Authors/Aristotle/metaphysics/l4/c7 - Revision history

Edward Ockham: /* Chapter 7 */

2015-02-21T22:30:47Z

Chapter 7

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:30, 21 February 2015
Line 1:		Line 1:
	==Chapter 7==		==Chapter 7==
	{\| border=1 cellpadding=10		{\| border=1 cellpadding=10
	!valign = top width=45%\|Latin		!valign = top width=30%\|Greek
	!valign = top width=55%\|English		!valign = top width=30%\|Latin
			!valign = top width=40%\|English
	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
			\|ἀλλὰ μὴν οὐδὲ μεταξὺ ἀντιφάσεως ἐνδέχεται εἶναι οὐθέν, ἀλλ᾽ ἀνάγκη ἢ φάναι ἢ ἀποφάναι ἓν καθ᾽ ἑνὸς ὁτιοῦν. [25] δῆλον δὲ πρῶτον μὲν ὁρισαμένοις τί τὸ ἀληθὲς καὶ ψεῦδος. τὸ μὲν γὰρ λέγειν τὸ ὂν μὴ εἶναι ἢ τὸ μὴ ὂν εἶναι ψεῦδος, τὸ δὲ τὸ ὂν εἶναι καὶ τὸ μὴ ὂν μὴ εἶναι ἀληθές, ὥστε καὶ ὁ λέγων εἶναι ἢ μὴ ἀληθεύσει ἢ ψεύσεται: ἀλλ᾽ οὔτε τὸ ὂν λέγεται μὴ εἶναι ἢ εἶναι οὔτε τὸ μὴ ὄν.

	\|<span id=c7></span> At vero nec medium contradictionis nihil esse contingit, sed necessarium aut dicere aut negare unum de uno quod{{p\|89}}cumque. Palam autem primum quidem diffmientibus quid {{a\|bk1011b25\|↵}} verum et * falsum. Dicere namque ens non esse aut hoc esse falsum , ens autem esse et non ens non esse verum ; quare et dicens * esse aut non verum dicet aut mentietur; sed neque ens dicit non esse aut esse neque non ens,		\|<span id=c7></span> At vero nec medium contradictionis nihil esse contingit, sed necessarium aut dicere aut negare unum de uno quod{{p\|89}}cumque. Palam autem primum quidem diffmientibus quid {{a\|bk1011b25\|↵}} verum et * falsum. Dicere namque ens non esse aut hoc esse falsum , ens autem esse et non ens non esse verum ; quare et dicens * esse aut non verum dicet aut mentietur; sed neque ens dicit non esse aut esse neque non ens,

Line 9:		Line 12:

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
			\|ἔτι [30] ἤτοι μεταξὺ ἔσται τῆς ἀντιφάσεως ὥσπερ τὸ φαιὸν μέλανος καὶ λευκοῦ, ἢ ὡς τὸ μηδέτερον ἀνθρώπου καὶ ἵππου. εἰ μὲν οὖν οὕτως, οὐκ ἂν μεταβάλλοι (ἐκ μὴ ἀγαθοῦ γὰρ εἰς ἀγαθὸν μεταβάλλει ἢ ἐκ τούτου εἰς μὴ ἀγαθόν), νῦν δ᾽ ἀεὶ φαίνεται (οὐ γὰρ ἔστι μεταβολὴ ἀλλ᾽ ἢ εἰς τὰ ἀντικείμενα [35] καὶ μεταξύ): εἰ δ᾽ ἔστι μεταξύ, καὶ οὕτως εἴη ἄν τις εἰς λευκὸν οὐκ ἐκ μὴ λευκοῦ γένεσις, νῦν δ᾽ οὐχ ὁρᾶται.

