Metaphysics by Aristotle Translated by W. D. Ross ...

8/14/2019 Metaphysics by Aristotle Translated by W. D. Ross BOOK I

1/190

Metaphysics

By Aristotle

Translated by W. D. Ross

----------------------------------------------------------------------

BOOK I

Part 1

"A !en by natre desire to #no$. An indication o% this is the deli&ht

$e ta#e in or senses' %or e(en apart %ro! their se%lness they are

lo(ed %or the!sel(es' and abo(e all others the sense o% si&ht. )or

not only $ith a (ie$ to action* bt e(en $hen $e are not &oin& to

do anythin&* $e pre%er seein& +one !i&ht say, to e(erythin& else.

The reason is that this* !ost o% all the senses* !a#es s #no$ and

brin&s to li&ht !any di%%erences bet$een thin&s.

"By natre ani!als are born $ith the %aclty o% sensation* and %ro!sensation !e!ory is prodced in so!e o% the!* tho&h not in others.

And there%ore the %or!er are !ore intelli&ent and apt at learnin&

than those $hich cannot re!e!ber' those $hich are incapable o% hearin&

sonds are intelli&ent tho&h they cannot be ta&ht* e.&. the bee*

and any other race o% ani!als that !ay be li#e it' and those $hich

besides !e!ory ha(e this sense o% hearin& can be ta&ht.

"The ani!als other than !an li(e by appearances and !e!ories* and

ha(e bt little o% connected eperience' bt the h!an race li(es

also by art and reasonin&s. o$ %ro! !e!ory eperience is prodced

in !en' %or the se(eral !e!ories o% the sa!e thin& prodce %inally

the capacity %or a sin&le eperience. And eperience see!s pretty

!ch li#e science and art* bt really science and art co!e to !en

thro&h eperience' %or /eperience !ade art/* as Pols says* /bt

ineperience lc#./ o$ art arises $hen %ro! !any notions &ained by

eperience one ni(ersal 0d&e!ent abot a class o% ob0ects is prodced.

)or to ha(e a 0d&e!ent that $hen allias $as ill o% this disease

this did hi! &ood* and si!ilarly in the case o% 2ocrates and in !any

indi(idal cases* is a !atter o% eperience' bt to 0d&e that it

has done &ood to all persons o% a certain constittion* !ar#ed o%%

in one class* $hen they $ere ill o% this disease* e.&. to phle&!atic

or bilios people $hen brnin& $ith %e(ers-this is a !atter o% art.

"With a (ie$ to action eperience see!s in no respect in%erior to

art* and !en o% eperience scceed e(en better than those $ho ha(e

theory $ithot eperience. +The reason is that eperience is #no$led&e

o% indi(idals* art o% ni(ersals* and actions and prodctions areall concerned $ith the indi(idal' %or the physician does not cre

!an* ecept in an incidental $ay* bt allias or 2ocrates or so!e

other called by so!e sch indi(idal na!e* $ho happens to be a !an.

I%* then* a !an has the theory $ithot the eperience* and reco&ni3es

the ni(ersal bt does not #no$ the indi(idal inclded in this* he

$ill o%ten %ail to cre' %or it is the indi(idal that is to be cred.,

Bt yet $e thin# that #no$led&e and nderstandin& belon& to art rather

than to eperience* and $e sppose artists to be $iser than !en o%

eperience +$hich i!plies that Wisdo! depends in all cases rather


2/190

on #no$led&e,' and this becase the %or!er #no$ the case* bt the

latter do not. )or !en o% eperience #no$ that the thin& is so* bt

do not #no$ $hy* $hile the others #no$ the /$hy/ and the case. 4ence

$e thin# also that the !aster$or#ers in each cra%t are !ore honorable

and #no$ in a trer sense and are $iser than the !anal $or#ers* becase

they #no$ the cases o% the thin&s that are done +$e thin# the !anal

$or#ers are li#e certain li%eless thin&s $hich act indeed* bt act

$ithot #no$in& $hat they do* as %ire brns*-bt $hile the li%eless

thin&s per%or! each o% their %nctions by a natral tendency* the

laborers per%or! the! thro&h habit,' ths $e (ie$ the! as bein&

$iser not in (irte o% bein& able to act* bt o% ha(in& the theory

%or the!sel(es and #no$in& the cases. And in &eneral it is a si&n

o% the !an $ho #no$s and o% the !an $ho does not #no$* that the %or!er

can teach* and there%ore $e thin# art !ore trly #no$led&e than

eperience

is' %or artists can teach* and !en o% !ere eperience cannot.

"A&ain* $e do not re&ard any o% the senses as Wisdo!' yet srely these

&i(e the !ost athoritati(e #no$led&e o% particlars. Bt they do

not tell s the /$hy/ o% anythin&-e.&. $hy %ire is hot' they only

say that it is hot.

"At %irst he $ho in(ented any art $hate(er that $ent beyond the co!!on

perceptions o% !an $as natrally ad!ired by !en* not only becase

there $as so!ethin& se%l in the in(entions* bt becase he $as tho&ht

$ise and sperior to the rest. Bt as !ore arts $ere in(ented* and

so!e $ere directed to the necessities o% li%e* others to recreation*

the in(entors o% the latter $ere natrally al$ays re&arded as $iser

than the in(entors o% the %or!er* becase their branches o% #no$led&e

did not ai! at tility. 4ence $hen all sch in(entions $ere already

established* the sciences $hich do not ai! at &i(in& pleasre or at

the necessities o% li%e $ere disco(ered* and %irst in the places $here

!en %irst be&an to ha(e leisre. This is $hy the !athe!atical arts

$ere %onded in 5&ypt' %or there the priestly caste $as allo$ed to

be at leisre.

"We ha(e said in the 5thics $hat the di%%erence is bet$een art and

science and the other #indred %aclties' bt the point o% or present

discssion is this* that all !en sppose $hat is called Wisdo! to

deal $ith the %irst cases and the principles o% thin&s' so that*

as has been said be%ore* the !an o% eperience is tho&ht to be $iser

than the possessors o% any sense-perception $hate(er* the artist $iser

than the !en o% eperience* the !aster$or#er than the !echanic* and

the theoretical #inds o% #no$led&e to be !ore o% the natre o% Wisdo!

than the prodcti(e. learly then Wisdo! is #no$led&e abot certain

principles and cases.

Part 6 "

"2ince $e are see#in& this #no$led&e* $e !st in7ire o% $hat #ind

are the cases and the principles* the #no$led&e o% $hich is Wisdo!.

I% one $ere to ta#e the notions $e ha(e abot the $ise !an* this !i&ht

perhaps !a#e the ans$er !ore e(ident. We sppose %irst* then* that

the $ise !an #no$s all thin&s* as %ar as possible* altho&h he has

not #no$led&e o% each o% the! in detail' secondly* that he $ho can

learn thin&s that are di%%iclt* and not easy %or !an to #no$* is

$ise +sense-perception is co!!on to all* and there%ore easy and no


3/190

!ar# o% Wisdo!,' a&ain* that he $ho is !ore eact and !ore capable

o% teachin& the cases is $iser* in e(ery branch o% #no$led&e' and

that o% the sciences* also* that $hich is desirable on its o$n accont

and %or the sa#e o% #no$in& it is !ore o% the natre o% Wisdo! than

that $hich is desirable on accont o% its reslts* and the sperior

science is !ore o% the natre o% Wisdo! than the ancillary' %or the

$ise !an !st not be ordered bt !st order* and he !st not obey

another* bt the less $ise !st obey hi!.

"2ch and so !any are the notions* then* $hich $e ha(e abot Wisdo!

and the $ise. o$ o% these characteristics that o% #no$in& all thin&s

!st belon& to hi! $ho has in the hi&hest de&ree ni(ersal #no$led&e'

%or he #no$s in a sense all the instances that %all nder the ni(ersal.

And these thin&s* the !ost ni(ersal* are on the $hole the hardest

%or !en to #no$' %or they are %arthest %ro! the senses. And the !ost

eact o% the sciences are those $hich deal !ost $ith %irst principles'

%or those $hich in(ol(e %e$er principles are !ore eact than those

$hich in(ol(e additional principles* e.&. arith!etic than &eo!etry.

Bt the science $hich in(esti&ates cases is also instrcti(e* in

a hi&her de&ree* %or the people $ho instrct s are those $ho tell

the cases o% each thin&. And nderstandin& and #no$led&e prsed%or their o$n sa#e are %ond !ost in the #no$led&e o% that $hich is

!ost #no$able +%or he $ho chooses to #no$ %or the sa#e o% #no$in&

$ill choose !ost readily that $hich is !ost trly #no$led&e* and sch

is the #no$led&e o% that $hich is !ost #no$able,' and the %irst

principles

and the cases are !ost #no$able' %or by reason o% these* and %ro!

these* all other thin&s co!e to be #no$n* and not these by !eans o%

the thin&s sbordinate to the!. And the science $hich #no$s to $hat

end each thin& !st be done is the !ost athoritati(e o% the sciences*

and !ore athoritati(e than any ancillary science' and this end is

the &ood o% that thin&* and in &eneral the spre!e &ood in the $hole

o% natre. 8d&ed by all the tests $e ha(e !entioned* then* the na!e

in 7estion %alls to the sa!e science' this !st be a science that

in(esti&ates the %irst principles and cases' %or the &ood* i.e. the

end* is one o% the cases.

"That it is not a science o% prodction is clear e(en %ro! the history

o% the earliest philosophers. )or it is o$in& to their $onder that

!en both no$ be&in and at %irst be&an to philosophi3e' they $ondered

ori&inally at the ob(ios di%%iclties* then ad(anced little by little

and stated di%%iclties abot the &reater !atters* e.&. abot the

pheno!ena o% the !oon and those o% the sn and o% the stars* and abot

the &enesis o% the ni(erse. And a !an $ho is p33led and $onders

thin#s hi!sel% i&norant +$hence e(en the lo(er o% !yth is in a sense

a lo(er o% Wisdo!* %or the !yth is co!posed o% $onders,' there%ore

since they philosophi3ed order to escape %ro! i&norance* e(idently

they $ere prsin& science in order to #no$* and not %or any tilitarianend. And this is con%ir!ed by the %acts' %or it $as $hen al!ost all

the necessities o% li%e and the thin&s that !a#e %or co!%ort and

recreation

had been secred* that sch #no$led&e be&an to be so&ht. 5(idently

then $e do not see# it %or the sa#e o% any other ad(anta&e' bt as

the !an is %ree* $e say* $ho eists %or his o$n sa#e and not %or

another/s*

so $e prse this as the only %ree science* %or it alone eists %or

its o$n sa#e.


