible and when impossible 139 Ch. 21 Deception in the arrangement of the terms ARGUMENTS AKIN TO SYLLOGISM Ch. 22 Whenever the extremes are convertible Ch. 23 Rhetorical syllogism and induction Ch. 24 When the major term belongs to the middle Ch. 25 Reduction Ch. 26 Objection Ch. 27 Probability Volume 4 ANALYTICA POSTERIORA 149 Book I Posterior Analytics Ch. 1 Proceeding from pre-existent knowledge Ch. 2 Unqualified scientific knowledge Ch. 3 Terminating regress in indemonstrable premisses Ch. 4 Scientific knowledge must rest on essential premisses 154 Ch. 5 Failure of commensurate universality Ch. 6 Demonstrative knowledge rests on necessary truths 157 Ch. 7 No demonstration may pass from one genus to another Ch. 8 Commensurately universal premisses yield eternal conclusions Ch. 9 Attribute demonstration only from appropriate basic truths Ch. 10 Basic truths, peculiar (to a genus), and common (to all) 162 Ch. 11 Existence of forms, contradiction, excluded middle. 164 Ch. 12 There are distinctively scientific questions Ch. 13 Knowledge of the fact differs from knowledge of the reasoned fact Ch. 14 Of all the figures the most scientific is the first Ch. 15 Atomic connexions and disconnexions Ch. 16 Ignorance is error produced by inference Ch. 17 Attributes not atomically connected or disconnected 172 Ch. 18 Demonstration develops from universals, induction from particulars Ch. 19 Every syllogism is effected by means of three terms 173

7 CONTENTS vii Ch. 20 Middle terms cannot be infinite in number Ch. 21 That the regress of middles terminates Ch. 22 Dialectical considerations Ch. 23 Some corollaries Ch. 24 Universal demonstration is better than particular Ch. 25 Affirmative demonstration excels negative Ch. 26 Negative demonstration and reductio ad impossibile 185 Ch. 27 Exactness and priority in science Ch. 28 A single science is one whose domain is a single genus 187 Ch. 29 One can have several demonstrations of the same connexion Ch. 30 There is no knowledge by demonstration of chance conjunctions Ch. 31 Knowledge of things demonstrable cannot be acquired by perception Ch. 32 Basic truths are not limited in number Ch. 33 Scientific knowledge differs from opinion Ch. 34 Quick wit is a faculty of hitting upon the middle term instantaneously Book II Posterior Analytics Ch. 1 Four kinds of question Ch. 2 Whether a connexion is a fact Ch. 3 How essential nature is revealed Ch. 4 Whether syllogism is possible Ch. 5 The method of division a not a process of inference 197 Ch. 6 The definable form must not fall within the syllogism 198 Ch. 7 How then by definition shall we prove essential nature? Ch. 8 Whether essential nature is demonstrable Ch. 9 There are essential natures which are immediate Ch. 10 Defining definition Ch. 11 We have scientific knowledge when we know the cause Ch. 12 Middle term as cause Ch. 13 The elements predicated as constituting the definable form Ch. 14 The method of selection of analyses and divisions. 210 Ch. 15 Identical and subordinate connexions Ch. 16 Whether, when the effect is present the cause also is present Ch. 17 Must identical effects have identical causes? Ch. 18 Which of multiple middles is the cause?

