350 BC ON INTERPRETATION by Aristotle translated by E. M. Edghill 1 irst !

e "#st de$ine the ter"s %no#n% and %&erb%' then the ter"s %denial% and %a$$ir"ation%' then %(ro(osition% and %senten)e.% *(o+en !ords are the sy"bols o$ "ental e,(erien)e and !ritten !ords are the sy"bols o$ s(o+en !ords. -#st as all "en ha&e not the sa"e !riting' so all "en ha&e not the sa"e s(ee)h so#nds' b#t the "ental e,(erien)es' !hi)h these dire)tly sy"boli.e' are the sa"e $or all' as also are those things o$ !hi)h o#r e,(erien)es are the i"ages. This "atter has' ho!e&er' been dis)#ssed in "y treatise abo#t the so#l' $or it belongs to an in&estigation distin)t $ro" that !hi)h lies be$ore #s. As there are in the "ind tho#ghts !hi)h do not in&ol&e tr#th or $alsity' and also those !hi)h "#st be either tr#e or $alse' so it is in s(ee)h. or tr#th and $alsity i"(ly )o"bination and se(aration. No#ns and &erbs' (ro&ided nothing is added' are li+e tho#ghts !itho#t )o"bination or se(aration/ %"an% and %!hite%' as isolated ter"s' are not yet either tr#e or $alse. In (roo$ o$ this' )onsider the !ord %goat0stag.% It has signi$i)an)e' b#t there is no tr#th or $alsity abo#t it' #nless %is% or %is not% is added' either in the (resent or in so"e other tense. 1 By a no#n !e "ean a so#nd signi$i)ant by )on&ention' !hi)h has no re$eren)e to ti"e' and o$ !hi)h no (art is signi$i)ant a(art $ro" the rest. In the no#n % airsteed'% the (art %steed% has no signi$i)an)e in and by itsel$' as in the (hrase %$air steed.% 2et there is a di$$eren)e bet!een si"(le and )o"(osite no#ns/ $or in the $or"er the (art is in no !ay signi$i)ant' in the latter it )ontrib#tes to the "eaning o$ the !hole' altho#gh it has not an inde(endent "eaning. Th#s in the !ord %(irate0boat% the !ord %boat% has no "eaning e,)e(t as (art o$ the !hole !ord. The li"itation %by )on&ention% !as introd#)ed be)a#se nothing is by nat#re a no#n or na"e0it is only so !hen it be)o"es a sy"bol/ inarti)#late so#nds' s#)h as those !hi)h br#tes (rod#)e' are signi$i)ant' yet none o$ these )onstit#tes a no#n. The e,(ression %not0"an% is not a no#n. There is indeed no re)ogni.ed ter" by !hi)h !e "ay denote s#)h an e,(ression' $or it is not a senten)e or a denial. 3et it then be )alled an inde$inite no#n. The e,(ressions %o$ Philo%' %to Philo%' and so on' )onstit#te not no#ns' b#t )ases o$ a no#n. The de$inition o$ these )ases o$ a no#n is in other res(e)ts the sa"e as that o$ the no#n (ro(er' b#t' !hen )o#(led !ith %is%' %!as%' or !ill be%' they do not' as they are' $or" a (ro(osition either tr#e or $alse' and this the no#n (ro(er al!ays does' #nder these )onditions. Ta+e the !ords %o$ Philo is% or %o$ or %o$ Philo is not%/ these !ords do not' as they stand' $or" either a tr#e or a $alse (ro(osition. 3 A &erb is that !hi)h' in addition to its (ro(er "eaning' )arries !ith it the notion o$ ti"e. No (art o$ it has any inde(endent "eaning' and it is a sign o$ so"ething said o$ so"ething else. I !ill e,(lain !hat I "ean by saying that it )arries !ith it the notion o$ ti"e. %4ealth% is a no#n' b#t %is healthy% is a &erb/ $or besides its (ro(er "eaning it indi)ates the (resent e,isten)e o$ the state in 5#estion.

Moreo&er' a &erb is al!ays a sign o$ so"ething said o$ so"ething else' i.e. o$ so"ething either (redi)able o$ or (resent in so"e other thing. *#)h e,(ressions as %is not0healthy%' %is not' ill%' I do not des)ribe as &erbs/ $or tho#gh they )arry the additional note o$ ti"e' and al!ays $or" a (redi)ate' there is no s(e)i$ied na"e $or this &ariety/ b#t let the" be )alled inde$inite &erbs' sin)e they a((ly e5#ally !ell to that !hi)h e,ists and to that !hi)h does not. *i"ilarly %he !as healthy%' %he !ill be healthy%' are not &erbs' b#t tenses o$ a &erb/ the di$$eren)e lies in the $a)t that the &erb indi)ates (resent ti"e' !hile the tenses o$ the &erb indi)ate those ti"es !hi)h lie o#tside the (resent. 6erbs in and by the"sel&es are s#bstanti&al and ha&e signi$i)an)e' $or he !ho #ses s#)h e,(ressions arrests the hearer%s "ind' and $i,es his attention/ b#t they do not' as they stand' e,(ress any 7#dge"ent' either (ositi&e or negati&e. or neither are %to be% and %not to be% the (arti)i(le %being% signi$i)ant o$ any $a)t' #nless so"ething is added/ $or they do not the"sel&es indi)ate anything' b#t i"(ly a )o(#lation' o$ !hi)h !e )annot $or" a )on)e(tion a(art $ro" the things )o#(led. 8 A senten)e is a signi$i)ant (ortion o$ s(ee)h' so"e (arts o$ !hi)h ha&e an inde(endent "eaning' that is to say' as an #tteran)e' tho#gh not as the e,(ression o$ any (ositi&e 7#dge"ent. 3et "e e,(lain. The !ord %h#"an% has "eaning' b#t does not )onstit#te a (ro(osition' either (ositi&e or negati&e. It is only !hen other !ords are added that the !hole !ill $or" an a$$ir"ation or denial. B#t i$ !e se(arate one syllable o$ the !ord %h#"an% $ro" the other' it has no "eaning/ si"ilarly in the !ord %"o#se%' the (art %o#se% has no "eaning in itsel$' b#t is "erely a so#nd. In )o"(osite !ords' indeed' the (arts )ontrib#te to the "eaning o$ the !hole/ yet' as has been (ointed o#t' they ha&e not an inde(endent "eaning. E&ery senten)e has "eaning' not as being the nat#ral "eans by !hi)h a (hysi)al $a)#lty is reali.ed' b#t' as !e ha&e said' by )on&ention. 2et e&ery senten)e is not a (ro(osition/ only s#)h are (ro(ositions as ha&e in the" either tr#th or $alsity. Th#s a (rayer is a senten)e' b#t is neither tr#e nor $alse. 3et #s there$ore dis"iss all other ty(es o$ senten)e b#t the (ro(osition' $or this last )on)erns o#r (resent in5#iry' !hereas the in&estigation o$ the others belongs rather to the st#dy o$ rhetori) or o$ (oetry. 5 The $irst )lass o$ si"(le (ro(ositions is the si"(le a$$ir"ation' the ne,t' the si"(le denial/ all others are only one by )on7#n)tion. E&ery (ro(osition "#st )ontain a &erb or the tense o$ a &erb. The (hrase !hi)h de$ines the s(e)ies %"an%' i$ no &erb in (resent' (ast' or $#t#re ti"e be added' is not a (ro(osition. It "ay be as+ed ho! the e,(ression %a $ooted ani"al !ith t!o $eet% )an be )alled single/ $or it is not the )ir)#"stan)e that the !ords $ollo! in #nbro+en s#))ession that e$$e)ts the #nity. This in5#iry' ho!e&er' $inds its (la)e in an in&estigation $oreign to that be$ore #s. 9e )all those (ro(ositions single !hi)h indi)ate a single $a)t' or the )on7#n)tion o$ the (arts o$ !hi)h res#lts in #nity: those (ro(ositions' on the other hand' are se(arate and "any in n#"ber' !hi)h indi)ate "any $a)ts' or !hose (arts ha&e no )on7#n)tion. 3et #s' "oreo&er' )onsent to )all a no#n or a &erb an e,(ression only' and not a (ro(osition' sin)e it is not (ossible $or a "an to s(ea+ in this !ay !hen he is e,(ressing so"ething' in s#)h a !ay as to "a+e a state"ent' !hether his #tteran)e is an ans!er to a 5#estion or an a)t o$ his o!n initiation.