	\|Amplius aut {{a\|bk1011b30\|↵}} medium erit contradictionis quemadmodum pallidum albi et nigri, aut quemadmodum neutrum hominis et equi. Si quidem igitur sic, non permutabitur (nam ex non bono in * bonum permutatur aut ex hoc in non bonum); nunc autem semper videtur. Non est enim permutatio nisi in contraria et media. {{a\|bk1011b35\|↵}} Si autem est medium, ** et sic utique erit aliqua in album 1012a1 non ex non albo generatio; nunc autem non videtur.		\|Amplius aut {{a\|bk1011b30\|↵}} medium erit contradictionis quemadmodum pallidum albi et nigri, aut quemadmodum neutrum hominis et equi. Si quidem igitur sic, non permutabitur (nam ex non bono in * bonum permutatur aut ex hoc in non bonum); nunc autem semper videtur. Non est enim permutatio nisi in contraria et media. {{a\|bk1011b35\|↵}} Si autem est medium, ** et sic utique erit aliqua in album 1012a1 non ex non albo generatio; nunc autem non videtur.

Line 14:		Line 19:

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
			\|[1012α] [1] ἔτι πᾶν τὸ διανοητὸν καὶ νοητὸν ἡ διάνοια ἢ κατάφησιν ἢ ἀπόφησιν—τοῦτο δ᾽ ἐξ ὁρισμοῦ δῆλον—ὅταν ἀληθεύῃ ἢ ψεύδηται: ὅταν μὲν ὡδὶ συνθῇ φᾶσα ἢ ἀποφᾶσα, ἀληθεύει, [5] ὅταν δὲ ὡδί, ψεύδεται.

	\|Amplius omne intellectuale et intelligibile mens aut affirmat aut negat. Hoc autem ex diffinitione palam, cum verum dicit aut mentitur. Quando quidem sic componit dicens aut negans, verum dicit, quando autem * sic, mentitur.		\|Amplius omne intellectuale et intelligibile mens aut affirmat aut negat. Hoc autem ex diffinitione palam, cum verum dicit aut mentitur. Quando quidem sic componit dicens aut negans, verum dicit, quando autem * sic, mentitur.

Line 19:		Line 26:

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
			\|ἔτι παρὰ πάσας δεῖ εἶναι τὰς ἀντιφάσεις, εἰ μὴ λόγου ἕνεκα λέγεται: ὥστε καὶ οὔτε ἀληθεύσει [7] τις οὔτ᾽ οὐκ ἀληθεύσει, καὶ παρὰ τὸ ὂν καὶ τὸ μὴ ὂν ἔσται, ὥστε καὶ παρὰ γένεσιν καὶ φθορὰν μεταβολή τις ἔσται.

	\|Amplius {{a\|bk1012a5\|↵}} praeter omnes oportet esse contradictiones, nisi orationis causa dicatur. Quare et nec verum dicet aliquis nec non verum dicet, et praeter ens et non ens erit, quare et praeter generationem et corruptionem transmutatio quaedam erit.		\|Amplius {{a\|bk1012a5\|↵}} praeter omnes oportet esse contradictiones, nisi orationis causa dicatur. Quare et nec verum dicet aliquis nec non verum dicet, et praeter ens et non ens erit, quare et praeter generationem et corruptionem transmutatio quaedam erit.

Line 24:		Line 33:

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
			\|ἔτι ἐν ὅσοις γένεσιν ἡ ἀπόφασις τὸ ἐναντίον ἐπιφέρει, [10] καὶ ἐν τούτοις ἔσται, οἷον ἐν ἀριθμοῖς οὔτε περιττὸς οὔτε οὐ περιττὸς ἀριθμός: ἀλλ᾽ ἀδύνατον: ἐκ τοῦ ὁρισμοῦ δὲ δῆλον.

	\|Amplius in quibuscumque generibus negatio contrarium infert, et in hiis erit, {{a\|bk1012a10\|↵}} ut in numeris neque impar neque non impar numerus. Sed impossibile; ex diffinitione vero palam.		\|Amplius in quibuscumque generibus negatio contrarium infert, et in hiis erit, {{a\|bk1012a10\|↵}} ut in numeris neque impar neque non impar numerus. Sed impossibile; ex diffinitione vero palam.

Line 29:		Line 40:

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
			\|ἔτι εἰς ἄπειρον βαδιεῖται, καὶ οὐ μόνον ἡμιόλια τὰ ὄντα ἔσται ἀλλὰ πλείω. πάλιν γὰρ ἔσται ἀποφῆσαι τοῦτο πρὸς τὴν φάσιν καὶ τὴν ἀπόφασιν, καὶ τοῦτ᾽ ἔσται τι: ἡ [15] γὰρ οὐσία ἐστί τις αὐτοῦ ἄλλη.