4/190

"4ence also the possession o% it !i&ht be 0stly re&arded as beyond

h!an po$er' %or in !any $ays h!an natre is in bonda&e* so that

accordin& to 2i!onides /9od alone can ha(e this pri(ile&e/* and it

is n%ittin& that !an shold not be content to see# the #no$led&e

that is sited to hi!. I%* then* there is so!ethin& in $hat the poets

say* and 0ealosy is natral to the di(ine po$er* it $old probably

occr in this case abo(e all* and all $ho ecelled in this #no$led&e

$old be n%ortnate. Bt the di(ine po$er cannot be 0ealos +nay*

accordin& to the pro(erb* /bards tell a lie/,* nor shold any other

science be tho&ht !ore honorable than one o% this sort. )or the

!ost di(ine science is also !ost honorable' and this science alone

!st be* in t$o $ays* !ost di(ine. )or the science $hich it $old

be !ost !eet %or 9od to ha(e is a di(ine science* and so is any science

that deals $ith di(ine ob0ects' and this science alone has both these

7alities' %or +1, 9od is tho&ht to be a!on& the cases o% all thin&s

and to be a %irst principle* and +6, sch a science either 9od alone

can ha(e* or 9od abo(e all others. All the sciences* indeed* are !ore

necessary than this* bt none is better.

":et the ac7isition o% it !st in a sense end in so!ethin& $hichis the opposite o% or ori&inal in7iries. )or all !en be&in* as $e

said* by $onderin& that thin&s are as they are* as they do abot sel%-

!o(in&

!arionettes* or abot the solstices or the inco!!ensrability o% the

dia&onal o% a s7are $ith the side' %or it see!s $onder%l to all

$ho ha(e not yet seen the reason* that there is a thin& $hich cannot

be !easred e(en by the s!allest nit. Bt $e !st end in the contrary

and* accordin& to the pro(erb* the better state* as is the case in

these instances too $hen !en learn the case' %or there is nothin&

$hich $old srprise a &eo!eter so !ch as i% the dia&onal trned

ot to be co!!ensrable.

"We ha(e stated* then* $hat is the natre o% the science $e are

searchin&

%or* and $hat is the !ar# $hich or search and or $hole in(esti&ation

!st reach.

Part ; "

"5(idently $e ha(e to ac7ire #no$led&e o% the ori&inal cases +%or

$e say $e #no$ each thin& only $hen $e thin# $e reco&ni3e its %irst

case,* and cases are spo#en o% in %or senses. In one o% these $e

!ean the sbstance* i.e. the essence +%or the /$hy/ is redcible %inally

to the de%inition* and the lti!ate /$hy/ is a case and principle,'

in another the !atter or sbstrat!* in a third the sorce o% the

chan&e* and in a %orth the case opposed to this* the prpose and

the &ood +%or this is the end o% all &eneration and chan&e,. We ha(estdied these cases s%%iciently in or $or# on natre* bt yet let

s call to or aid those $ho ha(e attac#ed the in(esti&ation o% bein&

and philosophi3ed abot reality be%ore s. )or ob(iosly they too

spea# o% certain principles and cases' to &o o(er their (ie$s* then*

$ill be o% pro%it to the present in7iry* %or $e shall either %ind

another #ind o% case* or be !ore con(inced o% the correctness o%

those $hich $e no$ !aintain.

"O% the %irst philosophers* then* !ost tho&ht the principles $hich


5/190

$ere o% the natre o% !atter $ere the only principles o% all thin&s.

That o% $hich all thin&s that are consist* the %irst %ro! $hich they

co!e to be* the last into $hich they are resol(ed +the sbstance

re!ainin&*

bt chan&in& in its !odi%ications,* this they say is the ele!ent and

this the principle o% thin&s* and there%ore they thin# nothin& is

either &enerated or destroyed* since this sort o% entity is al$ays

conser(ed* as $e say 2ocrates neither co!es to be absoltely $hen

he co!es to be beati%l or !sical* nor ceases to be $hen loses these

characteristics* becase the sbstrat!* 2ocrates hi!sel% re!ains.

0st so they say nothin& else co!es to be or ceases to be' %or there

!st be so!e entity-either one or !ore than one-%ro! $hich all other

thin&s co!e to be* it bein& conser(ed.

":et they do not all a&ree as to the n!ber and the natre o% these

principles. Thales* the %onder o% this type o% philosophy* says the

principle is $ater +%or $hich reason he declared that the earth rests

on $ater,* &ettin& the notion perhaps %ro! seein& that the ntri!ent

o% all thin&s is !oist* and that heat itsel% is &enerated %ro! the

!oist and #ept ali(e by it +and that %ro! $hich they co!e to be is

a principle o% all thin&s,. 4e &ot his notion %ro! this %act* and%ro! the %act that the seeds o% all thin&s ha(e a !oist natre* and

that $ater is the ori&in o% the natre o% !oist thin&s.

"2o!e thin# that e(en the ancients $ho li(ed lon& be%ore the present

&eneration* and %irst %ra!ed acconts o% the &ods* had a si!ilar (ie$

o% natre' %or they !ade Ocean and Tethys the parents o% creation*

and described the oath o% the &ods as bein& by $ater* to $hich they

&i(e the na!e o% 2ty' %or $hat is oldest is !ost honorable* and

the !ost honorable thin& is that by $hich one s$ears. It !ay perhaps

be ncertain $hether this opinion abot natre is pri!iti(e and ancient*

bt Thales at any rate is said to ha(e declared hi!sel% ths abot

the %irst case. 4ippo no one $old thin# %it to inclde a!on& these

thin#ers* becase o% the paltriness o% his tho&ht.

"Anai!enes and Dio&enes !a#e air prior to $ater* and the !ost pri!ary

o% the si!ple bodies* $hile 4ippass o% Metaponti! and 4eraclits

o% 5phess say this o% %ire* and 5!pedocles says it o% the %or ele!ents

+addin& a %orth-earth-to those $hich ha(e been na!ed,' %or these*

he says* al$ays re!ain and do not co!e to be* ecept that they co!e

to be !ore or %e$er* bein& a&&re&ated into one and se&re&ated ot

o% one.

"Anaa&oras o% la3o!enae* $ho* tho&h older than 5!pedocles* $as

later in his philosophical acti(ity* says the principles are in%inite

in n!ber' %or he says al!ost all the thin&s that are !ade o% parts

li#e the!sel(es* in the !anner o% $ater or %ire* are &enerated and

destroyed in this $ay* only by a&&re&ation and se&re&ation* and arenot in any other sense &enerated or destroyed* bt re!ain eternally.

")ro! these %acts one !i&ht thin# that the only case is the so-called

!aterial case' bt as !en ths ad(anced* the (ery %acts opened the

$ay %or the! and 0oined in %orcin& the! to in(esti&ate the sb0ect.

4o$e(er tre it !ay be that all &eneration and destrction proceed

%ro! so!e one or +%or that !atter, %ro! !ore ele!ents* $hy does this

happen and $hat is the case< )or at least the sbstrat! itsel% does

not !a#e itsel% chan&e' e.&. neither the $ood nor the bron3e cases


6/190

the chan&e o% either o% the!* nor does the $ood !an%actre a bed

and the bron3e a state* bt so!ethin& else is the case o% the chan&e.

And to see# this is to see# the second case* as $e shold say*-that

%ro! $hich co!es the be&innin& o% the !o(e!ent. o$ those $ho at the

(ery be&innin& set the!sel(es to this #ind o% in7iry* and said the

sbstrat! $as one* $ere not at all dissatis%ied $ith the!sel(es'

bt so!e at least o% those $ho !aintain it to be one-as tho&h de%eated

by this search %or the second case-say the one and natre as a $hole

is nchan&eable not only in respect o% &eneration and destrction

+%or this is a pri!iti(e belie%* and all a&reed in it,* bt also o%

all other chan&e' and this (ie$ is pecliar to the!. O% those $ho

said the ni(erse $as one* then none scceeded in disco(erin& a case

o% this sort* ecept perhaps Par!enides* and he only inas!ch as he

spposes that there is not only one bt also in so!e sense t$o cases.

Bt %or those $ho !a#e !ore ele!ents it is !ore possible to state

the second case* e.&. %or those $ho !a#e hot and cold* or %ire and

earth* the ele!ents' %or they treat %ire as ha(in& a natre $hich

%its it to !o(e thin&s* and $ater and earth and sch thin&s they treat

in the contrary $ay.

"When these !en and the principles o% this #ind had had their day*as the latter $ere %ond inade7ate to &enerate the natre o% thin&s

!en $ere a&ain %orced by the trth itsel%* as $e said* to in7ire

into the net #ind o% case. )or it is not li#ely either that %ire

or earth or any sch ele!ent shold be the reason $hy thin&s !ani%est

&oodness and* beaty both in their bein& and in their co!in& to be*

or that those thin#ers shold ha(e spposed it $as' nor a&ain cold

it be ri&ht to entrst so &reat a !atter to spontaneity and chance.

When one !an said* then* that reason $as present-as in ani!als* so

thro&hot natre-as the case o% order and o% all arran&e!ent* he

see!ed li#e a sober !an in contrast $ith the rando! tal# o% his

predecessors.

We #no$ that Anaa&oras certainly adopted these (ie$s* bt 4er!oti!s

o% la3o!enae is credited $ith epressin& the! earlier. Those $ho

tho&ht ths stated that there is a principle o% thin&s $hich is at

the sa!e ti!e the case o% beaty* and that sort o% case %ro! $hich

thin&s ac7ire !o(e!ent.

Part = "

"One !i&ht sspect that 4esiod $as the %irst to loo# %or sch a thin&-or

so!e one else $ho pt lo(e or desire a!on& eistin& thin&s as a

principle*

as Par!enides* too* does' %or he* in constrctin& the &enesis o% the

ni(erse* says>- "

"o(e %irst o% all the 9ods she planned. "

"And 4esiod says>- "

")irst o% all thin&s $as chaos !ade* and then

"Broad-breasted earth...

