Here are Aristotle’s “predicables” explained:

1. Definition or Species: a statement of the things essence (to ti en einai or “that which makes it what it is”). Aristotle called this “horos” or “definition.” Porphyry referred to this as “eidos” or “form.” Boethius introduced into the Latin tradition as  “species.” It denotes the specific essence of a thing.
2. Genus: Genus is that part of the essence which is also predicable of other things different from them in kind. The key to understand “genus” is that it is “general.” For example the “genus” of a triangle would be that it is a “shape.”
3. Differentia: that which distinguishes one species from another within a genus. The square species and triangle species are differentiated from one another within the shape genus by the number of their sides. Triangles have three. Squares have four.
4. Propria: A “property” is an attribute which is common to all the members of a class, but is not part of its essence or definition. The fact that the interior angles of all triangles are equal to two right angles is not part of the definition, but is universally true.
5. Accidentia: An accident is an attribute which may or may not belong to a subject. With a “green triangle” the color green is “accidental” – it is not something essential to “triangle-ness.”

Leave a comment if you need more help.

Augustine, City of God, Book 12, 3

Alfred North Whitehead, Process and Reality (Free Press, 1969) p. 53.

_______________________

BILL MURRAY: “What did you study?”

SCARLETT JOHANSSON: “Philosophy.”

BILL MURRAY: “Yeah, there’s a good buck in that racket.”

SCARLETT JOHANSSON: “Well, so far it’s pro bono.”

Lost in Translation (2003)

Far from seeing Neo-Platonism as a far-fetched corruption of Plato’s thought, these thinkers emphasize the continuity between Plato and his traditional interpreters (e.g. Plotinus).

The term “unwritten doctrine” or “unwritten dogma” comes from Aristotle’s Physics

“It is true, indeed, that the account he gives there of the participant is different from what he [Plato] says in his so-called unwritten teaching (agrapha dogmata).” – Aristotle, Physics 209b

This secret teaching conforms to something said by Plato in his Seventh Letter:

“Every serious man in dealing with really serious subjects carefully avoids writing” (344c).

What are the so-called “unwritten doctrines”? Aristotle explains it as amounting to the teaching of the “One and the Dyad.” To this is often added the “third hypostasis” of Plotinus, which is “nous” or “intellect.”

Those that favor this interpretation of Plato often see Platonism as reconcilable to Christianity.

Pertinent dialogues to this debate are: Republic, Timaeus, Parmenides, Philebus, Phaedrus, Phaedo and Epistle 7.

1, “Big” Alpha – “first philosophy” as the science of the first principles or causes of things

2, “Little” Alpha – method and rejection of infinite regresses

3, Beta – list of metaphysical “aporiai” or puzzles

4, Gamma – logical assumption of the Principle of Non-Contradiction and the Principle of the Excluded Middle

5, Delta – Aristotle’s Dictionary of Terms (just remember “delta” does with “dictionary”)

6, Epsilon – Metaphysics is the study of being as being and thus it is Theology (study of God/gods), because the highest substance (God) is the Principle of all Being.

7, Zeta – Aristotle lists four candidates for being/ousia/substance as 1) subject, 2) universal, 3) genus, and 4) essence.

8, Eta

9, Theta

10, Iota – One and many, sameness and difference.

11, Kappa – Review of things said already and of things stated in Aristotle’s Physics.

12, Lambda – The “Theology” Book. Aristotle examines the first principles or “gods”. Aristotle discusses the unmoved mover(s).