To ret#rn: o$ (ro(ositions one +ind is si"(le' i.e. that !hi)h asserts or denies so"ething o$ so"ething' the other )o"(osite' i.e. that !hi)h is )o"(o#nded o$ si"(le (ro(ositions. A si"(le (ro(osition is a state"ent' !ith "eaning' as to the (resen)e o$ so"ething in a s#b7e)t or its absen)e' in the (resent' (ast' or $#t#re' a))ording to the di&isions o$ ti"e. ; An a$$ir"ation is a (ositi&e assertion o$ so"ething abo#t so"ething' a denial a negati&e assertion. No! it is (ossible both to a$$ir" and to deny the (resen)e o$ so"ething !hi)h is (resent or o$ so"ething !hi)h is not' and sin)e these sa"e a$$ir"ations and denials are (ossible !ith re$eren)e to those ti"es !hi)h lie o#tside the (resent' it !o#ld be (ossible to )ontradi)t any a$$ir"ation or denial. Th#s it is (lain that e&ery a$$ir"ation has an o((osite denial' and si"ilarly e&ery denial an o((osite a$$ir"ation. 9e !ill )all s#)h a (air o$ (ro(ositions a (air o$ )ontradi)tories. Those (ositi&e and negati&e (ro(ositions are said to be )ontradi)tory !hi)h ha&e the sa"e s#b7e)t and (redi)ate. The identity o$ s#b7e)t and o$ (redi)ate "#st not be %e5#i&o)al%. Indeed there are de$initi&e 5#ali$i)ations besides this' !hi)h !e "a+e to "eet the )as#istries o$ so(hists. < *o"e things are #ni&ersal' others indi&id#al. By the ter" %#ni&ersal% I "ean that !hi)h is o$ s#)h a nat#re as to be (redi)ated o$ "any s#b7e)ts' by %indi&id#al% that !hi)h is not th#s (redi)ated. Th#s %"an% is a #ni&ersal' %Callias% an indi&id#al. O#r (ro(ositions ne)essarily so"eti"es )on)ern a #ni&ersal s#b7e)t' so"eti"es an indi&id#al. I$' then' a "an states a (ositi&e and a negati&e (ro(osition o$ #ni&ersal )hara)ter !ith regard to a #ni&ersal' these t!o (ro(ositions are %)ontrary%. By the e,(ression %a (ro(osition o$ #ni&ersal )hara)ter !ith regard to a #ni&ersal%' s#)h (ro(ositions as %e&ery "an is !hite%' %no "an is !hite% are "eant. 9hen' on the other hand' the (ositi&e and negati&e (ro(ositions' tho#gh they ha&e regard to a #ni&ersal' are yet not o$ #ni&ersal )hara)ter' they !ill not be )ontrary' albeit the "eaning intended is so"eti"es )ontrary. As instan)es o$ (ro(ositions "ade !ith regard to a #ni&ersal' b#t not o$ #ni&ersal )hara)ter' !e "ay ta+e the %(ro(ositions %"an is !hite%' %"an is not !hite%. %Man% is a #ni&ersal' b#t the (ro(osition is not "ade as o$ #ni&ersal )hara)ter/ $or the !ord %e&ery% does not "a+e the s#b7e)t a #ni&ersal' b#t rather gi&es the (ro(osition a #ni&ersal )hara)ter. I$' ho!e&er' both (redi)ate and s#b7e)t are distrib#ted' the (ro(osition th#s )onstit#ted is )ontrary to tr#th/ no a$$ir"ation !ill' #nder s#)h )ir)#"stan)es' be tr#e. The (ro(osition %e&ery "an is e&ery ani"al% is an e,a"(le o$ this ty(e. An a$$ir"ation is o((osed to a denial in the sense !hi)h I denote by the ter" %)ontradi)tory%' !hen' !hile the s#b7e)t re"ains the sa"e' the a$$ir"ation is o$ #ni&ersal )hara)ter and the denial is not. The a$$ir"ation %e&ery "an is !hite% is the )ontradi)tory o$ the denial %not e&ery "an is !hite%' or again' the (ro(osition %no "an is !hite% is the )ontradi)tory o$ the (ro(osition %so"e "en are !hite%. B#t (ro(ositions are o((osed as )ontraries !hen both the a$$ir"ation and the denial are #ni&ersal' as in the senten)es %e&ery "an is !hite%' %no "an is !hite%' %e&ery "an is 7#st%' %no "an is 7#st%. 9e see that in a (air o$ this sort both (ro(ositions )annot be tr#e' b#t the )ontradi)tories o$ a (air o$ )ontraries )an so"eti"es both be tr#e !ith re$eren)e to the sa"e s#b7e)t/ $or instan)e %not e&ery "an is !hite% and so"e "en are !hite% are both tr#e. O$ s#)h

)orres(onding (ositi&e and negati&e (ro(ositions as re$er to #ni&ersals and ha&e a #ni&ersal )hara)ter' one "#st be tr#e and the other $alse. This is the )ase also !hen the re$eren)e is to indi&id#als' as in the (ro(ositions %*o)rates is !hite%' %*o)rates is not !hite%. 9hen' on the other hand' the re$eren)e is to #ni&ersals' b#t the (ro(ositions are not #ni&ersal' it is not al!ays the )ase that one is tr#e and the other $alse' $or it is (ossible to state tr#ly that "an is !hite and that "an is not !hite and that "an is bea#ti$#l and that "an is not bea#ti$#l/ $or i$ a "an is de$or"ed he is the re&erse o$ bea#ti$#l' also i$ he is (rogressing to!ards bea#ty he is not yet bea#ti$#l. This state"ent "ight see" at $irst sight to )arry !ith it a )ontradi)tion' o!ing to the $a)t that the (ro(osition %"an is not !hite% a((ears to be e5#i&alent to the (ro(osition %no "an is !hite%. This' ho!e&er' is not the )ase' nor are they ne)essarily at the sa"e ti"e tr#e or $alse. It is e&ident also that the denial )orres(onding to a single a$$ir"ation is itsel$ single/ $or the denial "#st deny 7#st that !hi)h the a$$ir"ation a$$ir"s )on)erning the sa"e s#b7e)t' and "#st )orres(ond !ith the a$$ir"ation both in the #ni&ersal or (arti)#lar )hara)ter o$ the s#b7e)t and in the distrib#ted or #ndistrib#ted sense in !hi)h it is #nderstood. or instan)e' the a$$ir"ation %*o)rates is !hite% has its (ro(er denial in the (ro(osition %*o)rates is not !hite%. I$ anything else be negati&ely (redi)ated o$ the s#b7e)t or i$ anything else be the s#b7e)t tho#gh the (redi)ate re"ain the sa"e' the denial !ill not be the denial (ro(er to that a$$ir"ation' b#t on that is distin)t. The denial (ro(er to the a$$ir"ation %e&ery "an is !hite% is %not e&ery "an is !hite%/ that (ro(er to the a$$ir"ation %so"e "en are !hite% is %no "an is !hite%' !hile that (ro(er to the a$$ir"ation %"an is !hite% is %"an is not !hite%. 9e ha&e sho!n $#rther that a single denial is )ontradi)torily o((osite to a single a$$ir"ation and !e ha&e e,(lained !hi)h these are/ !e ha&e also stated that )ontrary are distin)t $ro" )ontradi)tory (ro(ositions and !hi)h the )ontrary are/ also that !ith regard to a (air o$ o((osite (ro(ositions it is not al!ays the )ase that one is tr#e and the other $alse. 9e ha&e (ointed o#t' "oreo&er' !hat the reason o$ this is and #nder !hat )ir)#"stan)es the tr#th o$ the one in&ol&es the $alsity o$ the other. = An a$$ir"ation or denial is single' i$ it indi)ates so"e one $a)t abo#t so"e one s#b7e)t/ it "atters not !hether the s#b7e)t is #ni&ersal and !hether the state"ent has a #ni&ersal )hara)ter' or !hether this is not so. *#)h single (ro(ositions are: %e&ery "an is !hite%' %not e&ery "an is !hite%/%"an is !hite%'%"an is not !hite%/ %no "an is !hite%' %so"e "en are !hite%/ (ro&ided the !ord %!hite% has one "eaning. I$' on the other hand' one !ord has t!o "eanings !hi)h do not )o"bine to $or" one' the a$$ir"ation is not single. or instan)e' i$ a "an sho#ld establish the sy"bol %gar"ent% as signi$i)ant both o$ a horse and o$ a "an' the (ro(osition %gar"ent is !hite% !o#ld not be a single a$$ir"ation' nor its o((osite a single denial. or it is e5#i&alent to the (ro(osition %horse and "an are !hite%' !hi)h' again' is e5#i&alent to the t!o (ro(ositions %horse is !hite%' %"an is !hite%. I$' then' these t!o (ro(ositions ha&e "ore than a single signi$i)an)e' and do not $or" a single (ro(osition' it is (lain that the $irst (ro(osition either has "ore than one signi$i)an)e or else has none/ $or a (arti)#lar "an is not a horse. This' then' is another instan)e o$ those (ro(ositions o$ !hi)h both the (ositi&e and the negati&e $or"s "ay be tr#e or $alse si"#ltaneo#sly.