8 viii CONTENTS Ch. 19 How basic premisses become known Volume 5 TOPICA 217 Book I Preliminary considerations Ch. 1 What reasoning is Ch. 2 For what purposes the treatise is useful Ch. 3 On the way to proceed Ch. 4 Of what parts our inquiry consists Ch. 5 Definition, property, genus, and accident Ch. 6 Remarks made in criticism of definitions Ch. 7 Senses borne by the term Sameness Ch. 8 Confirming the senses of definition Ch. 9 Categories of predicate Ch. 10 Dialectical propositions and problems Ch. 11 Theses Ch. 12 Species of dialectical arguments Ch. 13 Four sources of arguments Ch. 14 Three divisions of propositions and problems Ch. 15 The number of senses a term bears Ch. 16 Difference should be examined in same genera Ch. 17 Likeness should be studied in different genera Ch. 18 It is useful to study difference in meaning of a term 233 Book II On various argumentative techniques Ch. 1 Of problems some are universal, others particular. 234 Ch. 2 Mistaken accidental ascription Ch. 3 Attributions to terms used in several senses Ch. 4 It is well to alter a term into one more familiar Ch. 5 Drawing an opponent into a refutable statement Ch. 6 On dichotomies Ch. 7 Contraries and their conjunctions Ch. 8 Look for arguments among contradictories Ch. 9 Co-ordinates and inflected forms of the terms Ch. 10 Look at things which are like the subject Ch. 11 Matters of degree Book III Which is the more desirable of two or more things Ch. 1 In themselves Ch. 2 In their consequences Ch. 3 The particular virtue of species Ch. 4 The more desirable is desirable Ch. 5 Comparative degrees and amounts Ch. 6 Universals entail particulars Book IV The relationship between genus and species

9 CONTENTS ix Ch. 1 Species are distinguished by essential properties Ch. 2 Species falling under more than one genus Ch. 3 Species partaking of contratries of the genus Ch. 4 Things that bear a like relation to one another Ch. 5 Placing what is a state inside the genus activity. 270 Ch. 6 If the term rendered fails to be the genus of anything 273 Book V Whether an attribute is or is not a property Ch. 1 Essential and Relative Properties Ch. 2 Correct rendition of properties Ch. 3 Correct rendition of properties (continued) Ch. 4 Whether what is stated is or is not a Property Ch. 5 Natural properties cannot be essential Ch. 6 The point of view of the respective opposites Ch. 7 The point of view of things that are in a like relation 294 Ch. 8 The point of view of greater and less degrees Book VI The discussion of definitions Ch. 1 The five parts of the discussion of definitions Ch. 2 Obscurity Ch. 3 Redundancy Ch. 4 Intelligibility, priority, circularity Ch. 5 When an object in a genus has not been placed in it 306 Ch. 6 Whether the differentiae be those of the genus Ch. 7 Whether application of a term is consistent with its definition Ch. 8 Definitions of terms which are relative Ch. 9 Definitions of state, of relatives, of contraries Ch. 10 Like inflexions, ambiguous terms Ch. 11 Complex terms, equimembrals Ch. 12 Reality, relatives, imperfection, desirables Ch. 13 Product and sum Ch. 14 Definitions as composites or contraries Book VII Whether two things are the same or different Ch. 1 Inflections, accidents, categories, degrees Ch. 2 Constraints on definitions apply to sameness Ch. 3 Reasoning to a thing s definition Ch. 4 The most handy of the commonplace arguments Ch. 5 It is more difficult to establish than to overthrow a definition Book VIII Arrangement and method in posing questions Ch. 1 The premisses which have to be adopted Ch. 2 Syllogism and demonstration versus induction Ch. 3 Sources of difficulty in discussion

10 x CONTENTS Ch. 4 The business of a good answerer Ch. 5 Premisses generally accepted or rejected without qualification Ch. 6 What the aims of the answerer should be Ch. 7 Terms used obscurely Ch. 8 A premiss relates to a constituent in the reasoning. 342 Ch. 9 Before advancing a position, test it Ch. 10 Demolish the point on which the fallacy depends Ch. 11 Five kinds of criticism of arguments Ch. 12 An argument is called fallacious in four senses Ch. 13 People seem to beg their original question in five ways 347 Ch. 14 Training and practice in arguments Volume 6 DE SOPHISTICIS ELENCHIS 353 Section I Introduction Ch. 1 Distinguishing between genuine and sophistical arguments Ch. 2 Four kinds of arguments used in discussion Section II Sophistical questions and arguments Ch. 3 Five objectives of argument Ch. 4 Six sophistical methods involving language Ch. 5 Seven fallacies unconnected with language Ch. 6 Further discussion of these sophistical refutations. 360 Ch. 7 On the sources of these fallacies Ch. 8 Apparent and sophistical syllogisms Ch. 9 Scientific and dialectical reasoning Ch. 10 Argument against the word, and against the thought 366 Ch. 11 Dialectical versus contentious and sophistical reasoning Ch. 12 Exposing fallacious and paradoxical sophisms Ch. 13 Making someone babble Ch. 14 Solecism Ch. 15 How to ask questions effectively Section III Responding to sophistical arguments Ch. 16 Sophistries must be answered as well as understood 376 Ch. 17 Refutation by fraudulent artifice, equivocation, amphiboly Ch. 18 Making a distinction versus demolishing a premiss 380 Ch. 19 Equivocal premisses versus equivocal conclusions. 381 Ch. 20 Fallacies involving division and combination of words 382 Ch. 21 Accentuation Ch. 22 Identical expressions for distinct things