13, Mu – Mathematics and numbers

14, Nu – Mathematics and numbers continued

This list is derived from Marc Cohen’s article “Aristotle’s Metaphysics” in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

•    accident: sumbebêkos (kata sumbebhko,j)
•    accidental: kata sumbebêkos (kata sumbebhko,j)
•    account: logos
•    actuality: energeia, entelecheia
•    alteration: alloiôsis
•    affirmative: kataphatikos
•    assertion: apophansis (sentence with a truth value, declarative sentence)
•    assumption: hupothesis
•    attribute: pathos
•    axiom: axioma
•    be: einai
•    being(s): on, onta
•    belong: huparchein
•    category: katêgoria
•    cause: aition, aitia
•    change: kinêsis, metabolê
•    come to be: gignesthai
•    coming to be: genesis
•    contradict: antiphanai
•    contradiction: antiphasis (in the sense “contradictory pair of propositions” and also in the sense “denial of a proposition”)
•    contrary: enantion
•    definition: horos, horismos
•    demonstration: apodeixis
•    denial (of a proposition): apophasis
•    dialectic: dialektikê
•    differentia: diaphora; specific difference, eidopoios diaphora
•    distinctive: idios, idion
•    end: telos
•    essence: to ti ên einai, to ti esti
•    essential: en tôi ti esti, en tôi ti ên einai (of predications); kath’ hauto (of attributes)
•    exist: einai
•    explanation: aition, aitia
•    final cause: hou heneka (literally, “what something is for”)
•    form: eidos, morphê
•    formula: logos (lo,goj)
•    function: ergon
•    genus: genos
•    homonymous: homônumon
•    immediate: amesos
•    impossible: adunaton
•    in respect of itself: kath’ hauto
•    individual: atomon, tode ti
•    induction: epagôgê
•    infinite: apeiron
•    kind: genos, eidos
•    knowledge: epistêmê
•    matter: hulê
•    movement: kinêsis
•    nature: phusis
•    negation (of a term): apophasis
•    particular: en merei, epi meros (of a proposition); kath’hekaston (of individuals)
•    peculiar: idios, idion
•    per se: kath’ hauto
•    perception: aisthêsis
•    perplexity: aporia
•    possible: dunaton, endechomenon; endechesthai (verb: “be possible”)
•    potentially: dunamei
•    potentiality: dunamis
•    predicate: katêgorein (verb); katêegoroumenon(“what is predicated”)
•    predication: katêgoria (act or instance of predicating, type of predication)
•    principle: archê (starting point of a demonstration)
•    qua: hêi
•    quality: poion
•    quantity: poson
•    refute: elenchein, refutation, elenchos
•    separate: chôriston (cwristo,n)
•    said in many ways: pollachôs legetai
•    science: epistêmê
•    soul: psuchê
•    species: eidos
•    specific: eidopoios (of a differentia that “makes a species”, eidopoios diaphora)
•    subject: hupokeimenon (u`pokei,menon)
•    substance: ousia (ouvsia)
•    term: horos
•    this: tode ti (to,de ti)
•    universal: katholou (both of propositions and of individuals)
•    wisdom: sophia

“It is true, indeed, that the account he gives there of the participant is different from what he says in his so-called unwritten teaching.”

- Aristotle, Physics 209b

This secret teaching conforms to something said by Plato in his Seventh Letter:

“Every serious man in dealing with really serious subjects carefully avoids writing” (344c).

So what is this secret “unwritten doctrine” of Plato? I can’t write it down. Come to class and find out…

Here’s how it goes:

1. Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama are each “human”.
2. We infer that there must be a Form called “Human-ness” by which these “humans” participate.
3. Now these three men are alike because they are human. Moreover, these humans are like the Form of “Human-ness.” Consequently, we now have new set of things that are human: Human-ness, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama.
4. We now need a new Form of Human-ness to account for all these human things, including the original Form of “Human-ness”. Let’s call this new overarching Form “Super-Human-ness.”
5. But now we have an entirely new set of things all alike by way of being human: Super-Human-ness, Human-ness, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama. It doesn’t stop with this third “Super-Form.” We would have to keep on supplying “Super-Duper Form of Human-ness” and “Even-More-Super-Duper Form of Human-ness: it goes on and on forever. We have an infinite regress, which shows that the theory is absurd.

What does this all mean? The theory of forms assumes that predication is explained by participation and that arguments should not be circular. The Third Man Argument indicates a problem.

Here are some helpful articles on the Third Man Argument:

Cohen, S. M., “The Logic of the Third Man,” Philosophical Review 80 (1971) 448-475.