"And lo(e* /!id all the &ods pre-e!inent* "

$hich i!plies that a!on& eistin& thin&s there !st be %ro! the %irst


7/190

a case $hich $ill !o(e thin&s and brin& the! to&ether. 4o$ these

thin#ers shold be arran&ed $ith re&ard to priority o% disco(ery let

s be allo$ed to decide later' bt since the contraries o% the (arios

%or!s o% &ood $ere also percei(ed to be present in natre-not only

order and the beati%l* bt also disorder and the &ly* and bad thin&s

in &reater n!ber than &ood* and i&noble thin&s than beati%l-there%ore

another thin#er introdced %riendship and stri%e* each o% the t$o

the case o% one o% these t$o sets o% 7alities. )or i% $e $ere to

%ollo$ ot the (ie$ o% 5!pedocles* and interpret it accordin& to its

!eanin& and not to its lispin& epression* $e shold %ind that

%riendship

is the case o% &ood thin&s* and stri%e o% bad. There%ore* i% $e said

that 5!pedocles in a sense both !entions* and is the %irst to !ention*

the bad and the &ood as principles* $e shold perhaps be ri&ht* since

the case o% all &oods is the &ood itsel%.

"These thin#ers* as $e say* e(idently &rasped* and to this etent*

t$o o% the cases $hich $e distin&ished in or $or# on natre-the

!atter and the sorce o% the !o(e!ent-(a&ely* ho$e(er* and $ith no

clearness* bt as ntrained !en beha(e in %i&hts' %or they &o rond

their opponents and o%ten stri#e %ine blo$s* bt they do not %i&hton scienti%ic principles* and so too these thin#ers do not see! to

#no$ $hat they say' %or it is e(ident that* as a rle* they !a#e no

se o% their cases ecept to a s!all etent. )or Anaa&oras ses

reason as a des e !achina %or the !a#in& o% the $orld* and $hen

he is at a loss to tell %ro! $hat case so!ethin& necessarily is*

then he dra&s reason in* bt in all other cases ascribes e(ents to

anythin& rather than to reason. And 5!pedocles* tho&h he ses the

cases to a &reater etent than this* neither does so s%%iciently

nor attains consistency in their se. At least* in !any cases he !a#es

lo(e se&re&ate thin&s* and stri%e a&&re&ate the!. )or $hene(er the

ni(erse is dissol(ed into its ele!ents by stri%e* %ire is a&&re&ated

into one* and so is each o% the other ele!ents' bt $hene(er a&ain

nder the in%lence o% lo(e they co!e to&ether into one* the parts

!st a&ain be se&re&ated ot o% each ele!ent.

"5!pedocles* then* in contrast $ith his precessors* $as the %irst

to introdce the di(idin& o% this case* not positin& one sorce o%

!o(e!ent* bt di%%erent and contrary sorces. A&ain* he $as the %irst

to spea# o% %or !aterial ele!ents' yet he does not se %or* bt

treats the! as t$o only' he treats %ire by itsel%* and its opposite-

earth*

air* and $ater-as one #ind o% thin&. We !ay learn this by stdy o%

his (erses.

"This philosopher then* as $e say* has spo#en o% the principles in

this $ay* and !ade the! o% this n!ber. ecipps and his associate

De!ocrits say that the %ll and the e!pty are the ele!ents* callin&the one bein& and the other non-bein&-the %ll and solid bein& bein&*

the e!pty non-bein& +$hence they say bein& no !ore is than non-bein&*

becase the solid no !ore is than the e!pty,' and they !a#e these

the !aterial cases o% thin&s. And as those $ho !a#e the nderlyin&

sbstance one &enerate all other thin&s by its !odi%ications* spposin&

the rare and the dense to be the sorces o% the !odi%ications* in

the sa!e $ay these philosophers say the di%%erences in the ele!ents

are the cases o% all other 7alities. These di%%erences* they say*


8/190

are three-shape and order and position. )or they say the real is

di%%erentiated

only by /rhyth! and /inter-contact/ and /trnin&/' and o% these rhyth!

is shape* inter-contact is order* and trnin& is position' %or A di%%ers

%ro! in shape* A %ro! A in order* M %ro! W in position. The 7estion

o% !o(e!ent-$hence or ho$ it is to belon& to thin&s-these thin#ers*

li#e the others* la3ily ne&lected.

"Re&ardin& the t$o cases* then* as $e say* the in7iry see!s to ha(e

been pshed ths %ar by the early philosophers.

Part ? "

"onte!poraneosly $ith these philosophers and be%ore the!* the so-

called

Pytha&oreans* $ho $ere the %irst to ta#e p !athe!atics* not only

ad(anced this stdy* bt also ha(in& been bro&ht p in it they tho&ht

its principles $ere the principles o% all thin&s. 2ince o% these

principles

n!bers are by natre the %irst* and in n!bers they see!ed to see

!any rese!blances to the thin&s that eist and co!e into bein&-!orethan in %ire and earth and $ater +sch and sch a !odi%ication o%

n!bers bein& 0stice* another bein& sol and reason* another bein&

opportnity-and si!ilarly al!ost all other thin&s bein& n!erically

epressible,' since* a&ain* they sa$ that the !odi%ications and the

ratios o% the !sical scales $ere epressible in n!bers'-since* then*

all other thin&s see!ed in their $hole natre to be !odelled on n!bers*

and n!bers see!ed to be the %irst thin&s in the $hole o% natre*

they spposed the ele!ents o% n!bers to be the ele!ents o% all thin&s*

and the $hole hea(en to be a !sical scale and a n!ber. And all the

properties o% n!bers and scales $hich they cold sho$ to a&ree $ith

the attribtes and parts and the $hole arran&e!ent o% the hea(ens*

they collected and %itted into their sche!e' and i% there $as a &ap

any$here* they readily !ade additions so as to !a#e their $hole theory

coherent. 5.&. as the n!ber 1@ is tho&ht to be per%ect and to co!prise

the $hole natre o% n!bers* they say that the bodies $hich !o(e thro&h

the hea(ens are ten* bt as the (isible bodies are only nine* to !eet

this they in(ent a tenth--the /conter-earth/. We ha(e discssed these

!atters !ore eactly else$here.

"Bt the ob0ect o% or re(ie$ is that $e !ay learn %ro! these

philosophers

also $hat they sppose to be the principles and ho$ these %all nder

the cases $e ha(e na!ed. 5(idently* then* these thin#ers also consider

that n!ber is the principle both as !atter %or thin&s and as %or!in&

both their !odi%ications and their per!anent states* and hold that

the ele!ents o% n!ber are the e(en and the odd* and that o% these

the latter is li!ited* and the %or!er nli!ited' and that the Oneproceeds %ro! both o% these +%or it is both e(en and odd,* and n!ber

%ro! the One' and that the $hole hea(en* as has been said* is n!bers.

"Other !e!bers o% this sa!e school say there are ten principles* $hich

they arran&e in t$o col!ns o% co&nates-li!it and nli!ited* odd and

e(en* one and plrality* ri&ht and le%t* !ale and %e!ale* restin&

and !o(in&* strai&ht and cr(ed* li&ht and dar#ness* &ood and bad*

s7are and oblon&. In this $ay Alc!aeon o% roton see!s also to ha(e

concei(ed the !atter* and either he &ot this (ie$ %ro! the! or they


9/190

&ot it %ro! hi!' %or he epressed hi!sel% si!ilarly to the!. )or he

says !ost h!an a%%airs &o in pairs* !eanin& not de%inite contrarieties

sch as the Pytha&oreans spea# o%* bt any chance contrarieties* e.&.

$hite and blac#* s$eet and bitter* &ood and bad* &reat and s!all.

4e thre$ ot inde%inite s&&estions abot the other contrarieties*

bt the Pytha&oreans declared both ho$ !any and $hich their

contraricties

are.

")ro! both these schools* then* $e can learn this !ch* that the

contraries

are the principles o% thin&s' and ho$ !any these principles are and

$hich they are* $e can learn %ro! one o% the t$o schools. Bt ho$

these principles can be bro&ht to&ether nder the cases $e ha(e

na!ed has not been clearly and articlately stated by the!' they see!*

ho$e(er* to ran&e the ele!ents nder the head o% !atter' %or ot o%

these as i!!anent parts they say sbstance is co!posed and !olded.

")ro! these %acts $e !ay s%%iciently percei(e the !eanin& o% the

ancients $ho said the ele!ents o% natre $ere !ore than one' bt there

are so!e $ho spo#e o% the ni(erse as i% it $ere one entity* tho&hthey $ere not all ali#e either in the ecellence o% their state!ent

or in its con%or!ity to the %acts o% natre. The discssion o% the!

is in no $ay appropriate to or present in(esti&ation o% cases* %or.

they do not* li#e so!e o% the natral philosophers* ass!e bein& to

be one and yet &enerate it ot o% the one as ot o% !atter* bt they

spea# in another $ay' those others add chan&e* since they &enerate

the ni(erse* bt these thin#ers say the ni(erse is nchan&eable.

:et this !ch is &er!ane to the present in7iry> Par!enides see!s

to %asten on that $hich is one in de%inition* Melisss on that $hich

is one in !atter* %or $hich reason the %or!er says that it is li!ited*

the latter that it is nli!ited' $hile enophanes* the %irst o% these

partisans o% the One +%or Par!enides is said to ha(e been his ppil,*

&a(e no clear state!ent* nor does he see! to ha(e &rasped the natre

o% either o% these cases* bt $ith re%erence to the $hole !aterial

ni(erse he says the One is 9od. o$ these thin#ers* as $e said* !st

be ne&lected %or the prposes o% the present in7iry-t$o o% the!

entirely*

as bein& a little too nai(e* (i3. enophanes and Melisss' bt

Par!enides

see!s in places to spea# $ith !ore insi&ht. )or* clai!in& that* besides

the eistent* nothin& non-eistent eists* he thin#s that o% necessity

one thin& eists* (i3. the eistent and nothin& else +on this $e ha(e

spo#en !ore clearly in or $or# on natre,* bt bein& %orced to %ollo$

the obser(ed %acts* and spposin& the eistence o% that $hich is one

in de%inition* bt !ore than one accordin& to or sensations* he no$

posits t$o cases and t$o principles* callin& the! hot and cold* i.e.

%ire and earth' and o% these he ran&es the hot $ith the eistent*and the other $ith the non-eistent.

")ro! $hat has been said* then* and %ro! the $ise !en $ho ha(e no$

sat in concil $ith s* $e ha(e &ot ths !ch-on the one hand %ro!

the earliest philosophers* $ho re&ard the %irst principle as corporeal

+%or $ater and %ire and sch thin&s are bodies,* and o% $ho! so!e

sppose that there is one corporeal principle* others that there are

!ore than one* bt both pt these nder the head o% !atter' and on

the other hand %ro! so!e $ho posit both this case and besides this


10/190

the sorce o% !o(e!ent* $hich $e ha(e &ot %ro! so!e as sin&le and

%ro! others as t$o%old.