11 CONTENTS xi Ch. 23 Summary on answers for arguments depending on language Ch. 24 Dealing with arguments which depend on accident 386 Ch. 25 Arguments depending on expressions not valid absolutely Ch. 26 Comparing the conclusion with its contradictory Ch. 27 Begging the question Ch. 28 Refutations reaching their conclusion through the Ch. 29 consequent Refutations whose reasoning depends on some addition Ch. 30 Refutations which make several questions into one. 391 Ch. 31 Those who draw one into repetition Ch. 32 Refuting solecisms Ch. 33 Degrees of difficulty in refutation of fallacies Section IV Epilogue Ch. 34 Review and conclusions Index 399

12

13 Preface The works of Aristotle on logic have traditionally been referred to collectively as The Organon. This bare-bones English language edition of those works was prepared for my own use when I sought but failed to find elsewhere an edition convenient for my purposes. It is now made generally available. The translations from the original Greek sources were undertaken, during the first half of the 20 th Century, under the general editorship of Sir David Ross by: E. M. Edghill (Categories and On Interpretation) A. J. Jenkinson (Prior Analytics) G. R. G. Mure (Posterior Analytics) W. A. Pickard-Cambridge (Topics and On Sophistical Refutations) The texts from which this edition was prepared were published online at the MIT classics archive, without any clear indication of their origin. It seems likely that they were obtained by digital scanning and optical character recognition of the original Oxford University Press edition, followed by a (probably manual) cleanup which resulted in deleting materials which do not readily convert in this way, in fact, all but the translated text. These materials lost in the digital copy published by the MIT archive include translators footnotes, contents listings/summaries, and the Bekker page, column and line numbers (which are marginalia in the original). None of these omitted materials are Aristotle s, they were all provided by the translators or editors of the OUP edition, so the MIT text does include a complete translation of Aristotle s text. I first used the MIT texts in 1996 to produce an online HTML (hypertext) edition in which I sought to facilitate navigation by breaking the text into smaller sections and providing book and chapter/part headings, thus redoing a small amount of the work undertaken by the original editors. It was not until 2012 that I felt the need for a hard copy of The Organon, and at that

14 xiv CONTENTS point I modified the scripts used to produce the HTML edition to generate L A TEX source from which files suitable for use in Print-On-Demand publishing through CreateSpace.com could be obtained. At this time I also wrote scripts to assist in producing an index. This edition was made available in September At that time I had not seen the original OUP edition, and was not aware of the various materials present in that edition but omitted from the MIT texts. It was not until early in 2013 that I realised that digital scans of the original editions were available at archive.org, and was able to appreciate the full merits of the original editions. I then undertook some improvements to bring this edition closer to the merits of the original. These consist in the addition of Bekker page numbers and column letters, and incorporation of some of the contents summaries provided in the OUP edition (see the beginning of Categories and On Interpretation). Improvements were also made to the L A TEX generated contents listings, and to the information provided in the page footers. The smallest numbered divisions of the work (which have no name in the Greek originals) were called parts in the MIT texts and hence in the first version of this edition, but were called chapters in the OUP edition of these translations, though they are generally much shorter than chapters in modern works. I have now reverted to the terminology of the OUP edition. Page headers and footers have been designed to aid the reader in finding his way around the book. Bekker page numbers are now shown in the text and in the left page footer. Though it would have been possible to put the Bekker numbers in the margins, this would have narrowed the text and lengthened the volume, leading to a higher price. The left page footer now contains material intended to facilitate locating the points in the text referred to in commentaries and papers on Aristotle s works. Roger Bishop Jones May 2013