> In the )ase o$ that !hi)h is or !hi)h has ta+en (la)e' (ro(ositions' !hether (ositi&e or negati&e' "#st be tr#e or $alse. Again' in the )ase o$ a (air o$ )ontradi)tories' either !hen the s#b7e)t is #ni&ersal and the (ro(ositions are o$ a #ni&ersal )hara)ter' or !hen it is indi&id#al' as has been said'% one o$ the t!o "#st be tr#e and the other $alse/ !hereas !hen the s#b7e)t is #ni&ersal' b#t the (ro(ositions are not o$ a #ni&ersal )hara)ter' there is no s#)h ne)essity. 9e ha&e dis)#ssed this ty(e also in a (re&io#s )ha(ter. 9hen the s#b7e)t' ho!e&er' is indi&id#al' and that !hi)h is (redi)ated o$ it relates to the $#t#re' the )ase is altered. or i$ all (ro(ositions !hether (ositi&e or negati&e are either tr#e or $alse' then any gi&en (redi)ate "#st either belong to the s#b7e)t or not' so that i$ one "an a$$ir"s that an e&ent o$ a gi&en )hara)ter !ill ta+e (la)e and another denies it' it is (lain that the state"ent o$ the one !ill )orres(ond !ith reality and that o$ the other !ill not. or the (redi)ate )annot both belong and not belong to the s#b7e)t at one and the sa"e ti"e !ith regard to the $#t#re. Th#s' i$ it is tr#e to say that a thing is !hite' it "#st ne)essarily be !hite/ i$ the re&erse (ro(osition is tr#e' it !ill o$ ne)essity not be !hite. Again' i$ it is !hite' the (ro(osition stating that it is !hite !as tr#e/ i$ it is not !hite' the (ro(osition to the o((osite e$$e)t !as tr#e. And i$ it is not !hite' the "an !ho states that it is "a+ing a $alse state"ent/ and i$ the "an !ho states that it is !hite is "a+ing a $alse state"ent' it $ollo!s that it is not !hite. It "ay there$ore be arg#ed that it is ne)essary that a$$ir"ations or denials "#st be either tr#e or $alse. No! i$ this be so' nothing is or ta+es (la)e $ort#ito#sly' either in the (resent or in the $#t#re' and there are no real alternati&es/ e&erything ta+es (la)e o$ ne)essity and is $i,ed. or either he that a$$ir"s that it !ill ta+e (la)e or he that denies this is in )orres(onden)e !ith $a)t' !hereas i$ things did not ta+e (la)e o$ ne)essity' an e&ent "ight 7#st as easily not ha((en as ha((en/ $or the "eaning o$ the !ord %$ort#ito#s% !ith regard to (resent or $#t#re e&ents is that reality is so )onstit#ted that it "ay iss#e in either o$ t!o o((osite dire)tions. Again' i$ a thing is !hite no!' it !as tr#e be$ore to say that it !o#ld be !hite' so that o$ anything that has ta+en (la)e it !as al!ays tr#e to say %it is% or %it !ill be%. B#t i$ it !as al!ays tr#e to say that a thing is or !ill be' it is not (ossible that it sho#ld not be or not be abo#t to be' and !hen a thing )annot not )o"e to be' it is i"(ossible that it sho#ld not )o"e to be' and !hen it is i"(ossible that it sho#ld not )o"e to be' it "#st )o"e to be. All' then' that is abo#t to be "#st o$ ne)essity ta+e (la)e. It res#lts $ro" this that nothing is #n)ertain or $ort#ito#s' $or i$ it !ere $ort#ito#s it !o#ld not be ne)essary. Again' to say that neither the a$$ir"ation nor the denial is tr#e' "aintaining' let #s say' that an e&ent neither !ill ta+e (la)e nor !ill not ta+e (la)e' is to ta+e #( a (osition i"(ossible to de$end. In the $irst (la)e' tho#gh $a)ts sho#ld (ro&e the one (ro(osition $alse' the o((osite !o#ld still be #ntr#e. *e)ondly' i$ it !as tr#e to say that a thing !as both !hite and large' both these 5#alities "#st ne)essarily belong to it/ and i$ they !ill belong to it the ne,t day' they "#st ne)essarily belong to it the ne,t day. B#t i$ an e&ent is neither to ta+e (la)e nor not to ta+e (la)e the ne,t day' the ele"ent o$ )han)e !ill be eli"inated. or e,a"(le' it !o#ld be ne)essary that a sea0$ight sho#ld neither ta+e (la)e nor $ail to ta+e (la)e on the ne,t day. These a!+!ard res#lts and others o$ the sa"e +ind $ollo!' i$ it is an irre$ragable la! that o$ e&ery (air o$ )ontradi)tory (ro(ositions' !hether they ha&e regard to #ni&ersals and are stated as #ni&ersally a((li)able' or !hether they ha&e regard to indi&id#als' one "#st be tr#e and the other $alse' and that there are no real alternati&es' b#t that all that is or ta+es (la)e is the o#t)o"e o$

ne)essity. There !o#ld be no need to deliberate or to ta+e tro#ble' on the s#((osition that i$ !e sho#ld ado(t a )ertain )o#rse' a )ertain res#lt !o#ld $ollo!' !hile' i$ !e did not' the res#lt !o#ld not $ollo!. or a "an "ay (redi)t an e&ent ten tho#sand years be$orehand' and another "ay (redi)t the re&erse/ that !hi)h !as tr#ly (redi)ted at the "o"ent in the (ast !ill o$ ne)essity ta+e (la)e in the $#llness o$ ti"e. #rther' it "a+es no di$$eren)e !hether (eo(le ha&e or ha&e not a)t#ally "ade the )ontradi)tory state"ents. or it is "ani$est that the )ir)#"stan)es are not in$l#en)ed by the $a)t o$ an a$$ir"ation or denial on the (art o$ anyone. or e&ents !ill not ta+e (la)e or $ail to ta+e (la)e be)a#se it !as stated that they !o#ld or !o#ld not ta+e (la)e' nor is this any "ore the )ase i$ the (redi)tion dates ba)+ ten tho#sand years or any other s(a)e o$ ti"e. 9here$ore' i$ thro#gh all ti"e the nat#re o$ things !as so )onstit#ted that a (redi)tion abo#t an e&ent !as tr#e' then thro#gh all ti"e it !as ne)essary that that sho#ld $ind $#l$ill"ent/ and !ith regard to all e&ents' )ir)#"stan)es ha&e al!ays been s#)h that their o))#rren)e is a "atter o$ ne)essity. or that o$ !hi)h so"eone has said tr#ly that it !ill be' )annot $ail to ta+e (la)e/ and o$ that !hi)h ta+es (la)e' it !as al!ays tr#e to say that it !o#ld be. 2et this &ie! leads to an i"(ossible )on)l#sion/ $or !e see that both deliberation and a)tion are )a#sati&e !ith regard to the $#t#re' and that' to s(ea+ "ore generally' in those things !hi)h are not )ontin#o#sly a)t#al there is (otentiality in either dire)tion. *#)h things "ay either be or not be/ e&ents also there$ore "ay either ta+e (la)e or not ta+e (la)e. There are "any ob&io#s instan)es o$ this. It is (ossible that this )oat "ay be )#t in hal$' and yet it "ay not be )#t in hal$' b#t !ear o#t $irst. In the sa"e !ay' it is (ossible that it sho#ld not be )#t in hal$/ #nless this !ere so' it !o#ld not be (ossible that it sho#ld !ear o#t $irst. *o it is there$ore !ith all other e&ents !hi)h (ossess this +ind o$ (otentiality. It is there$ore (lain that it is not o$ ne)essity that e&erything is or ta+es (la)e/ b#t in so"e instan)es there are real alternati&es' in !hi)h )ase the a$$ir"ation is no "ore tr#e and no "ore $alse than the denial/ !hile so"e e,hibit a (redis(osition and general tenden)y in one dire)tion or the other' and yet )an iss#e in the o((osite dire)tion by e,)e(tion. No! that !hi)h is "#st needs be !hen it is' and that !hi)h is not "#st needs not be !hen it is not. 2et it )annot be said !itho#t 5#ali$i)ation that all e,isten)e and non0e,isten)e is the o#t)o"e o$ ne)essity. or there is a di$$eren)e bet!een saying that that !hi)h is' !hen it is' "#st needs be' and si"(ly saying that all that is "#st needs be' and si"ilarly in the )ase o$ that !hi)h is not. In the )ase' also' o$ t!o )ontradi)tory (ro(ositions this holds good. E&erything "#st either be or not be' !hether in the (resent or in the $#t#re' b#t it is not al!ays (ossible to disting#ish and state deter"inately !hi)h o$ these alternati&es "#st ne)essarily )o"e abo#t. 3et "e ill#strate. A sea0$ight "#st either ta+e (la)e to0"orro! or not' b#t it is not ne)essary that it sho#ld ta+e (la)e to0"orro!' neither is it ne)essary that it sho#ld not ta+e (la)e' yet it is ne)essary that it either sho#ld or sho#ld not ta+e (la)e to0"orro!. *in)e (ro(ositions )orres(ond !ith $a)ts' it is e&ident that !hen in $#t#re e&ents there is a real alternati&e' and a (otentiality in )ontrary dire)tions' the )orres(onding a$$ir"ation and denial ha&e the sa"e )hara)ter. This is the )ase !ith regard to that !hi)h is not al!ays e,istent or not al!ays none,istent. One o$ the t!o (ro(ositions in s#)h instan)es "#st be tr#e and the other $alse' b#t !e )annot say deter"inately that this or that is $alse' b#t "#st lea&e the alternati&e #nde)ided. One "ay indeed be "ore li+ely to be tr#e than the other' b#t it )annot be either a)t#ally tr#e or a)t#ally $alse. It is there$ore (lain that it is not ne)essary that o$ an a$$ir"ation and a denial one sho#ld be tr#e and the other $alse. or in the )ase o$