	\|Amplius in infinitum vadet; et non solum emyolia quae sunt erunt sed plura. Iterum enim est hoc negare ad dictionem et negationem, et hoc erit aliquid; nam substantia est quaedam ipsius alia.		\|Amplius in infinitum vadet; et non solum emyolia quae sunt erunt sed plura. Iterum enim est hoc negare ad dictionem et negationem, et hoc erit aliquid; nam substantia est quaedam ipsius alia.

Line 34:		Line 47:

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
			\|ἔτι ὅταν ἐρομένου εἰ λευκόν ἐστιν εἴπῃ ὅτι οὔ, οὐθὲν ἄλλο ἀποπέφηκεν ἢ τὸ εἶναι: ἀπόφασις δὲ τὸ μὴ εἶναι.

	\|Amplius {{a\|bk1012a15\|↵}} quando interrogante si est album dicit quia non *, nihil aliud negavit quam ipsum esse; negatio vero est quod non esse.		\|Amplius {{a\|bk1012a15\|↵}} quando interrogante si est album dicit quia non *, nihil aliud negavit quam ipsum esse; negatio vero est quod non esse.

Line 39:		Line 54:

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
			\|ἐλήλυθε δ᾽ ἐνίοις αὕτη ἡ δόξα ὥσπερ καὶ ἄλλαι τῶν παραδόξων: ὅταν γὰρ λύειν μὴ δύνωνται λόγους ἐριστικούς, ἐνδόντες τῷ λόγῳ σύμφασιν ἀληθὲς [20] εἶναι τὸ συλλογισθέν. οἱ μὲν οὖν διὰ τοιαύτην αἰτίαν λέγουσιν, οἱ δὲ διὰ τὸ πάντων ζητεῖν λόγον.

	\|Venit autem quibusdam haec opinio sicut et aliae inopinabi{{p\|90}}lium; quando enim soluere non possunt orationes contentiosas, {{a\|bk1012a20\|↵}} annuentes orationi confirmant verum esse quod est sillogizatum. Hii quidem igitur propter talem causam dicunt, illi vero propter omnium rationem inquirere.		\|Venit autem quibusdam haec opinio sicut et aliae inopinabi{{p\|90}}lium; quando enim soluere non possunt orationes contentiosas, {{a\|bk1012a20\|↵}} annuentes orationi confirmant verum esse quod est sillogizatum. Hii quidem igitur propter talem causam dicunt, illi vero propter omnium rationem inquirere.

Line 44:		Line 61:

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
			\|ἀρχὴ δὲ πρὸς ἅπαντας τούτους ἐξ ὁρισμοῦ. ὁρισμὸς δὲ γίγνεται ἐκ τοῦ σημαίνειν τι ἀναγκαῖον εἶναι αὐτούς: ὁ γὰρ λόγος οὗ τὸ ὄνομα σημεῖον ὁρισμὸς ἔσται.

	\|Principium autem ad hos omnes ex diffinitione. Diffinitio vero fit ex ipsos significare aliquid necessarium esse; ratio namque cuius nomen est signum diffinitio fit.		\|Principium autem ad hos omnes ex diffinitione. Diffinitio vero fit ex ipsos significare aliquid necessarium esse; ratio namque cuius nomen est signum diffinitio fit.

Line 49:		Line 68:

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
			\|ἔοικε δ᾽ ὁ μὲν Ἡρακλείτου [25] λόγος, λέγων πάντα εἶναι καὶ μὴ εἶναι, ἅπαντα ἀληθῆ ποιεῖν, ὁ δ᾽ Ἀναξαγόρου, εἶναί τι μεταξὺ τῆς ἀντιφάσεως, πάντα ψευδῆ: ὅταν γὰρ μιχθῇ, οὔτε ἀγαθὸν οὔτε οὐκ ἀγαθὸν τὸ μῖγμα, ὥστ᾽ οὐδὲν εἰπεῖν ἀληθές.