15 Volume 1 CATEGORIAE Book I The Categories Contents Summary Ch. 1. Homonyms, synonyms, and derivatives. Ch. 2. Presence and Predication. (1) Simple and composite expressions. (2) Things (a) predicable of a subject. (b) present in a subject, (c) both predicable of, and present in, a subject, (d) neither predicable of, nor present in, a subject. Ch. 3. Subclasses and predicability (1) That which is predicable of the predicate is predicable of the subject. (2) The differentiae of species in one genus are not the same as those in another, unless one genus is included in the other. Ch. 4. The eight categories of the objects of thought. Ch. 5. Substance. (1) Primary and secondary substance. (2) Difference in the relation subsisting between essential and accidental attributes and their subject. (3) All that which is not primary substance is either an essential or an accidental attribute of primary substance.

16 2 The Categories (4) Of secondary substances, species are more truly substance than genera. (5) All species, which are not genera, are substance in the same degree, and all primary substances are substance in the same degree. (6) Nothing except species and genera is secondary substance. (7) The relation of primary substance to secondary substance and to all other predicates is the same as that of secondary substance to all other predicates. (8) Substance is never an accidental attribute. (9) The differentiae of species are not accidental attributes. (10) Species, genus, and differentiae, as predicates, are univocal with their subject. (11) Primary substance is individual; secondary substance is the qualification of that which is individual. (12) No substance has a contrary. (13) No substance can be what it is in varying degrees. (14) The particular mark of substance is that contrary qualities can be predicated of it. (15) Contrary qualities cannot be predicated of anything other than substances, not even of propositions and judgements. Ch. 6. Quantity: (1) Discrete and continuous quantity. (2) Division of quantities, i.e. number, the spoken word, the line, the surface, the solid, time, place, into these two classes. (3) The parts of some quantities have a relative position, those of others have not. Division of quantities into these two classes. (4) Quantitative terms are applied to things other than quantity, in view of their relation to one of the aforesaid quantities. (5) Quantities have no contraries. (6) Terms such as great and small are relative, not quantitative, and moreover cannot be contrary to each other. (7) That which is most reasonably supposed to contain a contrary is space. (8) No quantity can be what it is in varying degrees. Cat.

17 3 (9) The peculiar mark of quantity is that equality and inequality can be predicated of it. Ch. 7. Relation. (1) First definition of relatives. (2) Some relatives have contraries. (3) Some relatives are what they are in varying degrees. (4) A relative term has always its correlative, and the two are inter dependent. (5) The correlative is only clear when the relative is given its proper name, and in some cases words must be coined for this purpose. (6) Most relatives come into existence simultaneously ; but the objects of knowledge and perception are prior to knowledge and perception. (7) No primary substance or part of a primary substance is relative. (8) Revised definition of relatives, excluding secondary substances. (9) It is impossible to know that a thing is relative, unless we know that to which it is relative. Ch. 8. Quality. (1) Definition of qualities. (2) Different kinds of quality: (a) habits and dispositions; (b) capacities; (c) affective qualities. [Distinction between affective qualities and affections.] (d) shape, &c. [Rarity, density, &c., are not qualities.] (3) Adjectives are generally formed derivatively from the names of the corresponding qualities. (4) Most qualities have contraries. (5) If of two contraries one is a quality, the other is also a quality. (6) A quality can in most cases be what it is in varying degrees, and subjects can possess most qualities in varying degrees. Qualities of shape are an exception to this rule. (7) The peculiar mark of quality is that likeness and unlikeness is predicable of things in respect of it. CATEGORIAE