that !hi)h e,ists (otentially' b#t not a)t#ally' the r#le !hi)h a((lies to that !hi)h e,ists a)t#ally does not hold good. The )ase is rather as !e ha&e indi)ated. 10 An a$$ir"ation is the state"ent o$ a $a)t !ith regard to a s#b7e)t' and this s#b7e)t is either a no#n or that !hi)h has no na"e/ the s#b7e)t and (redi)ate in an a$$ir"ation "#st ea)h denote a single thing. I ha&e already e,(lained% !hat is "eant by a no#n and by that !hi)h has no na"e/ $or I stated that the e,(ression %not0"an% !as not a no#n' in the (ro(er sense o$ the !ord' b#t an inde$inite no#n' denoting as it does in a )ertain sense a single thing. *i"ilarly the e,(ression %does not en7oy health% is not a &erb (ro(er' b#t an inde$inite &erb. E&ery a$$ir"ation' then' and e&ery denial' !ill )onsist o$ a no#n and a &erb' either de$inite or inde$inite. There )an be no a$$ir"ation or denial !itho#t a &erb/ $or the e,(ressions %is%' %!ill be%' %!as%' %is )o"ing to be%' and the li+e are &erbs a))ording to o#r de$inition' sin)e besides their s(e)i$i) "eaning they )on&ey the notion o$ ti"e. Th#s the (ri"ary a$$ir"ation and denial are %as $ollo!s: %"an is%' %"an is not%. Ne,t to these' there are the (ro(ositions: %not0"an is%' %not0"an is not%. Again !e ha&e the (ro(ositions: %e&ery "an is' %e&ery "an is not%' %all that is not0"an is%' %all that is not0"an is not%. The sa"e )lassi$i)ation holds good !ith regard to s#)h (eriods o$ ti"e as lie o#tside the (resent. 9hen the &erb %is% is #sed as a third ele"ent in the senten)e' there )an be (ositi&e and negati&e (ro(ositions o$ t!o sorts. Th#s in the senten)e %"an is 7#st% the &erb %is% is #sed as a third ele"ent' )all it &erb or no#n' !hi)h yo# !ill. o#r (ro(ositions' there$ore' instead o$ t!o )an be $or"ed !ith these "aterials. T!o o$ the $o#r' as regards their a$$ir"ation and denial' )orres(ond in their logi)al se5#en)e !ith the (ro(ositions !hi)h deal !ith a )ondition o$ (ri&ation/ the other t!o do not )orres(ond !ith these. I "ean that the &erb %is% is added either to the ter" %7#st% or to the ter" %not07#st%' and t!o negati&e (ro(ositions are $or"ed in the sa"e !ay. Th#s !e ha&e the $o#r (ro(ositions. Re$eren)e to the s#b7oined table !ill "a+e "atters )lear:

A. A$$ir"ation Man is 7#st @ A ?. ?enial Man is not not07#st B A @

B. ?enial Man is not 7#st

C. A$$ir"ation Man is not07#st

4ere %is% and %is not% are added either to %7#st% or to %not07#st%. This then is the (ro(er s)he"e $or these (ro(ositions' as has been said in the Analyti)s. The sa"e r#le holds good' i$ the s#b7e)t is distrib#ted. Th#s !e ha&e the table: A%. A$$ir"ation E&ery "an is 7#st B%. ?enial Not e&ery "an is 7#st

@ B

?%. ?enial A @ C%. A$$ir"ation Not e&ery "an is not07#st E&ery "an is not07#st 2et here it is not (ossible' in the sa"e !ay as in the $or"er )ase' that the (ro(ositions 7oined in the table by a diagonal line sho#ld both be tr#e/ tho#gh #nder )ertain )ir)#"stan)es this is the )ase.

9e ha&e th#s set o#t t!o (airs o$ o((osite (ro(ositions/ there are "oreo&er t!o other (airs' i$ a ter" be )on7oined !ith %not0"an%' the latter $or"ing a +ind o$ s#b7e)t. Th#s: A.C Not0"an is 7#st 0 @ ?.C A Not0"an is not not07#st B A @ C.C Not0"an is not07#st B.C Not0"an is not 7#st

This is an e,ha#sti&e en#"eration o$ all the (airs o$ o((osite (ro(ositions that )an (ossibly be $ra"ed. This last gro#( sho#ld re"ain distin)t $ro" those !hi)h (re)eded it' sin)e it e"(loys as its s#b7e)t the e,(ression %not0"an%. 9hen the &erb %is% does not $it the str#)t#re o$ the senten)e D$or instan)e' !hen the &erbs %!al+s%' %en7oys health% are #sedE' that s)he"e a((lies' !hi)h a((lied !hen the !ord %is% !as added. Th#s !e ha&e the (ro(ositions: %e&ery "an en7oys health%' %e&ery "an does0not0en7oy0health%' %all that is not0"an en7oys health%' %all that is not0"an does0not0en7oy0health%. 9e "#st not in these (ro(ositions #se the e,(ression %not e&ery "an%. The negati&e "#st be atta)hed to the !ord %"an%' $or the !ord %e&ery% does not gi&e to the s#b7e)t a #ni&ersal signi$i)an)e' b#t i"(lies that' as a s#b7e)t' it is distrib#ted. This is (lain $ro" the $ollo!ing (airs: %"an en7oys health%' %"an does not en7oy health%/ %not0"an en7oys health%' %not "an does not en7oy health%. These (ro(ositions di$$er $ro" the $or"er in being inde$inite and not #ni&ersal in )hara)ter. Th#s the ad7e)ti&es %e&ery% and no additional signi$i)an)e e,)e(t that the s#b7e)t' !hether in a (ositi&e or in a negati&e senten)e' is distrib#ted. The rest o$ the senten)e' there$ore' !ill in ea)h )ase be the sa"e. *in)e the )ontrary o$ the (ro(osition %e&ery ani"al is 7#st% is %no ani"al is 7#st%' it is (lain that these t!o (ro(ositions !ill ne&er both be tr#e at the sa"e ti"e or !ith re$eren)e to the sa"e s#b7e)t. *o"eti"es' ho!e&er' the )ontradi)tories o$ these )ontraries !ill both be tr#e' as in the instan)e be$ore #s: the (ro(ositions %not e&ery ani"al is 7#st% and %so"e ani"als are 7#st% are both tr#e. #rther' the (ro(osition %no "an is 7#st% $ollo!s $ro" the (ro(osition %e&ery "an is not 7#st% and the (ro(osition %not e&ery "an is not 7#st%' !hi)h is the o((osite o$ %e&ery "an is not07#st%' $ollo!s $ro" the (ro(osition %so"e "en are 7#st%/ $or i$ this be tr#e' there "#st be so"e 7#st "en. It is e&ident' also' that !hen the s#b7e)t is indi&id#al' i$ a 5#estion is as+ed and the negati&e ans!er is the tr#e one' a )ertain (ositi&e (ro(osition is also tr#e. Th#s' i$ the 5#estion !ere as+ed *o)rates !iseF% and the negati&e ans!er !ere the tr#e one' the (ositi&e in$eren)e %Then *o)rates is #n!ise% is )orre)t. B#t no s#)h in$eren)e is )orre)t in the )ase o$ #ni&ersals' b#t rather a negati&e (ro(osition. or instan)e' i$ to the 5#estion %Is e&ery "an !iseF% the ans!er is %no%' the in$eren)e %Then e&ery "an is #n!ise% is $alse. B#t #nder these )ir)#"stan)es the in$eren)e %Not e&ery "an is !ise% is )orre)t. This last is the )ontradi)tory' the $or"er the )ontrary. Negati&e e,(ressions' !hi)h )onsist o$ an inde$inite no#n or (redi)ate' s#)h as %not0"an% or %not07#st%' "ay see" to be denials )ontaining neither no#n nor &erb in the (ro(er sense o$ the !ords. B#t they are not. or a denial "#st al!ays be either tr#e or $alse' and he that #ses the e,(ression %not "an%' i$ nothing "ore be added' is not nearer b#t rather $#rther $ro" "a+ing a tr#e or a $alse state"ent than he !ho #ses the e,(ression %"an%. The (ro(ositions %e&erything that is not "an is 7#st%' and the )ontradi)tory o$ this' are not e5#i&alent to any o$ the other (ro(ositions/ on the other hand' the (ro(osition %e&erything that is not "an is not 7#st% is e5#i&alent to the (ro(osition %nothing that is