"Do$n to the Italian school* then* and apart %ro! it* philosophers

ha(e treated these sb0ects rather obscrely* ecept that* as $e said*

they ha(e in %act sed t$o #inds o% case* and one o% these-the sorce

o% !o(e!ent-so!e treat as one and others as t$o. Bt the Pytha&oreans

ha(e said in the sa!e $ay that there are t$o principles* bt added

this !ch* $hich is pecliar to the!* that they tho&ht that %initde

and in%inity $ere not attribtes o% certain other thin&s* e.&. o%

%ire or earth or anythin& else o% this #ind* bt that in%inity itsel%

and nity itsel% $ere the sbstance o% the thin&s o% $hich they are

predicated. This is $hy n!ber $as the sbstance o% all thin&s. On

this sb0ect* then* they epressed the!sel(es ths' and re&ardin&

the 7estion o% essence they be&an to !a#e state!ents and de%initions*

bt treated the !atter too si!ply. )or they both de%ined sper%icially

and tho&ht that the %irst sb0ect o% $hich a &i(en de%inition $as

predicable $as the sbstance o% the thin& de%ined* as i% one spposed

that /doble/ and /6/ $ere the sa!e* becase 6 is the %irst thin&

o% $hich /doble/ is predicable. Bt srely to be doble and to be

6 are not the sa!e' i% they are* one thin& $ill be !any-a conse7ence$hich they actally dre$. )ro! the earlier philosophers* then* and

%ro! their sccessors $e can learn ths !ch.

Part "

"A%ter the syste!s $e ha(e na!ed ca!e the philosophy o% Plato* $hich

in !ost respects %ollo$ed these thin#ers* bt had pecllarities that

distin&ished it %ro! the philosophy o% the Italians. )or* ha(in&

in his yoth %irst beco!e %a!iliar $ith ratyls and $ith the

4eraclitean

doctrines +that all sensible thin&s are e(er in a state o% %l and

there is no #no$led&e abot the!,* these (ie$s he held e(en in later

years. 2ocrates* ho$e(er* $as bsyin& hi!sel% abot ethical !atters

and ne&lectin& the $orld o% natre as a $hole bt see#in& the ni(ersal

in these ethical !atters* and %ied tho&ht %or the %irst ti!e on

de%initions' Plato accepted his teachin&* bt held that the proble!

applied not to sensible thin&s bt to entities o% another #ind-%or

this reason* that the co!!on de%inition cold not be a de%inition

o% any sensible thin&* as they $ere al$ays chan&in&. Thin&s o% this

other sort* then* he called Ideas* and sensible thin&s* he said* $ere

all na!ed a%ter these* and in (irte o% a relation to these' %or the

!any eisted by participation in the Ideas that ha(e the sa!e na!e

as they. Only the na!e /participation/ $as ne$' %or the Pytha&oreans

say that thin&s eist by /i!itation/ o% n!bers* and Plato says they

eist by participation* chan&in& the na!e. Bt $hat the participation

or the i!itation o% the )or!s cold be they le%t an open 7estion.

")rther* besides sensible thin&s and )or!s he says there are the

ob0ects o% !athe!atics* $hich occpy an inter!ediate position* di%%erin&

%ro! sensible thin&s in bein& eternal and nchan&eable* %ro! )or!s

in that there are !any ali#e* $hile the )or! itsel% is in each case

ni7e.

"2ince the )or!s $ere the cases o% all other thin&s* he tho&ht their

ele!ents $ere the ele!ents o% all thin&s. As !atter* the &reat and

the s!all $ere principles' as essential reality* the One' %or %ro!


11/190

the &reat and the s!all* by participation in the One* co!e the !bers.

"Bt he a&reed $ith the Pytha&oreans in sayin& that the One is sbstance

and not a predicate o% so!ethin& else' and in sayin& that the !bers

are the cases o% the reality o% other thin&s he a&reed $ith the!'

bt positin& a dyad and constrctin& the in%inite ot o% &reat and

s!all* instead o% treatin& the in%inite as one* is pecliar to hi!'

and so is his (ie$ that the !bers eist apart %ro! sensible thin&s*

$hile they say that the thin&s the!sel(es are !bers* and do not

place the ob0ects o% !athe!atics bet$een )or!s and sensible thin&s.

4is di(er&ence %ro! the Pytha&oreans in !a#in& the One and the !bers

separate %ro! thin&s* and his introdction o% the )or!s* $ere de

to his in7iries in the re&ion o% de%initions +%or the earlier thin#ers

had no tinctre o% dialectic,* and his !a#in& the other entity besides

the One a dyad $as de to the belie% that the n!bers* ecept those

$hich $ere pri!e* cold be neatly prodced ot o% the dyad as ot

o% so!e plastic !aterial. :et $hat happens is the contrary' the theory

is not a reasonable one. )or they !a#e !any thin&s ot o% the !atter*

and the %or! &enerates only once* bt $hat $e obser(e is that one

table is !ade %ro! one !atter* $hile the !an $ho applies the %or!*

tho&h he is one* !a#es !any tables. And the relation o% the !aleto the %e!ale is si!ilar' %or the latter is i!pre&nated by one

coplation*

bt the !ale i!pre&nates !any %e!ales' yet these are analo&es o%

those %irst principles.

"Plato* then* declared hi!sel% ths on the points in 7estion' it

is e(ident %ro! $hat has been said that he has sed only t$o cases*

that o% the essence and the !aterial case +%or the )or!s are the

cases o% the essence o% all other thin&s* and the One is the case

o% the essence o% the )or!s,' and it is e(ident $hat the nderlyin&

!atter is* o% $hich the )or!s are predicated in the case o% sensible

thin&s* and the One in the case o% )or!s* (i3. that this is a dyad*

the &reat and the s!all. )rther* he has assi&ned the case o% &ood

and that o% e(il to the ele!ents* one to each o% the t$o* as $e say

so!e o% his predecessors so&ht to do* e.&. 5!pedocles and Anaa&oras.

Part C "

"Or re(ie$ o% those $ho ha(e spo#en abot %irst principles and reality

and o% the $ay in $hich they ha(e spo#en* has been concise and s!!ary'

bt yet $e ha(e learnt this !ch %ro! the!* that o% those $ho spea#

abot /principle/ and /case/ no one has !entioned any principle ecept

those $hich ha(e been distin&ished in or $or# on natre* bt all

e(idently ha(e so!e in#lin& o% the!* tho&h only (a&ely. )or so!e

spea# o% the %irst principle as !atter* $hether they sppose one or

!ore %irst principles* and $hether they sppose this to be a body

or to be incorporeal' e.&. Plato spo#e o% the &reat and the s!all*the Italians o% the in%inite* 5!pedocles o% %ire* earth* $ater* and

air* Anaa&oras o% the in%inity o% thin&s co!posed o% si!ilar parts.

These* then* ha(e all had a notion o% this #ind o% case* and so ha(e

all $ho spea# o% air or %ire or $ater* or so!ethin& denser than %ire

and rarer than air' %or so!e ha(e said the pri!e ele!ent is o% this

#ind.

"These thin#ers &rasped this case only' bt certain others ha(e

!entioned


12/190

the sorce o% !o(e!ent* e.&. those $ho !a#e %riendship and stri%e*

or reason* or lo(e* a principle.

"The essence* i.e. the sbstantial reality* no one has epressed

distinctly.

It is hinted at chie%ly by those $ho belie(e in the )or!s' %or they

do not sppose either that the )or!s are the !atter o% sensible thin&s*

and the One the !atter o% the )or!s* or that they are the sorce o%

!o(e!ent +%or they say these are cases rather o% i!!obility and o%

bein& at rest,* bt they %rnish the )or!s as the essence o% e(ery

other thin&* and the One as the essence o% the )or!s.

"That %or $hose sa#e actions and chan&es and !o(e!ents ta#e place*

they assert to be a case in a $ay* bt not in this $ay* i.e. not

in the $ay in $hich it is its natre to be a case. )or those $ho

spea# o% reason or %riendship class these cases as &oods' they do

not spea#* ho$e(er* as i% anythin& that eists either eisted or ca!e

into bein& %or the sa#e o% these* bt as i% !o(e!ents started %ro!

these. In the sa!e $ay those $ho say the One or the eistent is the

&ood* say that it is the case o% sbstance* bt not that sbstance

either is or co!es to be %or the sa#e o% this. There%ore it trnsot that in a sense they both say and do not say the &ood is a case'

%or they do not call it a case 7a &ood bt only incidentally.

"All these thin#ers then* as they cannot pitch on another case* see!

to testi%y that $e ha(e deter!ined ri&htly both ho$ !any and o% $hat

sort the cases are. Besides this it is plain that $hen the cases

are bein& loo#ed %or* either all %or !st be so&ht ths or they

!st be so&ht in one o% these %or $ays. et s net discss the

possible di%%iclties $ith re&ard to the $ay in $hich each o% these

thin#ers has spo#en* and $ith re&ard to his sitation relati(ely to

the %irst principles.

Part "

"Those* then* $ho say the ni(erse is one and posit one #ind o% thin&

as !atter* and as corporeal !atter $hich has spatial !a&nitde*

e(idently

&o astray in !any $ays. )or they posit the ele!ents o% bodies only*

not o% incorporeal thin&s* tho&h there are also incorporeal thin&s.

And in tryin& to state the cases o% &eneration and destrction* and

in &i(in& a physical accont o% all thin&s* they do a$ay $ith the

case o% !o(e!ent. )rther* they err in not positin& the sbstance*

i.e. the essence* as the case o% anythin&* and besides this in li&htly

callin& any o% the si!ple bodies ecept earth the %irst principle*

$ithot in7irin& ho$ they are prodced ot o% one anothers-I !ean

%ire* $ater* earth* and air. )or so!e thin&s are prodced ot o% each

other by co!bination* others by separation* and this !a#es the &reatestdi%%erence to their priority and posteriority. )or +1, in a $ay the

property o% bein& !ost ele!entary o% all $old see! to belon& to the

%irst thin& %ro! $hich they are prodced by co!bination* and this

property $old belon& to the !ost %ine-&rained and sbtle o% bodies.