	\|{{a\|bk1012a25\|↵}} Videtur autem Eracliti quidem oratio, dicens omnia esse et non esse, omnia vera facere; quae vero est Anaxagore, esse aliquid medium contradictionis, quare omnia falsa. Nam quando miscentur, nec bonum nec non bonum est mixtum, quare nihil dicere verum.		\|{{a\|bk1012a25\|↵}} Videtur autem Eracliti quidem oratio, dicens omnia esse et non esse, omnia vera facere; quae vero est Anaxagore, esse aliquid medium contradictionis, quare omnia falsa. Nam quando miscentur, nec bonum nec non bonum est mixtum, quare nihil dicere verum.

Line 54:		Line 75:

	\|}		\|}

	<noinclude>		<noinclude>
	==Notes==		==Notes==
	{{reflist}}		{{reflist}}</noinclude>
	</noinclude>

Edward Ockham: Text replace - "{{bk\|(.*)}}" to "{{a|bk$1|↵}}"

2014-03-13T11:26:54Z

Text replace - "{{bk\|(.*)}}" to "{{a|bk$1|↵}}"

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:26, 13 March 2014
Line 4:		Line 4:
	!valign = top width=55%\|English		!valign = top width=55%\|English
	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|<span id=c7></span> At vero nec medium contradictionis nihil esse contingit, sed necessarium aut dicere aut negare unum de uno quod{{p\|89}}cumque. Palam autem primum quidem diffmientibus quid {{bk\|~~1011b25~~}} verum et * falsum. Dicere namque ens non esse aut hoc esse falsum , ens autem esse et non ens non esse verum ; quare et dicens * esse aut non verum dicet aut mentietur; sed neque ens dicit non esse aut esse neque non ens,		\|<span id=c7></span> At vero nec medium contradictionis nihil esse contingit, sed necessarium aut dicere aut negare unum de uno quod{{p\|89}}cumque. Palam autem primum quidem diffmientibus quid {{a\|bk1011b25\|↵}} verum et * falsum. Dicere namque ens non esse aut hoc esse falsum , ens autem esse et non ens non esse verum ; quare et dicens * esse aut non verum dicet aut mentietur; sed neque ens dicit non esse aut esse neque non ens,

	\|'''Chapter 7'''. <span id=jp383></span> But on the other hand there cannot be an intermediate between contradictories, but of one subject we must either affirm or deny any one predicate. This is clear, in the first place, if we define what the true and the false are. To say of what is that it is not, or of what is not that it is, is false, while to say of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not, is true; so that he who says of anything that it is, or that it is not, will say either what is true or what is false; but neither what is nor what is not is said to be or not to be.		\|'''Chapter 7'''. <span id=jp383></span> But on the other hand there cannot be an intermediate between contradictories, but of one subject we must either affirm or deny any one predicate. This is clear, in the first place, if we define what the true and the false are. To say of what is that it is not, or of what is not that it is, is false, while to say of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not, is true; so that he who says of anything that it is, or that it is not, will say either what is true or what is false; but neither what is nor what is not is said to be or not to be.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Amplius aut {{bk\|~~1011b30~~}} medium erit contradictionis quemadmodum pallidum albi et nigri, aut quemadmodum neutrum hominis et equi. Si quidem igitur sic, non permutabitur (nam ex non bono in * bonum permutatur aut ex hoc in non bonum); nunc autem semper videtur. Non est enim permutatio nisi in contraria et media. {{bk\|~~1011b35~~}} Si autem est medium, ** et sic utique erit aliqua in album 1012a1 non ex non albo generatio; nunc autem non videtur.		\|Amplius aut {{a\|bk1011b30\|↵}} medium erit contradictionis quemadmodum pallidum albi et nigri, aut quemadmodum neutrum hominis et equi. Si quidem igitur sic, non permutabitur (nam ex non bono in * bonum permutatur aut ex hoc in non bonum); nunc autem semper videtur. Non est enim permutatio nisi in contraria et media. {{a\|bk1011b35\|↵}} Si autem est medium, ** et sic utique erit aliqua in album 1012a1 non ex non albo generatio; nunc autem non videtur.