not "an is 7#st%. The )on&ersion o$ the (osition o$ s#b7e)t and (redi)ate in a senten)e in&ol&es no di$$eren)e in its "eaning. Th#s !e say %"an is !hite% and %!hite is "an%. I$ these !ere not e5#i&alent' there !o#ld be "ore than one )ontradi)tory to the sa"e (ro(osition' !hereas it has been de"onstrated% that ea)h (ro(osition has one (ro(er )ontradi)tory and one only. or o$ the (ro(osition %"an is !hite% the a((ro(riate )ontradi)tory is %"an is not !hite%' and o$ the (ro(osition %!hite is "an%' i$ its "eaning be di$$erent' the )ontradi)tory !ill either be %!hite is not not0"an% or %!hite is not "an%. No! the $or"er o$ these is the )ontradi)tory o$ the (ro(osition %!hite is not0"an%' and the latter o$ these is the )ontradi)tory o$ the (ro(osition %"an is !hite%/ th#s there !ill be t!o )ontradi)tories to one (ro(osition. It is e&ident' there$ore' that the in&ersion o$ the relati&e (osition o$ s#b7e)t and (redi)ate does not a$$e)t the sense o$ a$$ir"ations and denials. 11 There is no #nity abo#t an a$$ir"ation or denial !hi)h' either (ositi&ely or negati&ely' (redi)ates one thing o$ "any s#b7e)ts' or "any things o$ the sa"e s#b7e)t' #nless that !hi)h is indi)ated by the "any is really so"e one thing. do not a((ly this !ord %one% to those things !hi)h' tho#gh they ha&e a single re)ogni.ed na"e' yet do not )o"bine to $or" a #nity. Th#s' "an "ay be an ani"al' and bi(ed' and do"esti)ated' b#t these three (redi)ates )o"bine to $or" a #nity. On the other hand' the (redi)ates %!hite%' %"an%' and %!al+ing% do not th#s )o"bine. Neither' there$ore' i$ these three $or" the s#b7e)t o$ an a$$ir"ation' nor i$ they $or" its (redi)ate' is there any #nity abo#t that a$$ir"ation. In both )ases the #nity is ling#isti)' b#t not real. I$ there$ore the diale)ti)al 5#estion is a re5#est $or an ans!er' i.e. either $or the ad"ission o$ a (re"iss or $or the ad"ission o$ one o$ t!o )ontradi)tories0and the (re"iss is itsel$ al!ays one o$ t!o )ontradi)tories0the ans!er to s#)h a 5#estion as )ontains the abo&e (redi)ates )annot be a single (ro(osition. or as I ha&e e,(lained in the To(i)s' 5#estion is not a single one' e&en i$ the ans!er as+ed $or is tr#e. At the sa"e ti"e it is (lain that a 5#estion o$ the $or" %!hat is itF% is not a diale)ti)al 5#estion' $or a diale)ti)al 5#estioner "#st by the $or" o$ his 5#estion gi&e his o((onent the )han)e o$ anno#n)ing one o$ t!o alternati&es' !hi)he&er he !ishes. 4e "#st there$ore (#t the 5#estion into a "ore de$inite $or"' and in5#ire' e.g.. !hether "an has s#)h and s#)h a )hara)teristi) or not. *o"e )o"binations o$ (redi)ates are s#)h that the se(arate (redi)ates #nite to $or" a single (redi)ate. 3et #s )onsider #nder !hat )onditions this is and is not (ossible. 9e "ay either state in t!o se(arate (ro(ositions that "an is an ani"al and that "an is a bi(ed' or !e "ay )o"bine the t!o' and state that "an is an ani"al !ith t!o $eet. *i"ilarly !e "ay #se %"an% and %!hite% as se(arate (redi)ates' or #nite the" into one. 2et i$ a "an is a shoe"a+er and is also good' !e )annot )onstr#)t a )o"(osite (ro(osition and say that he is a good shoe"a+er. or i$' !hene&er t!o se(arate (redi)ates tr#ly belong to a s#b7e)t' it $ollo!s that the (redi)ate res#lting $ro" their )o"bination also tr#ly belongs to the s#b7e)t' "any abs#rd res#lts ens#e. or instan)e' a "an is "an and !hite. There$ore' i$ (redi)ates "ay al!ays be )o"bined' he is a !hite "an. Again' i$ the (redi)ate %!hite% belongs to hi"' then the )o"bination o$ that (redi)ate !ith the $or"er )o"(osite (redi)ate !ill be (er"issible. Th#s it !ill be right to say that he is a !hite "an so on inde$initely. Or' again' !e "ay )o"bine the (redi)ates %"#si)al%' %!hite%' and %!al+ing%' and these "ay be )o"bined "any ti"es. *i"ilarly !e "ay say that *o)rates is *o)rates and a "an' and that there$ore he is the "an *o)rates' or that *o)rates is a "an and a