)or this reason those $ho !a#e %ire the principle $old be !ost in

a&ree!ent $ith this ar&!ent. Bt each o% the other thin#ers a&rees

that the ele!ent o% corporeal thin&s is o% this sort. At least none

o% those $ho na!ed one ele!ent clai!ed that earth $as the ele!ent*

e(idently becase o% the coarseness o% its &rain. +O% the other three


13/190

ele!ents each has %ond so!e 0d&e on its side' %or so!e !aintain

that %ire* others that $ater* others that air is the ele!ent. :et

$hy* a%ter all* do they not na!e earth also* as !ost !en do< )or people

say all thin&s are earth 4esiod says earth $as prodced %irst o%

corporeal

thin&s' so pri!iti(e and poplar has the opinion been., Accordin&

to this ar&!ent* then* no one $old be ri&ht $ho either says the

%irst principle is any o% the ele!ents other than %ire* or spposes

it to be denser than air bt rarer than $ater. Bt +6, i% that $hich

is later in &eneration is prior in natre* and that $hich is concocted

and co!ponded is later in &eneration* the contrary o% $hat $e ha(e

been sayin& !st be tre*-$ater !st be prior to air* and earth to

$ater.

"2o !ch* then* %or those $ho posit one case sch as $e !entioned'

bt the sa!e is tre i% one spposes !ore o% these* as 5!pedocles

says !atter o% thin&s is %or bodies. )or he too is con%ronted by

conse7ences so!e o% $hich are the sa!e as ha(e been !entioned* $hile

others are pecliar to hi!. )or $e see these bodies prodced %ro!

one another* $hich i!plies that the sa!e body does not al$ays re!ain

%ire or earth +$e ha(e spo#en abot this in or $or#s on natre,'and re&ardin& the case o% !o(e!ent and the 7estion $hether $e !st

posit one or t$o* he !st be tho&ht to ha(e spo#en neither correctly

nor alto&ether plasibly. And in &eneral* chan&e o% 7ality is

necessarily

done a$ay $ith %or those $ho spea# ths* %or on their (ie$ cold $ill

not co!e %ro! hot nor hot %ro! cold. )or i% it did there $old be

so!ethin& that accepted the contraries the!sel(es* and there $old

be so!e one entity that beca!e %ire and $ater* $hich 5!pedocles denies.

"As re&ards Anaa&oras* i% one $ere to sppose that he said there

$ere t$o ele!ents* the spposition $old accord thoro&hly $ith an

ar&!ent $hich Anaa&oras hi!sel% did not state articlately* bt

$hich he !st ha(e accepted i% any one had led hi! on to it. Tre*

to say that in the be&innin& all thin&s $ere !ied is absrd both

on other &ronds and becase it %ollo$s that they !st ha(e eisted

be%ore in an n!ied %or!* and becase natre does not allo$ any chance

thin& to be !ied $ith any chance thin&* and also becase on this

(ie$ !odi%ications and accidents cold be separated %ro! sbstances

+%or the sa!e thin&s $hich are !ied can be separated,' yet i% one

$ere to %ollo$ hi! p* piecin& to&ether $hat he !eans* he $old perhaps

be seen to be so!e$hat !odern in his (ie$s. )or $hen nothin& $as

separated

ot* e(idently nothin& cold be trly asserted o% the sbstance that

then eisted. I !ean* e.&. that it $as neither $hite nor blac#* nor

&rey nor any other color* bt o% necessity colorless' %or i% it

had been colored* it $old ha(e had one o% these colors. And

si!ilarly*by this sa!e ar&!ent* it $as %la(orless* nor had it any si!ilar

attribte' %or it cold not be either o% any 7ality or o% any si3e*

nor cold it be any de%inite #ind o% thin&. )or i% it $ere* one o%

the particlar %or!s $old ha(e belon&ed to it* and this is i!possible*

since all $ere !ied to&ether' %or the particlar %or! $old necessarily

ha(e been already separated ot* bt he all $ere !ied ecept reason*

and this alone $as n!ied and pre. )ro! this it %ollo$s* then* that

he !st say the principles are the One +%or this is si!ple and n!ied,

and the Other* $hich is o% sch a natre as $e sppose the inde%inite


14/190

to be be%ore it is de%ined and parta#es o% so!e %or!. There%ore* $hile

epressin& hi!sel% neither ri&htly nor clearly* he !eans so!ethin&

li#e $hat the later thin#ers say and $hat is no$ !ore clearly seen

to be the case.

"Bt these thin#ers are* a%ter all* at ho!e only in ar&!ents abot

&eneration and destrction and !o(e!ent' %or it is practically only

o% this sort o% sbstance that they see# the principles and the cases.

Bt those $ho etend their (ision to all thin&s that eist* and o%

eistin& thin&s sppose so!e to be perceptible and others not

perceptible*

e(idently stdy both classes* $hich is all the !ore reason $hy one

shold de(ote so!e ti!e to seein& $hat is &ood in their (ie$s and

$hat bad %ro! the standpoint o% the in7iry $e ha(e no$ be%ore s.

"The /Pytha&oreans/ treat o% principles and ele!ents stran&er than

those o% the physical philosophers +the reason is that they &ot the

principles %ro! non-sensible thin&s* %or the ob0ects o% !athe!atics*

ecept those o% astrono!y* are o% the class o% thin&s $ithot !o(e!ent,'

yet their discssions and in(esti&ations are all abot natre' %or

they &enerate the hea(ens* and $ith re&ard to their parts and attribtesand %nctions they obser(e the pheno!ena* and se p the principles

and the cases in eplainin& these* $hich i!plies that they a&ree

$ith the others* the physical philosophers* that the real is 0st

all that $hich is perceptible and contained by the so-called /hea(ens/.

Bt the cases and the principles $hich they !ention are* as $e said*

s%%icient to act as steps e(en p to the hi&her real!s o% reality*

and are !ore sited to these than to theories abot natre. They do

not tell s at all* ho$e(er* ho$ there can be !o(e!ent i% li!it and

nli!ited and odd and e(en are the only thin&s ass!ed* or ho$ $ithot

!o(e!ent and chan&e there can be &eneration and destrction* or the

bodies that !o(e thro&h the hea(ens can do $hat they do.

")rther* i% one either &ranted the! that spatial !a&nitde consists

o% these ele!ents* or this $ere pro(ed* still ho$ $old so!e bodies

be li&ht and others ha(e $ei&ht< To 0d&e %ro! $hat they ass!e and

!aintain they are spea#in& no !ore o% !athe!atical bodies than o%

perceptible' hence they ha(e said nothin& $hate(er abot %ire or earth

or the other bodies o% this sort* I sppose becase they ha(e nothin&

to say $hich applies pecliarly to perceptible thin&s.

")rther* ho$ are $e to co!bine the belie%s that the attribtes o%

n!ber* and n!ber itsel%* are cases o% $hat eists and happens in

the hea(ens both %ro! the be&innin& and no$* and that there is no

other n!ber than this n!ber ot o% $hich the $orld is co!posed at least* this is %or all thin&s the case o% their bein&

one. Others say this nity and bein&* o% $hich thin&s consist and

ha(e been !ade* is %ire* and others say it is air. A si!ilar (ie$

is epressed by those $ho !a#e the ele!ents !ore than one' %or these

also !st say that nity and bein& are precisely all the thin&s $hich

they say are principles.

"+A, I% $e do not sppose nity and bein& to be sbstances* it %ollo$s

that none o% the other ni(ersals is a sbstance' %or these are !ost

ni(ersal o% all* and i% there is no nity itsel% or bein&-itsel%*there $ill scarcely be in any other case anythin& apart %ro! $hat

are called the indi(idals. )rther* i% nity is not a sbstance*

e(idently n!ber also $ill not eist as an entity separate %ro! the

indi(idal thin&s' %or n!ber is nits* and the nit is precisely

a certain #ind o% one.

"Bt +B, i% there is a nity-itsel% and a bein& itsel%* nity and

bein& !st be their sbstance' %or it is not so!ethin& else that is

predicated ni(ersally o% the thin&s that are and are one* bt 0st

nity and bein&. Bt i% there is to be a bein&-itsel% and a nity-

itsel%*

there is !ch di%%iclty in seein& ho$ there $ill be anythin& else

besides these*-I !ean* ho$ thin&s $ill be !ore than one in n!ber.

)or $hat is di%%erent %ro! bein& does not eist* so that it necessarily

%ollo$s* accordin& to the ar&!ent o% Par!enides* that all thin&s

that are are one and this is bein&.

"There are ob0ections to both (ie$s. )or $hether nity is not a

sbstance

or there is a nity-itsel%* n!ber cannot be a sbstance. We ha(e

already said $hy this reslt %ollo$s i% nity is not a sbstance'

and i% it is* the sa!e di%%iclty arises as arose $ith re&ard to bein&.

)or $hence is there to be another one besides nity-itsel%< It !st

be not-one' bt all thin&s are either one or !any* and o% the !any

each is one.

")rther* i% nity-itsel% is indi(isible* accordin& to Feno/s postlateit $ill be nothin&. )or that $hich neither $hen added !a#es a thin&

&reater nor $hen sbtracted !a#es it less* he asserts to ha(e no bein&*

e(idently ass!in& that $hate(er has bein& is a spatial !a&nitde.

And i% it is a !a&nitde* it is corporeal' %or the corporeal has bein&

in e(ery di!ension* $hile the other ob0ects o% !athe!atics* e.&. a

plane or a line* added in one $ay $ill increase $hat they are added

to* bt in another $ay $ill not do so* and a point or a nit does

so in no $ay. Bt* since his theory is o% a lo$ order* and an

indi(isible


33/190

thin& can eist in sch a $ay as to ha(e a de%ence e(en a&ainst hi!

+%or the indi(isible $hen added $ill !a#e the n!ber* tho&h not the

si3e* &reater,*-yet ho$ can a !a&nitde proceed %ro! one sch

indi(isible

or %ro! !any< It is li#e sayin& that the line is !ade ot o% points.

"Bt e(en i% ore spposes the case to be sch that* as so!e say* n!ber

proceeds %ro! nity-itsel% and so!ethin& else $hich is not one* none

the less $e !st in7ire $hy and ho$ the prodct $ill be so!eti!es

a n!ber and so!eti!es a !a&nitde* i% the not-one $as ine7ality

and $as the sa!e principle in either case. )or it is not e(ident ho$

!a&nitdes cold proceed either %ro! the one and this principle* or

%ro! so!e n!ber and this principle.