	\|<span id=jp384></span> Again, the intermediate between the contradictories will be so either in the way in which grey is between black and white, or as that which is neither man nor horse is between man and horse. (a) If it were of the latter kind, it could not change into the extremes (for change is from not-good to good, or from good to not-good), but as a matter of fact when there is an intermediate it is always observed to change into the extremes. For there is no change except to opposites and to their intermediates. (b) But if it is really intermediate, in this way too there would have to be a change to white, which was not from not-white; but as it ['''12a'''] is, this is never seen.		\|<span id=jp384></span> Again, the intermediate between the contradictories will be so either in the way in which grey is between black and white, or as that which is neither man nor horse is between man and horse. (a) If it were of the latter kind, it could not change into the extremes (for change is from not-good to good, or from good to not-good), but as a matter of fact when there is an intermediate it is always observed to change into the extremes. For there is no change except to opposites and to their intermediates. (b) But if it is really intermediate, in this way too there would have to be a change to white, which was not from not-white; but as it ['''12a'''] is, this is never seen.
Line 19:		Line 19:

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Amplius {{bk\|~~1012a5~~}} praeter omnes oportet esse contradictiones, nisi orationis causa dicatur. Quare et nec verum dicet aliquis nec non verum dicet, et praeter ens et non ens erit, quare et praeter generationem et corruptionem transmutatio quaedam erit.		\|Amplius {{a\|bk1012a5\|↵}} praeter omnes oportet esse contradictiones, nisi orationis causa dicatur. Quare et nec verum dicet aliquis nec non verum dicet, et praeter ens et non ens erit, quare et praeter generationem et corruptionem transmutatio quaedam erit.

	\|<span id=jp386></span> -Again, there must be an intermediate between all contradictories, if one is not arguing merely for the sake of argument; so that it will be possible for a man to say what is neither true nor untrue, and there will be a middle between that which is and that which is not, so that there will also be a kind of change intermediate between generation and destruction.		\|<span id=jp386></span> -Again, there must be an intermediate between all contradictories, if one is not arguing merely for the sake of argument; so that it will be possible for a man to say what is neither true nor untrue, and there will be a middle between that which is and that which is not, so that there will also be a kind of change intermediate between generation and destruction.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Amplius in quibuscumque generibus negatio contrarium infert, et in hiis erit, {{bk\|~~1012a10~~}} ut in numeris neque impar neque non impar numerus. Sed impossibile; ex diffinitione vero palam.		\|Amplius in quibuscumque generibus negatio contrarium infert, et in hiis erit, {{a\|bk1012a10\|↵}} ut in numeris neque impar neque non impar numerus. Sed impossibile; ex diffinitione vero palam.

	\|<span id=jp387></span> Again, in all classes in which the negation of an attribute involves the assertion of its contrary, even in these there will be an intermediate; for instance, in the sphere of numbers there will be number which is neither odd nor not-odd. But this is impossible, as is obvious from the definition.		\|<span id=jp387></span> Again, in all classes in which the negation of an attribute involves the assertion of its contrary, even in these there will be an intermediate; for instance, in the sphere of numbers there will be number which is neither odd nor not-odd. But this is impossible, as is obvious from the definition.
Line 34:		Line 34:

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Amplius {{bk\|~~1012a15~~}} quando interrogante si est album dicit quia non *, nihil aliud negavit quam ipsum esse; negatio vero est quod non esse.		\|Amplius {{a\|bk1012a15\|↵}} quando interrogante si est album dicit quia non *, nihil aliud negavit quam ipsum esse; negatio vero est quod non esse.

	\|<span id=jp389></span> Again, when a man, on being asked whether a thing is white, says ''no'', he has denied nothing except that it is; and its not being is a negation.		\|<span id=jp389></span> Again, when a man, on being asked whether a thing is white, says ''no'', he has denied nothing except that it is; and its not being is a negation.