18 4 The Categories (8) Habits and dispositions as genera are relative; as individual, qualitative. Ch. 9. Action and affection and the other categories described. Ch. 10. Four classes of opposites. (a) Correlatives. (b) Contraries. [Some contraries have an intermediate, and some have not.] (c) Positives and privatives. The terms expressing possession and privation are not the positive and privative, though the former are opposed each to each in the same sense as the latter. Similarly the facts which form the basis of an affirmation or a denial are opposed each to each in the same sense as the affirmation and denial themselves. Positives and privatives are not opposed in the sense in which correlatives are opposed. Positives and privatives are not opposed in the same sense in which contraries are opposed. For: (i) they are not of the class which has no intermediate, nor of the class which has intermediates. (ii) There can be no change from one state (privation) to its opposite. (d) Affirmation and negation. These are distinguished from other contraries by the fact that one is always false and the other true. [Opposite affirmations seem to possess this mark, but they do not.] Ch. 11. Contraries further discussed. Evil is generally the contrary of good, but sometimes two evils are contrary. When one contrary exists, the other need not exist. Contrary attributes are applicable within the same species or genus. Contraries must themselves be within the same genus, or within opposite genera, or be themselves genera. Ch. 12. The word prior is applicable: Cat.

19 Equivocal, univocal and derivative names 5 (a) to that which is previous in time; (b) to that on which something else depends, but which is not itself dependent on it; (c) to that which is prior in arrangement; (d) to that which is better or more honourable; (e) to that one of two interdependent things which is the cause of the other. Ch. 13. The word simultaneous is used: (a) of those things which come into being at the same time; (b) of those things which are interdependent, but neither of which is the cause of the other. (c) of the different species of the same genus. Ch. 14. Motion is of six kinds. Alteration is distinct from other kinds of motion. Definition of the contrary of motion and of the various kinds of motion. Ch. 15. The meanings of the term to have. Ch. 1 Equivocal, univocal and derivative names [1a] Things are said to be named equivocally when, though they have a common name, the definition corresponding with the name differs for each. Thus, a real man and a figure in a picture can both lay claim to the name animal ; yet these are equivocally so named, for, though they have a common name, the definition corresponding with the name differs for each. For should any one define in what sense each is an animal, his definition in the one case will be appropriate to that case only. On the other hand, things are said to be named univocally which have both the name and the definition answering to the name in common. A man and an ox are both animal, and these are univocally so named, inasmuch as not only the name, but also the definition, is the same in both cases: for if a man should state in what sense each is an animal, the statement in the one case would be identical with that in the other. Things are said to be named derivatively, which derive their name from some other name, but differ from it in termination. Thus the grammarian derives his name from the word grammar, and the courageous man from the word courage. CATEGORIAE

20 6 The Categories Ch. 2 Presence and predication Forms of speech are either simple or composite. Examples of the latter are such expressions as the man runs, the man wins ; of the former man, ox, runs, wins. Of things themselves some are predicable of a subject, and are never present in a subject. Thus man is predicable of the individual man, and is never present in a subject. By being present in a subject I do not mean present as parts are present in a whole, but being incapable of existence apart from the said subject. Some things, again, are present in a subject, but are never predicable of a subject. For instance, a certain point of grammatical knowledge is present in the mind, but is not predicable of any subject; [1b] or again, a certain whiteness may be present in the body (for colour requires a material basis), yet it is never predicable of anything. Other things, again, are both predicable of a subject and present in a subject. Thus while knowledge is present in the human mind, it is predicable of grammar. There is, lastly, a class of things which are neither present in a subject nor predicable of a subject, such as the individual man or the individual horse. But, to speak more generally, that which is individual and has the character of a unit is never predicable of a subject. Yet in some cases there is nothing to prevent such being present in a subject. Thus a certain point of grammatical knowledge is present in a subject. Ch. 3 Subclasses and predicability When one thing is predicated of another, all that which is predicable of the predicate will be predicable also of the subject. Thus, man is predicated of the individual man; but animal is predicated of man ; it will, therefore, be predicable of the individual man also: for the individual man is both man and animal. If genera are different and co-ordinate, their differentiae are themselves different in kind. Take as an instance the genus animal and the genus knowledge. With feet, two-footed, winged, aquatic, are differentiae of animal ; the species of knowledge are not distinguished by the same differentiae. One species of knowledge does not differ from another in being two-footed. But where one genus is subordinate to another, there is nothing to prevent their having the same differentiae: for the greater class is predicated of the lesser, so that all the differentiae of the predicate will be differentiae also of the subject. Cat. I Ch. 4 2a