Part ? "

"+1=, A 7estion connected $ith these is $hether n!bers and bodies

and planes and points are sbstances o% a #ind* or not. I% they are

not* it ba%%les s to say $hat bein& is and $hat the sbstances o%

thin&s are. )or !odi%ications and !o(e!ents and relations and

dispositionsand ratios do not see! to indicate the sbstance o% anythin&' %or

all are predicated o% a sb0ect* and none is a /this/. And as to the

thin&s $hich !i&ht see! !ost o% all to indicate sbstance* $ater and

earth and %ire and air* o% $hich co!posite bodies consist* heat and

cold and the li#e are !odi%ications o% these* not sbstances* and

the body $hich is ths !odi%ied alone persists as so!ethin& real and

as a sbstance. Bt* on the other hand* the body is srely less o%

a sbstance than the sr%ace* and the sr%ace than the line* and the

line than the nit and the point. )or the body is bonded by these'

and they are tho&ht to be capable o% eistin& $ithot body* bt body

incapable o% eistin& $ithot these. This is $hy* $hile !ost o% the

philosophers and the earlier a!on& the! tho&ht that sbstance and

bein& $ere identical $ith body* and that all other thin&s $ere

!odi%ications

o% this* so that the %irst principles o% the bodies $ere the %irst

principles o% bein&* the !ore recent and those $ho $ere held to be

$iser tho&ht n!bers $ere the %irst principles. As $e said* then*

i% these are not sbstance* there is no sbstance and no bein& at

all' %or the accidents o% these it cannot be ri&ht to call bein&s.

"Bt i% this is ad!itted* that lines and points are sbstance !ore

than bodies* bt $e do not see to $hat sort o% bodies these cold

belon& +%or they cannot be in perceptible bodies,* there can be no

sbstance.-)rther* these are all e(idently di(isions o% body*-one

in breadth* another in depth* another in len&th. Besides this* no

sort o% shape is present in the solid !ore than any other' so that

i% the 4er!es is not in the stone* neither is the hal% o% the cbein the cbe as so!ethin& deter!inate' there%ore the sr%ace is not

in it either' %or i% any sort o% sr%ace $ere in it* the sr%ace $hich

!ar#s o%% the hal% o% the cbe $old be in it too. And the sa!e accont

applies to the line and to the point and the nit. There%ore* i% on

the one hand body is in the hi&hest de&ree sbstance* and on the other

hand these thin&s are so !ore than body* bt these are not e(en

instances

o% sbstance* it ba%%les s to say $hat bein& is and $hat the sbstance


34/190

o% thin&s is.-)or besides $hat has been said* the 7estions o%

&eneration

and instrction con%ront s $ith %rther paradoes. )or i% sbstance*

not ha(in& eisted be%ore* no$ eists* or ha(in& eisted be%ore*

a%ter$ards

does not eist* this chan&e is tho&ht to be acco!panied by a process

o% beco!in& or perishin&' bt points and lines and sr%aces cannot

be in process either o% beco!in& or o% perishin&* $hen they at one

ti!e eist and at another do not. )or $hen bodies co!e into contact

or are di(ided* their bondaries si!ltaneosly beco!e one in the

one case $hen they toch* and t$o in the other-$hen they are di(ided'

so that $hen they ha(e been pt to&ether one bondary does not eist

bt has perished* and $hen they ha(e been di(ided the bondaries eist

$hich be%ore did not eist +%or it cannot be said that the point*

$hich is indi(isible* $as di(ided into t$o,. And i% the bondaries

co!e into bein& and cease to be* %ro! $hat do they co!e into bein&-i% then this !st be so* the )or!s also

!st there%ore be held to eist. 5(en i% those $ho spport this (ie$

do not epress it articlately* still this is $hat they !ean* and

they !st be !aintainin& the )or!s 0st becase each o% the )or!s

is a sbstance and none is by accident.

"Bt i% $e are to sppose both that the )or!s eist and that theprinciples

are one in n!ber* not in #ind* $e ha(e !entioned the i!possible reslts

that necessarily %ollo$.

"+1;, losely connected $ith this is the 7estion $hether the ele!ents

eist potentially or in so!e other !anner. I% in so!e other $ay* there

$ill be so!ethin& else prior to the %irst principles' %or the potency

is prior to the actal case* and it is not necessary %or e(erythin&

potential to be actal.-Bt i% the ele!ents eist potentially* it


35/190

is possible that e(erythin& that is shold not be. )or e(en that $hich

is not yet is capable o% bein&' %or that $hich is not co!es to be*

bt nothin& that is incapable o% bein& co!es to be.

"+16, We !st not only raise these 7estions abot the %irst principles*

bt also as# $hether they are ni(ersal or $hat $e call indi(idals.

I% they are ni(ersal* they $ill not be sbstances' %or e(erythin&

that is co!!on indicates not a /this/ bt a /sch/* bt sbstance

is a /this/. And i% $e are to be allo$ed to lay it do$n that a co!!on

predicate is a /this/ and a sin&le thin&* 2ocrates $ill be se(eral

ani!als-hi!sel% and /!an/ and /ani!al/* i% each o% these indicates

a /this/ and a sin&le thin&.

"I%* then* the principles are ni(ersals* these ni(ersal. There%ore

i% there is to be reslts %ollo$' i% they are not ni(ersals bt o%

#no$led&e o% the principles there !st be the natre o% indi(idals*

they $ill not be other principles prior to the!* na!ely those #no$able'

%or the #no$led&e o% anythin& is that are ni(ersally predicated o%

the!.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

BOOK IG

Part 1

"

"T45R5 is a science $hich in(esti&ates bein& as bein& and the attribtes

$hich belon& to this in (irte o% its o$n natre. o$ this is not

the sa!e as any o% the so-called special sciences' %or none o% these

others treats ni(ersally o% bein& as bein&. They ct o%% a part o%

bein& and in(esti&ate the attribte o% this part' this is $hat the

!athe!atical sciences %or instance do. o$ since $e are see#in& the

%irst principles and the hi&hest cases* clearly there !st be so!e

thin& to $hich these belon& in (irte o% its o$n natre. I% then those

$ho so&ht the ele!ents o% eistin& thin&s $ere see#in& these sa!e

principles* it is necessary that the ele!ents !st be ele!ents o%

bein& not by accident bt 0st becase it is bein&. There%ore it is

o% bein& as bein& that $e also !st &rasp the %irst cases.

"

Part 6

"There are !any senses in $hich a thin& !ay be said to /be/* bt all

that /is/ is related to one central point* one de%inite #ind o% thin&*

and is not said to /be/ by a !ere a!bi&ity. 5(erythin& $hich is healthy

is related to health* one thin& in the sense that it preser(es health*another in the sense that it prodces it* another in the sense that

it is a sy!pto! o% health* another becase it is capable o% it. And

that $hich is !edical is relati(e to the !edical art* one thin& bein&

called !edical becase it possesses it* another becase it is natrally

adapted to it* another becase it is a %nction o% the !edical art.

And $e shall %ind other $ords sed si!ilarly to these. 2o* too* there

are !any senses in $hich a thin& is said to be* bt all re%er to one

startin&-point' so!e thin&s are said to be becase they are sbstances*

others becase they are a%%ections o% sbstance* others becase they


36/190

are a process to$ards sbstance* or destrctions or pri(ations or

7alities o% sbstance* or prodcti(e or &enerati(e o% sbstance*

or o% thin&s $hich are relati(e to sbstance* or ne&ations o% one

o% these thin& o% sbstance itsel%. It is %or this reason that $e

say e(en o% non-bein& that it is nonbein&. As* then* there is one

science $hich deals $ith all healthy thin&s* the sa!e applies in the

other cases also. )or not only in the case o% thin&s $hich ha(e one

co!!on notion does the in(esti&ation belon& to one science* bt also

in the case o% thin&s $hich are related to one co!!on natre' %or

e(en these in a sense ha(e one co!!on notion. It is clear then that

it is the $or# o% one science also to stdy the thin&s that are* 7a

bein&.-Bt e(ery$here science deals chie%ly $ith that $hich is pri!ary*

and on $hich the other thin&s depend* and in (irte o% $hich they

&et their na!es. I%* then* this is sbstance* it $ill be o% sbstances

that the philosopher !st &rasp the principles and the cases.

"o$ %or each one class o% thin&s* as there is one perception* so

there is one science* as %or instance &ra!!ar* bein& one science*

in(esti&ates all articlate sonds. 4ence to in(esti&ate all the species

o% bein& 7a bein& is the $or# o% a science $hich is &enerically one*

and to in(esti&ate the se(eral species is the $or# o% the speci%icparts o% the science.

"I%* no$* bein& and nity are the sa!e and are one thin& in the sense

that they are i!plied in one another as principle and case are* not

in the sense that they are eplained by the sa!e de%inition +tho&h

it !a#es no di%%erence e(en i% $e sppose the! to be li#e that-in

%act this $old e(en stren&then or case,' %or /one !an/ and /!an/

are the sa!e thin&* and so are /eistent !an/ and /!an/* and the

doblin&

o% the $ords in /one !an and one eistent !an/ does not epress anythin&

di%%erent +it is clear that the t$o thin&s are not separated either

in co!in& to be or in ceasin& to be,' and si!ilarly /one eistent

!an/ adds nothin& to /eistent !an/* and that it is ob(ios that the

addition in these cases !eans the sa!e thin&* and nity is nothin&

apart %ro! bein&' and i%* %rther* the sbstance o% each thin& is

one in no !erely accidental $ay* and si!ilarly is %ro! its (ery natre

so!ethin& that is>-all this bein& so* there !st be eactly as !any

species o% bein& as o% nity. And to in(esti&ate the essence o% these

is the $or# o% a science $hich is &enerically one-I !ean* %or instance*

the discssion o% the sa!e and the si!ilar and the other concepts

o% this sort' and nearly all contraries !ay be re%erred to this ori&in'

let s ta#e the! as ha(in& been in(esti&ated in the /2election o%

ontraries/.

"And there are as !any parts o% philosophy as there are #inds o%

sbstance*

so that there !st necessarily be a!on& the! a %irst philosophy andone $hich %ollo$s this. )or bein& %alls i!!ediately into &enera' %or

$hich reason the sciences too $ill correspond to these &enera. )or

the philosopher is li#e the !athe!atician* as that $ord is sed' %or

!athe!atics also has parts* and there is a %irst and a second science

and other sccessi(e ones $ithin the sphere o% !athe!atics.