bi(ed' and that there$ore he is a t!o0$ooted "an. Th#s it is "ani$est that i$ "an states #n)onditionally that (redi)ates )an al!ays be )o"bined' "any abs#rd )onse5#en)es ens#e. 9e !ill no! e,(lain !hat o#ght to be laid do!n. Those (redi)ates' and ter"s $or"ing the s#b7e)t o$ (redi)ation' !hi)h are a))idental either to the sa"e s#b7e)t or to one another' do not )o"bine to $or" a #nity. Ta+e the (ro(osition %"an is !hite o$ )o"(le,ion and "#si)al%. 9hiteness and being "#si)al do not )oales)e to $or" a #nity' $or they belong only a))identally to the sa"e s#b7e)t. Nor yet' i$ it !ere tr#e to say that that !hi)h is !hite is "#si)al' !o#ld the ter"s %"#si)al% and %!hite% $or" a #nity' $or it is only in)identally that that !hi)h is "#si)al is !hite/ the )o"bination o$ the t!o !ill' there$ore' not $or" a #nity. Th#s' again' !hereas' i$ a "an is both good and a shoe"a+er' !e )annot )o"bine the t!o (ro(ositions and say si"(ly that he is a good shoe"a+er' !e are' at the sa"e ti"e' able to )o"bine the (redi)ates %ani"al% and %bi(ed% and say that a "an is an ani"al !ith t!o $eet' $or these (redi)ates are not a))idental. Those (redi)ates' again' )annot $or" a #nity' o$ !hi)h the one is i"(li)it in the other: th#s !e )annot )o"bine the (redi)ate %!hite% again and again !ith that !hi)h already )ontains the notion %!hite%' nor is it right to )all a "an an ani"al0"an or a t!o0$ooted "an/ $or the notions %ani"al% and %bi(ed% are i"(li)it in the !ord %"an%. On the other hand' it is (ossible to (redi)ate a ter" si"(ly o$ any one instan)e' and to say that so"e one (arti)#lar "an is a "an or that so"e one !hite "an is a !hite "an. 2et this is not al!ays (ossible: indeed' !hen in the ad7#n)t there is so"e o((osite !hi)h in&ol&es a )ontradi)tion' the (redi)ation o$ the si"(le ter" is i"(ossible. Th#s it is not right to )all a dead "an a "an. 9hen' ho!e&er' this is not the )ase' it is not i"(ossible. 2et the $a)ts o$ the )ase "ight rather be stated th#s: !hen so"e s#)h o((osite ele"ents are (resent' resol#tion is ne&er (ossible' b#t !hen they are not (resent' resol#tion is ne&ertheless not al!ays (ossible. Ta+e the (ro(osition %4o"er is so0and0so%' say %a (oet%/ does it $ollo! that 4o"er is' or does it notF The &erb %is% is here #sed o$ 4o"er only in)identally' the (ro(osition being that 4o"er is a (oet' not that he is' in the inde(endent sense o$ the !ord. Th#s' in the )ase o$ those (redi)ations !hi)h ha&e !ithin the" no )ontradi)tion !hen the no#ns are e,(anded into de$initions' and !herein the (redi)ates belong to the s#b7e)t in their o!n (ro(er sense and not in any indire)t !ay' the indi&id#al "ay be the s#b7e)t o$ the si"(le (ro(ositions as !ell as o$ the )o"(osite. B#t in the )ase o$ that !hi)h is not' it is not tr#e to say that be)a#se it is the ob7e)t o$ o(inion' it is/ $or the o(inion held abo#t it is that it is not' not that it is. 11 As these distin)tions ha&e been "ade' !e "#st )onsider the "#t#al relation o$ those a$$ir"ations and denials !hi)h assert or deny (ossibility or )ontingen)y' i"(ossibility or ne)essity: $or the s#b7e)t is not !itho#t di$$i)#lty. 9e ad"it that o$ )o"(osite e,(ressions those are )ontradi)tory ea)h to ea)h !hi)h ha&e the &erb %to be% its (ositi&e and negati&e $or" res(e)ti&ely. Th#s the )ontradi)tory o$ the (ro(osition %"an is% is %"an is not%' not %not0"an is%' and the )ontradi)tory o$ %"an is !hite% is %"an is not !hite%' not %"an is not0!hite%. or other!ise' sin)e either the (ositi&e or the negati&e (ro(osition is tr#e o$ any s#b7e)t' it !ill t#rn o#t tr#e to say that a (ie)e o$ !ood is a "an that is not !hite. No! i$ this is the )ase' in those (ro(ositions !hi)h do not )ontain the &erb %to be% the &erb !hi)h ta+es its (la)e !ill e,er)ise the sa"e $#n)tion. Th#s the )ontradi)tory o$ %"an !al+s% is %"an does not !al+%' not %not0"an !al+s%/ $or to say %"an !al+s%

"erely e5#i&alent to saying %"an is !al+ing%. I$ then this r#le is #ni&ersal' the )ontradi)tory o$ %it "ay be% is "ay not be%' not %it )annot be%. No! it a((ears that the sa"e thing both "ay and "ay not be/ $or instan)e' e&erything that "ay be )#t or "ay !al+ "ay also es)a(e )#tting and re$rain $ro" !al+ing/ and the reason is that those things that ha&e (otentiality in this sense are not al!ays a)t#al. In s#)h )ases' both the (ositi&e and the negati&e (ro(ositions !ill be tr#e/ $or that !hi)h is )a(able o$ !al+ing or o$ being seen has also a (otentiality in the o((osite dire)tion. B#t sin)e it is i"(ossible that )ontradi)tory (ro(ositions sho#ld both be tr#e o$ the sa"e s#b7e)t' it $ollo!s that% it "ay not be% is not the )ontradi)tory o$ %it "ay be%. or it is a logi)al )onse5#en)e o$ !hat !e ha&e said' either that the sa"e (redi)ate )an be both a((li)able and ina((li)able to one and the sa"e s#b7e)t at the sa"e ti"e' or that it is not by the addition o$ the &erbs %be% and %not be%' res(e)ti&ely' that (ositi&e and negati&e (ro(ositions are $or"ed. I$ the $or"er o$ these alternati&es "#st be re7e)ted' !e "#st )hoose the latter. The )ontradi)tory' then' o$ %it "ay be% is %it )annot be%. The sa"e r#le a((lies to the (ro(osition %it is )ontingent that it sho#ld be%/ the )ontradi)tory o$ this is %it is not )ontingent that it sho#ld be%. The si"ilar (ro(ositions' s#)h as %it is ne)essary% and %it is i"(ossible%' "ay be dealt !ith in the sa"e "anner. or it )o"es abo#t that 7#st as in the $or"er instan)es the &erbs %is% and %is not% !ere added to the s#b7e)t0"atter o$ the senten)e %!hite% and %"an%' so here %that it sho#ld be% and %that it sho#ld not be% are the s#b7e)t0"atter and %is (ossible%' %is )ontingent%' are added. These indi)ate that a )ertain thing is or is not (ossible' 7#st as in the $or"er instan)es %is% and %is not% indi)ated that )ertain things !ere or !ere not the )ase. The )ontradi)tory' then' o$ %it "ay not be% is not %it )annot be%' b#t %it )annot not be%' and the )ontradi)tory o$ %it "ay be% is not %it "ay not be%' b#t )annot be%. Th#s the (ro(ositions %it "ay be% and %it "ay not be% a((ear ea)h to i"(ly the other: $or' sin)e these t!o (ro(ositions are not )ontradi)tory' the sa"e thing both "ay and "ay not be. B#t the (ro(ositions %it "ay be% and %it )annot be% )an ne&er be tr#e o$ the sa"e s#b7e)t at the sa"e ti"e' $or they are )ontradi)tory. Nor )an the (ro(ositions %it "ay not be% and %it )annot not be% be at on)e tr#e o$ the sa"e s#b7e)t. The (ro(ositions !hi)h ha&e to do !ith ne)essity are go&erned by the sa"e (rin)i(le. The )ontradi)tory o$ %it is ne)essary that it sho#ld be%' is not %it is ne)essary that it sho#ld not be'% b#t %it is not ne)essary that it sho#ld be%' and the )ontradi)tory o$ %it is ne)essary that it sho#ld not be% is %it is not ne)essary that it sho#ld not be%. Again' the )ontradi)tory o$ %it is i"(ossible that it sho#ld be% is not %it is i"(ossible that it sho#ld not be% b#t %it is not i"(ossible that it sho#ld be%' and the )ontradi)tory o$ %it is i"(ossible that it sho#ld not be% is %it is not i"(ossible that it sho#ld not be%. To generali.e' !e "#st' as has been stated' de$ine the )la#ses %that it sho#ld be% and %that it sho#ld not be% as the s#b7e)t0"atter o$ the (ro(ositions' and in "a+ing these ter"s into a$$ir"ations and denials !e "#st )o"bine the" !ith %that it sho#ld be% and %that it sho#ld not be% res(e)ti&ely. 9e "#st )onsider the $ollo!ing (airs as )ontradi)tory (ro(ositions: It It It It It "ay be. is )ontingent. is i"(ossible. is ne)essary. is tr#e. It It It It It )annot is not is not is not is not 13 be. )ontingent. i"(ossible. ne)essary. tr#e.

3ogi)al se5#en)es $ollo! in d#e )o#rse !hen !e ha&e arranged the (ro(ositions th#s. ro" the (ro(osition %it "ay be% it $ollo!s that it is )ontingent' and the relation is re)i(ro)al. It $ollo!s also that it is not i"(ossible and not ne)essary. ro" the (ro(osition %it "ay not be% or %it is )ontingent that it sho#ld not be% it $ollo!s that it is not ne)essary that it sho#ld not be and that it is not i"(ossible that it sho#ld not be. ro" the (ro(osition %it )annot be% or %it is not )ontingent% it $ollo!s that it is ne)essary that it sho#ld not be and that it is i"(ossible that it sho#ld be. ro" the (ro(osition %it )annot not be% or %it is not )ontingent that it sho#ld not be% it $ollo!s that it is ne)essary that it sho#ld be and that it is i"(ossible that it sho#ld not be. 3et #s )onsider these state"ents by the hel( o$ a table: A. It "ay be. It is )ontingent. It is not i"(ossible that it sho#ld be. It is not ne)essary that it sho#ld be. C. It "ay not be. It is )ontingent that it sho#ld not be. It is not i"(ossible that it sho#ld not be. It is not ne)essary that it sho#ld not be. B. It )annot be. It is not )ontingent. It is i"(ossible that it sho#ld be. It is ne)essary that it sho#ld not be. ?. It )annot not be. It is not )ontingent that it sho#ld not be. It is i"(ossible thatit sho#ld not be. It is ne)essary that it sho#ld be.