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|Venit autem quibusdam haec opinio sicut et aliae inopinabi{{p\|90}}lium; quando enim soluere non possunt orationes contentiosas, {{bk\|~~1012a20~~}} annuentes orationi confirmant verum esse quod est sillogizatum. Hii quidem igitur propter talem causam dicunt, illi vero propter omnium rationem inquirere.		\|Venit autem quibusdam haec opinio sicut et aliae inopinabi{{p\|90}}lium; quando enim soluere non possunt orationes contentiosas, {{a\|bk1012a20\|↵}} annuentes orationi confirmant verum esse quod est sillogizatum. Hii quidem igitur propter talem causam dicunt, illi vero propter omnium rationem inquirere.

	\|<span id=jp390></span> Some people have acquired this opinion as other paradoxical opinions have been acquired; when men cannot refute eristical arguments, they give in to the argument and agree that the conclusion is true. This, then, is why some express this view; others do so because they demand a reason for everything.		\|<span id=jp390></span> Some people have acquired this opinion as other paradoxical opinions have been acquired; when men cannot refute eristical arguments, they give in to the argument and agree that the conclusion is true. This, then, is why some express this view; others do so because they demand a reason for everything.
Line 49:		Line 49:

	\|- valign = top		\|- valign = top
	\|{{bk\|~~1012a25~~}} Videtur autem Eracliti quidem oratio, dicens omnia esse et non esse, omnia vera facere; quae vero est Anaxagore, esse aliquid medium contradictionis, quare omnia falsa. Nam quando miscentur, nec bonum nec non bonum est mixtum, quare nihil dicere verum.		\|{{a\|bk1012a25\|↵}} Videtur autem Eracliti quidem oratio, dicens omnia esse et non esse, omnia vera facere; quae vero est Anaxagore, esse aliquid medium contradictionis, quare omnia falsa. Nam quando miscentur, nec bonum nec non bonum est mixtum, quare nihil dicere verum.

	\|<span id=jp392></span> -While the doctrine of Heraclitus, that all things are and are not, seems to make everything true, that of Anaxagoras, that there is an intermediate between the terms of a contradiction, seems to make everything false; for when things are mixed, the mixture is neither good nor not-good, so that one cannot say anything that is true.		\|<span id=jp392></span> -While the doctrine of Heraclitus, that all things are and are not, seems to make everything true, that of Anaxagoras, that there is an intermediate between the terms of a contradiction, seems to make everything false; for when things are mixed, the mixture is neither good nor not-good, so that one cannot say anything that is true.

Edward Ockham at 16:26, 9 March 2014

2014-03-09T16:26:46Z

New page

==Chapter 7==
{| border=1 cellpadding=10
!valign = top width=45%|Latin
!valign = top width=55%|English
|- valign = top
| At vero nec medium contradictionis nihil esse contingit, sed necessarium aut dicere aut negare unum de uno quod{{p|89}}cumque. Palam autem primum quidem diffmientibus quid {{bk|1011b25}} verum et * falsum. Dicere namque ens non esse aut hoc esse falsum *, ens autem esse et non ens non esse verum *; quare et dicens * esse aut non verum dicet aut mentietur; sed neque ens dicit non esse aut esse neque non ens,

|'''Chapter 7'''. But on the other hand there cannot be an intermediate between contradictories, but of one subject we must either affirm or deny any one predicate. This is clear, in the first place, if we define what the true and the false are. To say of what is that it is not, or of what is not that it is, is false, while to say of what is that it is, and of what is not that it is not, is true; so that he who says of anything that it is, or that it is not, will say either what is true or what is false; but neither what is nor what is not is said to be or not to be.

|- valign = top
|Amplius aut {{bk|1011b30}} medium erit contradictionis quemadmodum pallidum albi et nigri, aut quemadmodum neutrum hominis et equi. Si quidem igitur sic, non permutabitur (nam ex non bono in * bonum permutatur aut ex hoc in non bonum); nunc autem semper videtur. Non est enim permutatio nisi in contraria et media. {{bk|1011b35}} Si autem est medium, ** et sic utique erit aliqua in album 1012a1 non ex non albo generatio; nunc autem non videtur.