"o$ since it is the $or# o% one science to in(esti&ate opposites*

and plrality is opposed to nity-and it belon&s to one science to

in(esti&ate the ne&ation and the pri(ation becase in both cases $e


37/190

are really in(esti&atin& the one thin& o% $hich the ne&ation or the

pri(ation is a ne&ation or pri(ation +%or $e either say si!ply that

that thin& is not present* or that it is not present in so!e particlar

class' in the latter case di%%erence is present o(er and abo(e $hat

is i!plied in ne&ation' %or ne&ation !eans 0st the absence o% the

thin& in 7estion* $hile in pri(ation there is also e!ployed an

nderlyin&

natre o% $hich the pri(ation is asserted,>-in (ie$ o% all these %acts*

the contraries o% the concepts $e na!ed abo(e* the other and the

dissi!ilar

and the ne7al* and e(erythin& else $hich is deri(ed either %ro!

these or %ro! plrality and nity* !st %all $ithin the pro(ince o%

the science abo(e na!ed. And contrariety is one o% these concepts'

%or contrariety is a #ind o% di%%erence* and di%%erence is a #ind

o% otherness. There%ore* since there are !any senses in $hich a thin&

is said to be one* these ter!s also $ill ha(e !any senses* bt yet

it belon&s to one science to #no$ the! all' %or a ter! belon&s to

di%%erent sciences not i% it has di%%erent senses* bt i% it has not

one !eanin& and its de%initions cannot be re%erred to one central

!eanin&. And since all thin&s are re%erred to that $hich is pri!ary*

as %or instance all thin&s $hich are called one are re%erred to thepri!ary one* $e !st say that this holds &ood also o% the sa!e and

the other and o% contraries in &eneral' so that a%ter distin&ishin&

the (arios senses o% each* $e !st then eplain by re%erence to $hat

is pri!ary in the case o% each o% the predicates in 7estion* sayin&

ho$ they are related to it' %or so!e $ill be called $hat they are

called becase they possess it* others becase they prodce it* and

others in other sch $ays.

"It is e(ident* then* that it belon&s to one science to be able to

&i(e an accont o% these concepts as $ell as o% sbstance +this $as

one o% the 7estions in or boo# o% proble!s,* and that it is the

%nction o% the philosopher to be able to in(esti&ate all thin&s.

)or i% it is not the %nction o% the philosopher* $ho is it $ho $ill

in7ire $hether 2ocrates and 2ocrates seated are the sa!e thin&* or

$hether one thin& has one contrary* or $hat contrariety is* or ho$

!any !eanin&s it has< And si!ilarly $ith all other sch 7estions.

2ince* then* these are essential !odi%ications o% nity 7a nity

and o% bein& 7a bein&* not 7a n!bers or lines or %ire* it is clear

that it belon&s to this science to in(esti&ate both the essence o%

these concepts and their properties. And those $ho stdy these

properties

err not by lea(in& the sphere o% philosophy* bt by %or&ettin& that

sbstance* o% $hich they ha(e no correct idea* is prior to these other

thin&s. )or n!ber 7a n!ber has pecliar attribtes* sch as oddness

and e(enness* co!!ensrability and e7ality* ecess and de%ect* and

these belon& to n!bers either in the!sel(es or in relation to one

another. And si!ilarly the solid and the !otionless and that $hichis in !otion and the $ei&htless and that $hich has $ei&ht ha(e other

pecliar properties. 2o too there are certain properties pecliar

to bein& as sch* and it is abot these that the philosopher has to

in(esti&ate the trth.-An indication o% this !ay be !entioned>

dialecticians

and sophists ass!e the sa!e &ise as the philosopher* %or sophistic

is Wisdo! $hich eists only in se!blance* and dialecticians e!brace

all thin&s in their dialectic* and bein& is co!!on to all thin&s'

bt e(idently their dialectic e!braces these sb0ects becase these


38/190

are proper to philosophy.-)or sophistic and dialectic trn on the

sa!e class o% thin&s as philosophy* bt this di%%ers %ro! dialectic

in the natre o% the %aclty re7ired and %ro! sophistic in respect

o% the prpose o% the philosophic li%e. Dialectic is !erely critical

$here philosophy clai!s to #no$* and sophistic is $hat appears to

be philosophy bt is not.

"A&ain* in the list o% contraries one o% the t$o col!ns is pri(ati(e*

and all contraries are redcible to bein& and non-bein&* and to nity

and plrality* as %or instance rest belon&s to nity and !o(e!ent

to plrality. And nearly all thin#ers a&ree that bein& and sbstance

are co!posed o% contraries' at least all na!e contraries as their

%irst principles-so!e na!e odd and e(en* so!e hot and cold* so!e li!it

and the nli!ited* so!e lo(e and stri%e. And all the others as $ell

are e(idently redcible to nity and plrality +this redction $e

!st ta#e %or &ranted,* and the principles stated by other thin#ers

%all entirely nder these as their &enera. It is ob(ios then %ro!

these considerations too that it belon&s to one science to ea!ine

bein& 7a bein&. )or all thin&s are either contraries or co!posed

o% contraries* and nity and plrality are the startin&-points o%

all contraries. And these belon& to one science* $hether they ha(eor ha(e not one sin&le !eanin&. Probably the trth is that they ha(e

not' yet e(en i% /one/ has se(eral !eanin&s* the other !eanin&s $ill

be related to the pri!ary !eanin& +and si!ilarly in the case o% the

contraries,* e(en i% bein& or nity is not a ni(ersal and the sa!e

in e(ery instance or is not separable %ro! the particlar instances

+as in %act it probably is not' the nity is in so!e cases that o%

co!!on re%erence* in so!e cases that o% serial sccession,. And %or

this reason it does not belon& to the &eo!eter to in7ire $hat is

contrariety or co!pleteness or nity or bein& or the sa!e or the other*

bt only to presppose these concepts and reason %ro! this startin&-

point.--Ob(iosly

then it is the $or# o% one science to ea!ine bein& 7a bein&* and

the attribtes $hich belon& to it 7a bein&* and the sa!e science

$ill ea!ine not only sbstances bt also their attribtes* both those

abo(e na!ed and the concepts /prior/ and /posterior/* /&ens/ and

/species/* /$hole/ and /part/* and the others o% this sort.

Part ; "

"We !st state $hether it belon&s to one or to di%%erent sciences

to in7ire into the trths $hich are in !athe!atics called aio!s*

and into sbstance. 5(idently* the in7iry into these also belon&s

to one science* and that the science o% the philosopher' %or these

trths hold &ood %or e(erythin& that is* and not %or so!e special

&ens apart %ro! others. And all !en se the!* becase they are tre

o% bein& 7a bein& and each &ens has bein&. Bt !en se the! 0st

so %ar as to satis%y their prposes' that is* as %ar as the &ensto $hich their de!onstrations re%er etends. There%ore since these

trths clearly hold &ood %or all thin&s 7a bein& +%or this is $hat

is co!!on to the!,* to hi! $ho stdies bein& 7a bein& belon&s the

in7iry into these as $ell. And %or this reason no one $ho is condctin&

a special in7iry tries to say anythin& abot their trth or %alsity*-

neither

the &eo!eter nor the arith!etician. 2o!e natral philosophers indeed

ha(e done so* and their procedre $as intelli&ible eno&h' %or they

tho&ht that they alone $ere in7irin& abot the $hole o% natre and


39/190

abot bein&. Bt since there is one #ind o% thin#er $ho is abo(e e(en

the natral philosopher +%or natre is only one particlar &ens o%

bein&,* the discssion o% these trths also $ill belon& to hi! $hose

in7iry is ni(ersal and deals $ith pri!ary sbstance. Physics also

is a #ind o% Wisdo!* bt it is not the %irst #ind.-And the atte!pts

o% so!e o% those $ho discss the ter!s on $hich trth shold be

accepted*

are de to a $ant o% trainin& in lo&ic' %or they shold #no$ these

thin&s already $hen they co!e to a special stdy* and not be in7irin&

into the! $hile they are listenin& to lectres on it.

"5(idently then it belon&s to the philosopher* i.e. to hi! $ho is

stdyin& the natre o% all sbstance* to in7ire also into the

principles

o% syllo&is!. Bt he $ho #no$s best abot each &ens !st be able

to state the !ost certain principles o% his sb0ect* so that he $hose

sb0ect is eistin& thin&s 7a eistin& !st be able to state the

!ost certain principles o% all thin&s. This is the philosopher* and

the !ost certain principle o% all is that re&ardin& $hich it is

i!possible

to be !ista#en' %or sch a principle !st be both the best #no$n +%orall !en !ay be !ista#en abot thin&s $hich they do not #no$,* and

non-hypothetical. )or a principle $hich e(ery one !st ha(e $ho

nderstands

anythin& that is* is not a hypothesis' and that $hich e(ery one !st

#no$ $ho #no$s anythin&* he !st already ha(e $hen he co!es to a special

stdy. 5(idently then sch a principle is the !ost certain o% all'

$hich principle this is* let s proceed to say. It is* that the sa!e

attribte cannot at the sa!e ti!e belon& and not belon& to the sa!e

sb0ect and in the sa!e respect' $e !st presppose* to &ard a&ainst

dialectical ob0ections* any %rther 7ali%ications $hich !i&ht be

added. This* then* is the !ost certain o% all principles* since it

ans$ers to the de%inition &i(en abo(e. )or it is i!possible %or any

one to belie(e the sa!e thin& to be and not to be* as so!e thin#

4eraclits

says. )or $hat a !an says* he does not necessarily belie(e' and i%

it is i!possible that contrary attribtes shold belon& at the sa!e

ti!e to the sa!e sb0ect +the sal 7ali%ications !st be prespposed

in this pre!iss too,* and i% an opinion $hich contradicts another

is contrary to it* ob(iosly it is i!possible %or the sa!e !an at

the sa!e ti!e to belie(e the sa!e thin& to be and not to be' %or i%

a !an $ere !ista#en on this point he $old ha(e contrary opinions

at the sa!e ti!e. It is %or this reason that all $ho are carryin&

ot a de!onstration redce it to this as an lti!ate belie%' %or this

is natrally the startin&-point e(en %or all the other aio!s.