No! the (ro(ositions %it is i"(ossible that it sho#ld be% and %it is not i"(ossible that it sho#ld be% are )onse5#ent #(on the (ro(ositions %it "ay be%' %it is )ontingent%' and %it )annot be%' %it is not )ontingent%' the )ontradi)tories #(on the )ontradi)tories. B#t there is in&ersion. The negati&e o$ the (ro(osition %it is i"(ossible% is )onse5#ent #(on the (ro(osition %it "ay be% and the )orres(onding (ositi&e in the $irst )ase #(on the negati&e in the se)ond. or %it is i"(ossible% is a (ositi&e (ro(osition and %it is not i"(ossible% is negati&e. 9e "#st in&estigate the relation s#bsisting bet!een these (ro(ositions and those !hi)h (redi)ate ne)essity. That there is a distin)tion is )lear. In this )ase' )ontrary (ro(ositions $ollo! res(e)ti&ely $ro" )ontradi)tory (ro(ositions' and the )ontradi)tory (ro(ositions belong to se(arate se5#en)es. or the (ro(osition %it is not ne)essary that it sho#ld be% is not the negati&e o$ %it is ne)essary that it sho#ld not be%' $or both these (ro(ositions "ay be tr#e o$ the sa"e s#b7e)t/ $or !hen it is ne)essary that a thing sho#ld not be' it is not ne)essary that it sho#ld be. The reason !hy the (ro(ositions (redi)ating ne)essity do not $ollo! in the sa"e +ind o$ se5#en)e as the rest' lies in the $a)t that the (ro(osition %it is i"(ossible% is e5#i&alent' !hen #sed !ith a )ontrary s#b7e)t' to the (ro(osition %it is ne)essary%. or !hen it is i"(ossible that a thing sho#ld be' it is ne)essary' not that it sho#ld be' b#t that it sho#ld not be' and !hen it is i"(ossible that a thing sho#ld not be' it is ne)essary that it sho#ld be. Th#s' i$ the (ro(ositions (redi)ating i"(ossibility or non0i"(ossibility $ollo! !itho#t )hange o$ s#b7e)t $ro" those (redi)ating (ossibility or non0(ossibility' those (redi)ating ne)essity "#st $ollo! !ith the )ontrary s#b7e)t/ $or the (ro(ositions %it is i"(ossible% and %it is ne)essary% are not e5#i&alent' b#t' as has been said' in&ersely )onne)ted. 2et (erha(s it is i"(ossible that the )ontradi)tory (ro(ositions (redi)ating ne)essity sho#ld be th#s arranged. or !hen it is

ne)essary that a thing sho#ld be' it is (ossible that it sho#ld be. D or i$ not' the o((osite $ollo!s' sin)e one or the other "#st $ollo!/ so' i$ it is not (ossible' it is i"(ossible' and it is th#s i"(ossible that a thing sho#ld be' !hi)h "#st ne)essarily be/ !hi)h is abs#rd.E 2et $ro" the (ro(osition %it "ay be% it $ollo!s that it is not i"(ossible' and $ro" that it $ollo!s that it is not ne)essary/ it )o"es abo#t there$ore that the thing !hi)h "#st ne)essarily be need not be/ !hi)h is abs#rd. B#t again' the (ro(osition %it is ne)essary that it sho#ld be% does not $ollo! $ro" the (ro(osition %it "ay be%' nor does the (ro(osition %it is ne)essary that it sho#ld not be%. or the (ro(osition %it "ay be% i"(lies a t!o$old (ossibility' !hile' i$ either o$ the t!o $or"er (ro(ositions is tr#e' the t!o$old (ossibility &anishes. or i$ a thing "ay be' it "ay also not be' b#t i$ it is ne)essary that it sho#ld be or that it sho#ld not be' one o$ the t!o alternati&es !ill be e,)l#ded. It re"ains' there$ore' that the (ro(osition %it is not ne)essary that it sho#ld not be% $ollo!s $ro" the (ro(osition %it "ay be%. or this is tr#e also o$ that !hi)h "#st ne)essarily be. Moreo&er the (ro(osition %it is not ne)essary that it sho#ld not be% is the )ontradi)tory o$ that !hi)h $ollo!s $ro" the (ro(osition %it )annot be%/ $or %it )annot be% is $ollo!ed by %it is i"(ossible that it sho#ld be% and by %it is ne)essary that it sho#ld not be%' and the )ontradi)tory o$ this is the (ro(osition %it is not ne)essary that it sho#ld not be%. Th#s in this )ase also )ontradi)tory (ro(ositions $ollo! )ontradi)tory in the !ay indi)ated' and no logi)al i"(ossibilities o))#r !hen they are th#s arranged. It "ay be 5#estioned !hether the (ro(osition %it "ay be% $ollo!s $ro" the (ro(osition %it is ne)essary that it sho#ld be%. I$ not' the )ontradi)tory "#st $ollo!' na"ely that it )annot be' or' i$ a "an sho#ld "aintain that this is not the )ontradi)tory' then the (ro(osition %it "ay not be%. No! both o$ these are $alse o$ that !hi)h ne)essarily is. At the sa"e ti"e' it is tho#ght that i$ a thing "ay be )#t it "ay also not be )#t' i$ a thing "ay be it "ay also not be' and th#s it !o#ld $ollo! that a thing !hi)h "#st ne)essarily be "ay (ossibly not be/ !hi)h is $alse. It is e&ident' then' that it is not al!ays the )ase that that !hi)h "ay be or "ay !al+ (ossesses also a (otentiality in the other dire)tion. There are e,)e(tions. In the $irst (la)e !e "#st e,)e(t those things !hi)h (ossess a (otentiality not in a))ordan)e !ith a rational (rin)i(le' as $ire (ossesses the (otentiality o$ gi&ing o#t heat' that is' an irrational )a(a)ity. Those (otentialities !hi)h in&ol&e a rational (rin)i(le are (otentialities o$ "ore than one res#lt' that is' o$ )ontrary res#lts/ those that are irrational are not al!ays th#s )onstit#ted. As I ha&e said' $ire )annot both heat and not heat' neither has anything that is al!ays a)t#al any t!o$old (otentiality. 2et so"e e&en o$ those (otentialities !hi)h are irrational ad"it o$ o((osite res#lts. 4o!e&er' th#s "#)h has been said to e"(hasi.e the tr#th that it is not e&ery (otentiality !hi)h ad"its o$ o((osite res#lts' e&en !here the !ord is #sed al!ays in the sa"e sense. B#t in so"e )ases the !ord is #sed e5#i&o)ally. or the ter" %(ossible% is a"big#o#s' being #sed in the one )ase !ith re$eren)e to $a)ts' to that !hi)h is a)t#ali.ed' as !hen a "an is said to $ind !al+ing (ossible be)a#se he is a)t#ally !al+ing' and generally !hen a )a(a)ity is (redi)ated be)a#se it is a)t#ally reali.ed/ in the other )ase' !ith re$eren)e to a state in !hi)h reali.ation is )onditionally (ra)ti)able' as !hen a "an is said to $ind !al+ing (ossible be)a#se #nder )ertain )onditions he !o#ld !al+. This last sort o$ (otentiality belongs only to that !hi)h )an be in "otion' the $or"er )an e,ist also in the )ase o$ that !hi)h has not this (o!er. Both o$ that !hi)h is !al+ing and is a)t#al' and o$ that !hi)h has the )a(a)ity tho#gh not ne)essarily reali.ed' it is tr#e to say that it is not i"(ossible that it sho#ld !al+ Dor' in the other )ase' that it sho#ld beE' b#t !hile !e )annot (redi)ate this latter