| Again, the intermediate between the contradictories will be so either in the way in which grey is between black and white, or as that which is neither man nor horse is between man and horse. (a) If it were of the latter kind, it could not change into the extremes (for change is from not-good to good, or from good to not-good), but as a matter of fact when there is an intermediate it is always observed to change into the extremes. For there is no change except to opposites and to their intermediates. (b) But if it is really intermediate, in this way too there would have to be a change to white, which was not from not-white; but as it ['''12a'''] is, this is never seen.

|- valign = top
|Amplius omne intellectuale et intelligibile mens aut affirmat aut negat. Hoc autem ex diffinitione palam, cum verum dicit aut mentitur. Quando quidem sic componit dicens aut negans, verum dicit, quando autem * sic, mentitur.

| Again, every object of understanding or reason the understanding either affirms or denies – this is obvious from the definition – whenever it says what is true or false. When it connects in one way by assertion or negation, it says what is true, and when it does so in another way, what is false.

|- valign = top
|Amplius {{bk|1012a5}} praeter omnes oportet esse contradictiones, nisi orationis causa dicatur. Quare et nec verum dicet aliquis nec non verum dicet, et praeter ens et non ens erit, quare et praeter generationem et corruptionem transmutatio quaedam erit.

| -Again, there must be an intermediate between all contradictories, if one is not arguing merely for the sake of argument; so that it will be possible for a man to say what is neither true nor untrue, and there will be a middle between that which is and that which is not, so that there will also be a kind of change intermediate between generation and destruction.

|- valign = top
|Amplius in quibuscumque generibus negatio contrarium infert, et in hiis erit, {{bk|1012a10}} ut in numeris neque impar neque non impar numerus. Sed impossibile; ex diffinitione vero palam.

| Again, in all classes in which the negation of an attribute involves the assertion of its contrary, even in these there will be an intermediate; for instance, in the sphere of numbers there will be number which is neither odd nor not-odd. But this is impossible, as is obvious from the definition.

|- valign = top
|Amplius in infinitum vadet; et non solum emyolia quae sunt erunt sed plura. Iterum enim est hoc negare ad dictionem et negationem, et hoc erit aliquid; nam substantia est quaedam ipsius alia.

| Again, the process will go on ad infinitum, and the number of realities will be not only half as great again, but even greater. For again it will be possible to deny this intermediate with reference both to its assertion and to its negation, and this new term will be some definite thing; for its essence is something different.

|- valign = top
|Amplius {{bk|1012a15}} quando interrogante si est album dicit quia non *, nihil aliud negavit quam ipsum esse; negatio vero est quod non esse.

| Again, when a man, on being asked whether a thing is white, says ''no'', he has denied nothing except that it is; and its not being is a negation.

|- valign = top
|Venit autem quibusdam haec opinio sicut et aliae inopinabi{{p|90}}lium; quando enim soluere non possunt orationes contentiosas, {{bk|1012a20}} annuentes orationi confirmant verum esse quod est sillogizatum. Hii quidem igitur propter talem causam dicunt, illi vero propter omnium rationem inquirere.

| Some people have acquired this opinion as other paradoxical opinions have been acquired; when men cannot refute eristical arguments, they give in to the argument and agree that the conclusion is true. This, then, is why some express this view; others do so because they demand a reason for everything.

|- valign = top
|Principium autem ad hos omnes ex diffinitione. Diffinitio vero fit ex ipsos significare aliquid necessarium esse; ratio namque cuius nomen est signum diffinitio fit.

| And the starting-point in dealing with all such people is definition. Now the definition rests on the necessity of their meaning something; for the form of words of which the word is a sign will be its definition.

|- valign = top
|{{bk|1012a25}} Videtur autem Eracliti quidem oratio, dicens omnia esse et non esse, omnia vera facere; quae vero est Anaxagore, esse aliquid medium contradictionis, quare omnia falsa. Nam quando miscentur, nec bonum nec non bonum est mixtum, quare nihil dicere verum.

| -While the doctrine of Heraclitus, that all things are and are not, seems to make everything true, that of Anaxagoras, that there is an intermediate between the terms of a contradiction, seems to make everything false; for when things are mixed, the mixture is neither good nor not-good, so that one cannot say anything that is true.

|}

<noinclude>
==Notes==
{{reflist}}
</noinclude>