21 Terms and Categories 7 Ch. 4 Terms and Categories Expressions which are in no way composite signify substance, quantity, quality, relation, place, time, position, state, action, or affection. To sketch my meaning roughly, examples of substance are man or the horse, of quantity, such terms as two cubits long or three cubits long, of quality, such attributes as white, [2a] grammatical. Double, half, greater, fall under the category of relation; in the market place, in the Lyceum, under that of place; yesterday, last year, under that of time. Lying, sitting, are terms indicating position, shod, armed, state; to lance, to cauterize, action; to be lanced, to be cauterized, affection. No one of these terms, in and by itself, involves an affirmation; it is by the combination of such terms that positive or negative statements arise. For every assertion must, as is admitted, be either true or false, whereas expressions which are not in any way composite such as man, white, runs, wins, cannot be either true or false. Ch. 5 Substance Substance, in the truest and primary and most definite sense of the word, is that which is neither predicable of a subject nor present in a subject; for instance, the individual man or horse. But in a secondary sense those things are called substances within which, as species, the primary substances are included; also those which, as genera, include the species. For instance, the individual man is included in the species man, and the genus to which the species belongs is animal ; these, therefore - that is to say, the species man and the genus animal - are termed secondary substances. It is plain from what has been said that both the name and the definition of the predicate must be predicable of the subject. For instance, man is predicted of the individual man. Now in this case the name of the species man is applied to the individual, for we use the term man in describing the individual; and the definition of man will also be predicated of the individual man, for the individual man is both man and animal. Thus, both the name and the definition of the species are predicable of the individual. With regard, on the other hand, to those things which are present in a subject, it is generally the case that neither their name nor their definition is predicable of that in which they are present. Though, however, the definition is never predicable, there is nothing in certain cases to prevent the name being used. For instance, white being present in a body is predicated of that in which it is present, for a body is called white: the definition, however, of the colour white is never predicable of the body. Everything except primary substances is either predicable of a primary CATEGORIAE

22 8 The Categories substance or present in a primary substance. This becomes evident by reference to particular instances which occur. Animal is predicated of the species man, therefore of the individual man, for if there were no individual man of whom it could be predicated, it could not be predicated of the species man at all. [2b] Again, colour is present in body, therefore in individual bodies, for if there were no individual body in which it was present, it could not be present in body at all. Thus everything except primary substances is either predicated of primary substances, or is present in them, and if these last did not exist, it would be impossible for anything else to exist. Of secondary substances, the species is more truly substance than the genus, being more nearly related to primary substance. For if any one should render an account of what a primary substance is, he would render a more instructive account, and one more proper to the subject, by stating the species than by stating the genus. Thus, he would give a more instructive account of an individual man by stating that he was man than by stating that he was animal, for the former description is peculiar to the individual in a greater degree, while the latter is too general. Again, the man who gives an account of the nature of an individual tree will give a more instructive account by mentioning the species tree than by mentioning the genus plant. Moreover, primary substances are most properly called substances in virtue of the fact that they are the entities which underlie everything else, and that everything else is either predicated of them or present in them. Now the same relation which subsists between primary substance and everything else subsists also between the species and the genus: for the species is to the genus as subject is to predicate, since the genus is predicated of the species, whereas the species cannot be predicated of the genus. Thus we have a second ground for asserting that the species is more truly substance than the genus. Of species themselves, except in the case of such as are genera, no one is more truly substance than another. We should not give a more appropriate account of the individual man by stating the species to which he belonged, than we should of an individual horse by adopting the same method of definition. In the same way, of primary substances, no one is more truly substance than another; an individual man is not more truly substance than an individual ox. It is, then, with good reason that of all that remains, when we exclude primary substances, we concede to species and genera alone the name secondary substance, for these alone of all the predicates convey a knowledge of primary substance. For it is by stating the species or the genus that we appropriately define any individual man; and we shall make our definition more exact by stating the former than by stating the latter. All other things that we state, such as that he is white, that he runs, and so on, are irrele- Cat. I Ch. 5 2b