+ind o$ (otentiality o$ that !hi)h is ne)essary in the #n5#ali$ied sense o$ the !ord' !e )an (redi)ate the $or"er. O#r )on)l#sion' then' is this: that sin)e the #ni&ersal is )onse5#ent #(on the (arti)#lar' that !hi)h is ne)essary is also (ossible' tho#gh not in e&ery sense in !hi)h the !ord "ay be #sed. 9e "ay (erha(s state that ne)essity and its absen)e are the initial (rin)i(les o$ e,isten)e and non0e,isten)e' and that all else "#st be regarded as (osterior to these. It is (lain $ro" !hat has been said that that !hi)h is o$ ne)essity is a)t#al. Th#s' i$ that !hi)h is eternal is (rior' a)t#ality also is (rior to (otentiality. *o"e things are a)t#alities !itho#t (otentiality' na"ely' the (ri"ary s#bstan)es/ a se)ond )lass )onsists o$ those things !hi)h are a)t#al b#t also (otential' !hose a)t#ality is in nat#re (rior to their (otentiality' tho#gh (osterior in ti"e/ a third )lass )o"(rises those things !hi)h are ne&er a)t#ali.ed' b#t are (#re (otentialities. 18 The 5#estion arises !hether an a$$ir"ation $inds its )ontrary in a denial or in another a$$ir"ation/ !hether the (ro(osition %e&ery "an is 7#st% $inds its )ontrary in the (ro(osition %no "an is 7#st%' or in the (ro(osition %e&ery "an is #n7#st%. Ta+e the (ro(ositions %Callias is 7#st%' %Callias is not 7#st%' %Callias is #n7#st%/ !e ha&e to dis)o&er !hi)h o$ these $or" )ontraries. No! i$ the s(o+en !ord )orres(onds !ith the 7#dge"ent o$ the "ind' and i$' in tho#ght' that 7#dge"ent is the )ontrary o$ another' !hi)h (rono#n)es a )ontrary $a)t' in the !ay' $or instan)e' in !hi)h the 7#dge"ent %e&ery "an is 7#st% (rono#n)es a )ontrary to that (rono#n)ed by the 7#dge"ent %e&ery "an is #n7#st%' the sa"e "#st needs hold good !ith regard to s(o+en a$$ir"ations. B#t i$' in tho#ght' it is not the 7#dge"ent !hi)h (rono#n)es a )ontrary $a)t that is the )ontrary o$ another' then one a$$ir"ation !ill not $ind its )ontrary in another' b#t rather in the )orres(onding denial. 9e "#st there$ore )onsider !hi)h tr#e 7#dge"ent is the )ontrary o$ the $alse' that !hi)h $or"s the denial o$ the $alse 7#dge"ent or that !hi)h a$$ir"s the )ontrary $a)t. 3et "e ill#strate. There is a tr#e 7#dge"ent )on)erning that !hi)h is good' that it is good/ another' a $alse 7#dge"ent' that it is not good/ and a third' !hi)h is distin)t' that it is bad. 9hi)h o$ these t!o is )ontrary to the tr#eF And i$ they are one and the sa"e' !hi)h "ode o$ e,(ression $or"s the )ontraryF It is an error to s#((ose that 7#dge"ents are to be de$ined as )ontrary in &irt#e o$ the $a)t that they ha&e )ontrary s#b7e)ts/ $or the 7#dge"ent )on)erning a good thing' that it is good' and that )on)erning a bad thing' that it is bad' "ay be one and the sa"e' and !hether they are so or not' they both re(resent the tr#th. 2et the s#b7e)ts here are )ontrary. B#t 7#dge"ents are not )ontrary be)a#se they ha&e )ontrary s#b7e)ts' b#t be)a#se they are to the )ontrary e$$e)t. No! i$ !e ta+e the 7#dge"ent that that !hi)h is good is good' and another that it is not good' and i$ there are at the sa"e ti"e other attrib#tes' !hi)h do not and )annot belong to the good' !e "#st ne&ertheless re$#se to treat as the )ontraries o$ the tr#e 7#dge"ent those !hi)h o(ine that so"e other attrib#te s#bsists !hi)h does not s#bsist' as also those that o(ine that so"e other attrib#te does not s#bsist !hi)h does s#bsist' $or both these )lasses o$ 7#dge"ent are o$ #nli"ited )ontent. Those 7#dge"ents "#st rather be ter"ed )ontrary to the tr#e 7#dge"ents' in !hi)h error is (resent. No! these 7#dge"ents are those !hi)h are )on)erned !ith the starting (oints o$ generation' and generation is the (assing $ro" one e,tre"e to its o((osite/ there$ore error is a li+e transition. No! that !hi)h is good is both good and not bad. The $irst 5#ality is (art o$ its essen)e' the se)ond a))idental/ $or it is by a))ident

that it is not bad. B#t i$ that tr#e 7#dge"ent is "ost really tr#e' !hi)h )on)erns the s#b7e)t%s intrinsi) nat#re' then that $alse 7#dge"ent li+e!ise is "ost really $alse' !hi)h )on)erns its intrinsi) nat#re. No! the 7#dge"ent that that is good is not good is a $alse 7#dge"ent )on)erning its intrinsi) nat#re' the 7#dge"ent that it is bad is one )on)erning that !hi)h is a))idental. Th#s the 7#dge"ent !hi)h denies the tr#e 7#dge"ent is "ore really $alse than that !hi)h (ositi&ely asserts the (resen)e o$ the )ontrary 5#ality. B#t it is the "an !ho $or"s that 7#dge"ent !hi)h is )ontrary to the tr#e !ho is "ost thoro#ghly de)ei&ed' $or )ontraries are a"ong the things !hi)h di$$er "ost !idely !ithin the sa"e )lass. I$ then o$ the t!o 7#dge"ents one is )ontrary to the tr#e 7#dge"ent' b#t that !hi)h is )ontradi)tory is the "ore tr#ly )ontrary' then the latter' it see"s' is the real )ontrary. The 7#dge"ent that that !hi)h is good is bad is )o"(osite. or (res#"ably the "an !ho $or"s that 7#dge"ent "#st at the sa"e ti"e #nderstand that that !hi)h is good is not good. #rther' the )ontradi)tory is either al!ays the )ontrary or ne&er/ there$ore' i$ it "#st ne)essarily be so in all other )ases' o#r )on)l#sion in the )ase 7#st dealt !ith !o#ld see" to be )orre)t. No! !here ter"s ha&e no )ontrary' that 7#dge"ent is $alse' !hi)h $or"s the negati&e o$ the tr#e/ $or instan)e' he !ho thin+s a "an is not a "an $or"s a $alse 7#dge"ent. I$ then in these )ases the negati&e is the )ontrary' then the (rin)i(le is #ni&ersal in its a((li)ation. Again' the 7#dge"ent that that !hi)h is not good is not good is (arallel !ith the 7#dge"ent that that !hi)h is good is good. Besides these there is the 7#dge"ent that that !hi)h is good is not good' (arallel !ith the 7#dge"ent that that that is not good is good. 3et #s )onsider' there$ore' !hat !o#ld $or" the )ontrary o$ the tr#e 7#dge"ent that that !hi)h is not good is not good. The 7#dge"ent that it is bad !o#ld' o$ )o#rse' $ail to "eet the )ase' sin)e t!o tr#e 7#dge"ents are ne&er )ontrary and this 7#dge"ent "ight be tr#e at the sa"e ti"e as that !ith !hi)h it is )onne)ted. or sin)e so"e things !hi)h are not good are bad' both 7#dge"ents "ay be tr#e. Nor is the 7#dge"ent that it is not bad the )ontrary' $or this too "ight be tr#e' sin)e both 5#alities "ight be (redi)ated o$ the sa"e s#b7e)t. It re"ains' there$ore' that o$ the 7#dge"ent )on)erning that !hi)h is not good' that it is not good' the )ontrary 7#dge"ent is that it is good/ $or this is $alse. In the sa"e !ay' "oreo&er' the 7#dge"ent )on)erning that !hi)h is good' that it is not good' is the )ontrary o$ the 7#dge"ent that it is good. It is e&ident that it !ill "a+e no di$$eren)e i$ !e #ni&ersali.e the (ositi&e 7#dge"ent' $or the #ni&ersal negati&e 7#dge"ent !ill $or" the )ontrary. or instan)e' the )ontrary o$ the 7#dge"ent that e&erything that is good is good is that nothing that is good is good. or the 7#dge"ent that that !hi)h is good is good' i$ the s#b7e)t be #nderstood in a #ni&ersal sense' is e5#i&alent to the 7#dge"ent that !hate&er is good is good' and this is identi)al !ith the 7#dge"ent that e&erything that is good is good. 9e "ay deal si"ilarly !ith 7#dge"ents )on)erning that !hi)h is not good. I$ there$ore this is the r#le !ith 7#dge"ents' and i$ s(o+en a$$ir"ations and denials are 7#dge"ents e,(ressed in !ords' it is (lain that the #ni&ersal denial is the )ontrary o$ the a$$ir"ation abo#t the sa"e s#b7e)t. Th#s the (ro(ositions %e&erything good is good%' %e&ery "an is good%' ha&e $or their )ontraries the (ro(ositions %nothing good is good%' %no "an is good%. The )ontradi)tory (ro(ositions' on the other hand' are %not e&erything good is good%' %not e&ery "an is good%. It is e&ident' also' that neither tr#e 7#dge"ents nor tr#e (ro(ositions )an be )ontrary the one to the other. or !hereas' !hen t!o (ro(ositions are tr#e' a "an "ay state both at the sa"e ti"e !itho#t in)onsisten)y' )ontrary (ro(ositions are those !hi)h state )ontrary )onditions' and )ontrary )onditions )annot s#bsist at one and the sa"e ti"e in the sa"e s#b7e)t.

T4E EN? .