Geach, P. T., “The Third Man Again,” Philosophical Review 65 (1956) 72-82.

Owen, G.E.L., “The Place of the Timaeus in Plato’s Dialogues,” Classical Quarterly n.s. 3 (1953) 79-95; also in Studies in Plato’s Metaphysics, ed. by R. E. Allen (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1965) 313-338.

Sellars, W., “Vlastos and the Third Man,” Philosophical Review 64 (1955) 405-437.

Strang, C., “Plato and the Third Man,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Suppl. vol. 37 (1963) 147-164; also in Plato: A Collection of Critical Essays, vol. 1, ed. by G. Vlastos (New York: Anchor, 1971) 184-200, and on reserve in OUGL.

Vlastos, G., “The Third Man Argument in the Parmenides,” Philosophical Review 63 (1954) 319-349; also in Studies in Plato’s Metaphysics, ed. by R. E. Allen (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1965) 231-263.

1.    Thales (624-546 B.C.) – The “Father of Greek philosophy”. All things are water

2.    Anaximander (610-546 B.C.) – The first principle is an undefined, unlimited substance without qualities, out of which the primary opposites, (e.g. hot and cold, moist and dry) are differentiated.

3.    Anaximenes (585-525 B.C.) – All things are air – as air “thickens” it becomes fire, cloud, water, earth.

By the way, the first known philosophic critique: Anaximander critiques Thales regarding water.

Pythagorean School – Harmony and Numbers

4.    Pythagoras of Samos (582-496 B.C.). All is number and harmony. He had a cult following.

Ephesian School – Fire and Flux

5.    Heraclitus of Ephesus (535-475 B.C.) – He said that all is fire. Fire is always in flux and so all things are always changing in an unending process.

Eleatic School – The Doctrine of the One

6.    Parmenides of Elea (510-440 B.C.) – All is one and change is only apparent.

7.    Zeno of Elea (490-430 B.C.) – A disciple of Parmenides (not the same Zeno who was the founder of the Stoics). Zeno listed a number of celebrated paradoxes (e.g. Achilles and the Tortoise).

Atomist School – All is Small, Little Things

8.    Leucippus (5th century B.C.) and Democritus of Abdera (460-370 B.C.). All is atoms. Moving along an infinite void, atoms “swerve” and “crash”, thereby generating things.

The Sophists – Wise Guys

9.    Protagoras (490-420 BC) – He is regarded as the “First Sophist”. Diogenes Laertius wrote that Protagoras—a sophist—invented the “Socratic” method. Protagoras said things appear differently to different persons. He creates a system of relativism. Things are and are not.

10.    Gorgias (487-376 BC) – emphasizes the persuasive power of logos or language. He wrote an Encomium of Helen. He defends Helen. She had not power to resist the words convincing her to go to Troy. Language is all powerful for those who are skillful.

11.    Hippias of Elis (485-499 BC) – He was a younger contemporary of Protagoras and Socrates who claimed to make his own clothing. He also claimed to be an authority on all subjects, and lectured on economics, politics, poetry, grammar, history, archaeology, mathematics and astronomy.

12.    Prodicus (465-390 BC) – He carefully distinguishes the meanings of words. Aristotle actually outdoes him because Aristotle classifies the different meanings of a single word.

Remember the Sophists tend to be focused on langauge and rhetoric. They seem to be disillisioned with the cosmologies of earlier thinkers.

Saint Thomas Aquinas’ Commentaria in Aristotelem.

The picture above is part of an image of Saint Thomas Aquinas “confounding” the Muslim philosopher Averroës (Arabic: Ibn Rushd). The whole thing is depicted below. Averroës and Aquinas both studied Aristotle, but Aquinas showed that Aristotle could be reconciled with Christianity. To do this, Aquinas had to correct what he considered to be “misinterpretations” of Aristotle made by Averroës.

In case you’re wondering, that’s Averroës on the floor below Aquinas. Apparently he’s been TKO’ed by Aquinas’ mental powers. Or he may just be sleeping, because he’s so bored. You decide.