23 Substance 9 vant to the definition. Thus it is just that these alone, apart from primary substances, should be called substances. Further, primary substances are most properly so called, because they underlie and are the subjects of everything else. [3a] Now the same relation that subsists between primary substance and everything else subsists also between the species and the genus to which the primary substance belongs, on the one hand, and every attribute which is not included within these, on the other. For these are the subjects of all such. If we call an individual man skilled in grammar, the predicate is applicable also to the species and to the genus to which he belongs. This law holds good in all cases. It is a common characteristic of all substance that it is never present in a subject. For primary substance is neither present in a subject nor predicated of a subject; while, with regard to secondary substances, it is clear from the following arguments (apart from others) that they are not present in a subject. For man is predicated of the individual man, but is not present in any subject: for manhood is not present in the individual man. In the same way, animal is also predicated of the individual man, but is not present in him. Again, when a thing is present in a subject, though the name may quite well be applied to that in which it is present, the definition cannot be applied. Yet of secondary substances, not only the name, but also the definition, applies to the subject: we should use both the definition of the species and that of the genus with reference to the individual man. Thus substance cannot be present in a subject. Yet this is not peculiar to substance, for it is also the case that differentiae cannot be present in subjects. The characteristics terrestrial and twofooted are predicated of the species man, but not present in it. For they are not in man. Moreover, the definition of the differentia may be predicated of that of which the differentia itself is predicated. For instance, if the characteristic terrestrial is predicated of the species man, the definition also of that characteristic may be used to form the predicate of the species man : for man is terrestrial. The fact that the parts of substances appear to be present in the whole, as in a subject, should not make us apprehensive lest we should have to admit that such parts are not substances: for in explaining the phrase being present in a subject, we stated that we meant otherwise than as parts in a whole. It is the mark of substances and of differentiae that, in all propositions of which they form the predicate, they are predicated univocally. For all such propositions have for their subject either the individual or the species. It is true that, inasmuch as primary substance is not predicable of anything, it can never form the predicate of any proposition. But of secondary substances, the species is predicated of the individual, the genus both of the species and CATEGORIAE

24 10 The Categories of the individual. [3b] Similarly the differentiae are predicated of the species and of the individuals. Moreover, the definition of the species and that of the genus are applicable to the primary substance, and that of the genus to the species. For all that is predicated of the predicate will be predicated also of the subject. Similarly, the definition of the differentiae will be applicable to the species and to the individuals. But it was stated above that the word univocal was applied to those things which had both name and definition in common. It is, therefore, established that in every proposition, of which either substance or a differentia forms the predicate, these are predicated univocally. All substance appears to signify that which is individual. In the case of primary substance this is indisputably true, for the thing is a unit. In the case of secondary substances, when we speak, for instance, of man or animal, our form of speech gives the impression that we are here also indicating that which is individual, but the impression is not strictly true; for a secondary substance is not an individual, but a class with a certain qualification; for it is not one and single as a primary substance is; the words man, animal, are predicable of more than one subject. Yet species and genus do not merely indicate quality, like the term white ; white indicates quality and nothing further, but species and genus determine the quality with reference to a substance: they signify substance qualitatively differentiated. The determinate qualification covers a larger field in the case of the genus that in that of the species: he who uses the word animal is herein using a word of wider extension than he who uses the word man. Another mark of substance is that it has no contrary. What could be the contrary of any primary substance, such as the individual man or animal? It has none. Nor can the species or the genus have a contrary. Yet this characteristic is not peculiar to substance, but is true of many other things, such as quantity. There is nothing that forms the contrary of two cubits long or of three cubits long, or of ten, or of any such term. A man may contend that much is the contrary of little, or great of small, but of definite quantitative terms no contrary exists. Substance, again, does not appear to admit of variation of degree. I do not mean by this that one substance cannot be more or less truly substance than another, for it has already been stated that this is the case; but that no single substance admits of varying degrees within itself. For instance, one particular substance, man, cannot be more or less man either than himself at some other time or than some other man. One man cannot be more man than another, as that which is white may be more or less white [4a] than some other white object, or as that which is beautiful may be more or less beautiful than some other beautiful object. The same quality, moreover, is Cat. I Ch. 5 4a