Part = "

"There are so!e $ho* as $e said* both the!sel(es assert that it is

possible %or the sa!e thin& to be and not to be* and say that people

can 0d&e this to be the case. And a!on& others !any $riters abot

natre se this lan&a&e. Bt $e ha(e no$ posited that it is i!possible

%or anythin& at the sa!e ti!e to be and not to be* and by this !eans

ha(e sho$n that this is the !ost indisptable o% all principles.-2o!e

indeed de!and that e(en this shall be de!onstrated* bt this they

do thro&h $ant o% edcation* %or not to #no$ o% $hat thin&s one shold


40/190

de!and de!onstration* and o% $hat one shold not* ar&es $ant o%

edcation.

)or it is i!possible that there shold be de!onstration o% absoltely

e(erythin& +there $old be an in%inite re&ress* so that there $old

still be no de!onstration,' bt i% there are thin&s o% $hich one shold

not de!and de!onstration* these persons cold not say $hat principle

they !aintain to be !ore sel%-e(ident than the present one.

"We can* ho$e(er* de!onstrate ne&ati(ely e(en that this (ie$ is

i!possible*

i% or opponent $ill only say so!ethin&' and i% he says nothin&* it

is absrd to see# to &i(e an accont o% or (ie$s to one $ho cannot

&i(e an accont o% anythin&* in so %ar as he cannot do so. )or sch

a !an* as sch* is %ro! the start no better than a (e&etable. o$

ne&ati(e de!onstration I distin&ish %ro! de!onstration proper* becase

in a de!onstration one !i&ht be tho&ht to be be&&in& the 7estion*

bt i% another person is responsible %or the ass!ption $e shall ha(e

ne&ati(e proo%* not de!onstration. The startin&-point %or all sch

ar&!ents is not the de!and that or opponent shall say that so!ethin&

either is or is not +%or this one !i&ht perhaps ta#e to be a be&&in&

o% the 7estion,* bt that he shall say so!ethin& $hich is si&ni%icantboth %or hi!sel% and %or another' %or this is necessary* i% he really

is to say anythin&. )or* i% he !eans nothin&* sch a !an $ill not

be capable o% reasonin&* either $ith hi!sel% or $ith another. Bt

i% any one &rants this* de!onstration $ill be possible' %or $e shall

already ha(e so!ethin& de%inite. The person responsible %or the proo%*

ho$e(er* is not he $ho de!onstrates bt he $ho listens' %or $hile

diso$nin& reason he listens to reason. And a&ain he $ho ad!its this

has ad!itted that so!ethin& is tre apart %ro! de!onstration +so that

not e(erythin& $ill be /so and not so/,.

")irst then this at least is ob(iosly tre* that the $ord /be/ or

/not be/ has a de%inite !eanin&* so that not e(erythin& $ill be /so

and not so/. A&ain* i% /!an/ has one !eanin&* let this be /t$o-%ooted

ani!al/' by ha(in& one !eanin& I nderstand this>-i% /!an/ !eans //*

then i% A is a !an // $ill be $hat /bein& a !an/ !eans %or hi!. +It

!a#es no di%%erence e(en i% one $ere to say a $ord has se(eral !eanin&s*

i% only they are li!ited in n!ber' %or to each de%inition there !i&ht

be assi&ned a di%%erent $ord. )or instance* $e !i&ht say that /!an/

has not one !eanin& bt se(eral* one o% $hich $old ha(e one de%inition*

(i3. /t$o-%ooted ani!al/* $hile there !i&ht be also se(eral other

de%initions i% only they $ere li!ited in n!ber' %or a pecliar na!e

!i&ht be assi&ned to each o% the de%initions. I%* ho$e(er* they $ere

not li!ited bt one $ere to say that the $ord has an in%inite n!ber

o% !eanin&s* ob(iosly reasonin& $old be i!possible' %or not to ha(e

one !eanin& is to ha(e no !eanin&* and i% $ords ha(e no !eanin& or

reasonin& $ith one another* and indeed $ith orsel(es* has been

annihilated'%or it is i!possible to thin# o% anythin& i% $e do not thin# o% one

thin&' bt i% this is possible* one na!e !i&ht be assi&ned to this

thin&.,

"et it be ass!ed then* as $as said at the be&innin&* that the na!e

has a !eanin& and has one !eanin&' it is i!possible* then* that /bein&

a !an/ shold !ean precisely /not bein& a !an/* i% /!an/ not only

si&ni%ies so!ethin& abot one sb0ect bt also has one si&ni%icance

+%or $e do not identi%y /ha(in& one si&ni%icance/ $ith /si&ni%yin&


41/190

so!ethin& abot one sb0ect/* since on that ass!ption e(en /!sical/

and /$hite/ and /!an/ $old ha(e had one si&ni%icance* so that all

thin&s $old ha(e been one' %or they $old all ha(e had the sa!e

si&ni%icance,.

"And it $ill not be possible to be and not to be the sa!e thin&* ecept

in (irte o% an a!bi&ity* 0st as i% one $ho! $e call /!an/* others

$ere to call /not-!an/' bt the point in 7estion is not this* $hether

the sa!e thin& can at the sa!e ti!e be and not be a !an in na!e* bt

$hether it can in %act. o$ i% /!an/ and /not-!an/ !ean nothin&

di%%erent*

ob(iosly /not bein& a !an/ $ill !ean nothin& di%%erent %ro! /bein&

a !an/' so that /bein& a !an/ $ill be /not bein& a !an/' %or they

$ill be one. )or bein& one !eans this-bein& related as /rai!ent/ and

/dress/ are* i% their de%inition is one. And i% /bein& a !an/ and

/bein& a not-!an/ are to be one* they !st !ean one thin&. Bt it

$as sho$n earlier/ that they !ean di%%erent thin&s.-There%ore* i%

it is tre to say o% anythin& that it is a !an* it !st be a t$o-%ooted

ani!al +%or this $as $hat /!an/ !eant,' and i% this is necessary*

it is i!possible that the sa!e thin& shold not at that ti!e be a

t$o-%ooted ani!al' %or this is $hat /bein& necessary/ !eans-that itis i!possible %or the thin& not to be. It is* then* i!possible that

it shold be at the sa!e ti!e tre to say the sa!e thin& is a !an

and is not a !an.

"The sa!e accont holds &ood $ith re&ard to /not bein& a !an/* %or

/bein& a !an/ and /bein& a not-!an/ !ean di%%erent thin&s* since e(en

/bein& $hite/ and /bein& a !an/ are di%%erent' %or the %or!er ter!s

are !ch !ore di%%erent so that they !st a %ortiori !ean di%%erent

thin&s. And i% any one says that /$hite/ !eans one and the sa!e thin&

as /!an/* a&ain $e shall say the sa!e as $hat $as said be%ore* that

it $old %ollo$ that all thin&s are one* and not only opposites. Bt

i% this is i!possible* then $hat $e ha(e !aintained $ill %ollo$* i%

or opponent $ill only ans$er or 7estion.

"And i%* $hen one as#s the 7estion si!ply* he adds the contradictories*

he is not ans$erin& the 7estion. )or there is nothin& to pre(ent

the sa!e thin& %ro! bein& both a !an and $hite and contless other

thin&s> bt still* i% one as#s $hether it is or is not tre to say

that this is a !an* or opponent !st &i(e an ans$er $hich !eans one

thin&* and not add that /it is also $hite and lar&e/. )or* besides

other reasons* it is i!possible to en!erate its accidental attribtes*

$hich are in%inite in n!ber' let hi!* then* en!erate either all

or none. 2i!ilarly* there%ore* e(en i% the sa!e thin& is a thosand

ti!es a !an and a not-!an* he !st not* in ans$erin& the 7estion

$hether this is a !an* add that it is also at the sa!e ti!e a not-!an*

nless he is bond to add also all the other accidents* all that the

sb0ect is or is not' and i% he does this* he is not obser(in& therles o% ar&!ent.

"And in &eneral those $ho say this do a$ay $ith sbstance and essence.

)or they !st say that all attribtes are accidents* and that there

is no sch thin& as /bein& essentially a !an/ or /an ani!al/. )or

i% there is to be any sch thin& as /bein& essentially a !an/ this

$ill not be /bein& a not-!an/ or /not bein& a !an/ +yet these are

ne&ations o% it,' %or there $as one thin& $hich it !eant* and this

$as the sbstance o% so!ethin&. And denotin& the sbstance o% a thin&


42/190

!eans that the essence o% the thin& is nothin& else. Bt i% its bein&

essentially a !an is to be the sa!e as either bein& essentially a

not-!an or essentially not bein& a !an* then its essence $ill be

so!ethin&

else. There%ore or opponents !st say that there cannot be sch a

de%inition o% anythin&* bt that all attribtes are accidental' %or

this is the distinction bet$een sbstance and accident-/$hite/ is

accidental to !an* becase tho&h he is $hite* $hiteness is not his

essence. Bt i% all state!ents are accidental* there $ill be nothin&

pri!ary abot $hich they are !ade* i% the accidental al$ays i!plies

predication abot a sb0ect. The predication* then* !st &o on ad

in%init!. Bt this is i!possible' %or not e(en !ore than t$o ter!s

can be co!bined in accidental predication. )or +1, an accident is

not an accident o% an accident* nless it be becase both are accidents

o% the sa!e sb0ect. I !ean* %or instance* that the $hite is !sical

and the latter is $hite* only becase both are accidental to !an.

Bt +6, 2ocrates is !sical* not in this sense* that both ter!s are

accidental to so!ethin& else. 2ince then so!e predicates are accidental

in this and so!e in that sense* +a, those $hich are accidental in

the latter sense* in $hich $hite is accidental to 2ocrates* cannot

%or! an in%inite series in the p$ard direction' e.&. 2ocrates the$hite has not yet another accident' %or no nity can be &ot ot o%

sch a s!. or a&ain +b, $ill /$hite/ ha(e another ter! accidental

to it* e.&. /!sical/. )or this is no !ore accidental to that than

that is to this' and at the sa!e ti!e $e ha(e dra$n the distinction*

that $hile so!e predicates are accidental in this sense* others are

so in the sense in $hich /!sical/ is accidental to 2ocrates' and

the accident is an accident o% an accident not in cases o% the latter

#ind* bt only in cases o% the other #ind* so that not all ter!s $ill

be accidental. There !st* then* e(en so be so!ethin& $hich denotes

sbstance. And i% this is so* it has been sho$n that contradictories

cannot be predicated at the sa!e ti!e.

"A&ain* i% all contradictory state!ents are tre o% the sa!e sb0e

Metaphysics by Aristotle Translated by W. D. Ross ...

Documents

Transcript of Metaphysics by Aristotle Translated by W. D. Ross ...