25 Substance 11 said to subsist in a thing in varying degrees at different times. A body, being white, is said to be whiter at one time than it was before, or, being warm, is said to be warmer or less warm than at some other time. But substance is not said to be more or less that which it is: a man is not more truly a man at one time than he was before, nor is anything, if it is substance, more or less what it is. Substance, then, does not admit of variation of degree. The most distinctive mark of substance appears to be that, while remaining numerically one and the same, it is capable of admitting contrary qualities. From among things other than substance, we should find ourselves unable to bring forward any which possessed this mark. Thus, one and the same colour cannot be white and black. Nor can the same one action be good and bad: this law holds good with everything that is not substance. But one and the selfsame substance, while retaining its identity, is yet capable of admitting contrary qualities. The same individual person is at one time white, at another black, at one time warm, at another cold, at one time good, at another bad. This capacity is found nowhere else, though it might be maintained that a statement or opinion was an exception to the rule. The same statement, it is agreed, can be both true and false. For if the statement he is sitting is true, yet, when the person in question has risen, the same statement will be false. The same applies to opinions. For if any one thinks truly that a person is sitting, yet, when that person has risen, this same opinion, if still held, will be false. Yet although this exception may be allowed, there is, nevertheless, a difference in the manner in which the thing takes place. It is by themselves changing that substances admit contrary qualities. It is thus that that which was hot becomes cold, for it has entered into a different state. Similarly that which was white becomes black, and that which was bad good, by a process of change; and in the same way in all other cases it is by changing that substances are capable of admitting contrary qualities. But statements and opinions themselves remain unaltered in all respects: it is by the alteration in the facts of the case that the contrary quality comes to be theirs. The statement he is sitting remains unaltered, [4b] but it is at one time true, at another false, according to circumstances. What has been said of statements applies also to opinions. Thus, in respect of the manner in which the thing takes place, it is the peculiar mark of substance that it should be capable of admitting contrary qualities; for it is by itself changing that it does so. If, then, a man should make this exception and contend that statements and opinions are capable of admitting contrary qualities, his contention is unsound. For statements and opinions are said to have this capacity, not because they themselves undergo modification, but because this modification occurs in the case of something else. The truth or falsity of a statement depends on facts, and not on any power on the part of the statement itself CATEGORIAE

26 12 The Categories of admitting contrary qualities. In short, there is nothing which can alter the nature of statements and opinions. As, then, no change takes place in themselves, these cannot be said to be capable of admitting contrary qualities. But it is by reason of the modification which takes place within the substance itself that a substance is said to be capable of admitting contrary qualities; for a substance admits within itself either disease or health, whiteness or blackness. It is in this sense that it is said to be capable of admitting contrary qualities. To sum up, it is a distinctive mark of substance, that, while remaining numerically one and the same, it is capable of admitting contrary qualities, the modification taking place through a change in the substance itself. Let these remarks suffice on the subject of substance. Ch. 6 Quantity Quantity is either discrete or continuous. Moreover, some quantities are such that each part of the whole has a relative position to the other parts: others have within them no such relation of part to part. Instances of discrete quantities are number and speech; of continuous, lines, surfaces, solids, and, besides these, time and place. In the case of the parts of a number, there is no common boundary at which they join. For example: two fives make ten, but the two fives have no common boundary, but are separate; the parts three and seven also do not join at any boundary. Nor, to generalize, would it ever be possible in the case of number that there should be a common boundary among the parts; they are always separate. Number, therefore, is a discrete quantity. The same is true of speech. That speech is a quantity is evident: for it is measured in long and short syllables. I mean here that speech which is vocal. Moreover, it is a discrete quantity for its parts have no common boundary. There is no common boundary at which the syllables join, but each is separate and distinct from the rest. [5a] A line, on the other hand, is a continuous quantity, for it is possible to find a common boundary at which its parts join. In the case of the line, this common boundary is the point; in the case of the plane, it is the line: for the parts of the plane have also a common boundary. Similarly you can find a common boundary in the case of the parts of a solid, namely either a line or a plane. Space and time also belong to this class of quantities. Time, past, present, and future, forms a continuous whole. Space, likewise, is a continuous quantity; for the parts of a solid occupy a certain space, and these have a common boundary; it follows that the parts of space also, which are occupied by the parts of the solid, have the same common boundary as the parts of the solid. Cat. I Ch. 6 5a