Book, Paragraph

  1      I,  2 |            i.e. it predicates a single attribute of a single subject. If
  2      I,  2 |        conclusion: for the cause of an attribute’s inherence in a subject
  3      I,  2 |          subject more firmly than that attribute; e.g. the cause of our loving
  4      I,  4 |              define what we mean by an attribute "true in every instance
  5      I,  4 |               subject", an "essential" attribute, and a "commensurate and
  6      I,  4 |            commensurate and universal" attribute. I call "true in every instance"
  7      I,  4 |            belong are contained in the attribute’s own defining formula.
  8      I,  4 |                the contrary of a given attribute is either its privative
  9      I,  4 |                distinction between the attribute which is "true in every
 10      I,  4 |          instance" and the "essential" attribute.~I term "commensurately
 11      I,  4 |           commensurately universal" an attribute which belongs to every instance
 12      I,  4 |                subjects. The essential attribute, and the attribute that
 13      I,  4 |           essential attribute, and the attribute that belongs to its subject
 14      I,  4 |                to two right angles.~An attribute belongs commensurately and
 15      I,  4 |               commensurately universal attribute of figure. For though it
 16      I,  4 |              to two right angles, this attribute cannot be demonstrated of
 17      I,  4 |                primary subject of this attribute but triangle is prior. So
 18      I,  4 |                or to possess any other attribute, in any random instance
 19      I,  4 |               commensurately universal attribute of isosceles; it is of wider
 20      I,  5 |               they do not possess this attribute qua lines or qua numbers,
 21      I,  5 |                hand it be not, and the attribute belongs to equilateral qua
 22      I,  5 |              will be asked, "does this attribute belong to the subject of
 23      I,  5 |           brazen and isosceles and the attribute remains. "But"-you may say- "
 24      I,  5 |               figure or limit, and the attribute vanishes. " True, but figure
 25      I,  5 |               elimination destroys the attribute. "Then what is the first?"
 26      I,  5 |            virtue of triangle that the attribute belongs to all the other
 27      I,  7 |              proved, the conclusion-an attribute inhering essentially in
 28      I,  8 |               be eternal. Therefore no attribute can be demonstrated nor
 29      I,  8 |                accidental, because the attribute’s connexion with its perishable
 30      I,  9 |               conclusion is to show an attribute inhering as such, nothing
 31      I,  9 |       therefore afford knowledge of an attribute only as inhering accidentally,
 32      I,  9 |            genus.~Our knowledge of any attribute’s connexion with a subject
 33      I,  9 |                exceptions show that no attribute is strictly demonstrable
 34      I,  9 |                truths of each inhering attribute are indemonstrable; for
 35      I,  13|                twinkling. Then B is an attribute of C, and A-not twinkling-of
 36      I,  15|                          15~Just as an attribute A may (as we saw) be atomically
 37      I,  16|                  a) If neither A is an attribute of any C nor C of any B,
 38      I,  16|       subordinate to A nor a universal attribute of B: for B, since A was
 39      I,  16|             necessarily be a universal attribute of all things. Consequently
 40      I,  16|               true because A is not an attribute of all things, C-B false
 41      I,  16|         because C, which never has the attribute A, cannot be an attribute
 42      I,  16|              attribute A, cannot be an attribute of B; for if C-B were true,
 43      I,  16|             supposing that actually an attribute of all A must also be an
 44      I,  16|               of all A must also be an attribute of all B, then if C is yet
 45      I,  16|                taken to be a universal attribute of all but universally non-attributable
 46      I,  16|              actually that which is an attribute of no B will not be an attribute
 47      I,  16|       attribute of no B will not be an attribute of all A either; for if
 48      I,  16|                either; for if it be an attribute of all A, it will also be
 49      I,  16|              all A, it will also be an attribute of all B, which is contrary
 50      I,  16|              assumed to be a universal attribute of A, but an attribute of
 51      I,  16|       universal attribute of A, but an attribute of no B, then the premiss
 52      I,  16|                 For in fact what is an attribute of no A will not be an attribute
 53      I,  16|       attribute of no A will not be an attribute of any B either; and if
 54      I,  16| non-attributable to A, but a universal attribute of B, the premiss C-A is
 55      I,  16|           assume that that which is an attribute of all B is an attribute
 56      I,  16|               attribute of all B is an attribute of no A, for if it be an
 57      I,  16|               of no A, for if it be an attribute of all B, it must be an
 58      I,  16|                of all B, it must be an attribute of some A. If then C is
 59      I,  16|          nevertheless assumed to be an attribute of all B but of no A, C-B
 60      I,  17|              Thus, if C is actually an attribute of both A and B, but is
 61      I,  17|                but is assumed to be an attribute of A only and not of B,
 62      I,  17|              for A may very well be an attribute of no D, whereas all B is
 63      I,  17|               Equally well A may be an attribute of no D, and D of no B.
 64      I,  19|               proximate subject of the attribute B—i.e. so that B-C is immediate;
 65      I,  19|           ultimate subject and primary attribute limit one another?~I hold
 66      I,  22|                this that when a single attribute is predicated of a single
 67      I,  22|            single subject and a single attribute, and secondly that predicates
 68      I,  22|          predication in which a single attribute is predicated of a single
 69      I,  22|              subject (D) of which some attribute (C) is primarily predicable;
 70      I,  22|      predicable; that there must be an attribute (B) primarily predicable
 71      I,  22|                predicable of the first attribute, and that the series must
 72      I,  22|                the latter is odd as an attribute of number-though it is number’
 73      I,  22|           number-though it is number’s attribute, yet number itself is an
 74      I,  22|            inherence in odd of another attribute of odd in whose nature odd
 75      I,  23|           conclusions that if the same attribute A inheres in two terms C
 76      I,  23|                and scalene possess the attribute of having their angles equal
 77      I,  23|              middle term that a single attribute inheres in several subjects,
 78      I,  23|        immediate intervals. Yet if the attribute to be proved common to two
 79      I,  23|              manner, no proposition or attribute which falls beyond A is
 80      I,  23|              prove the inherence of an attribute, nothing falls outside the
 81      I,  23|          limits of the subject and the attribute denied of it.~
 82      I,  24|         subject, as such, possesses an attribute is superior. If this is
 83      I,  24|               isosceles possesses that attribute knows the subject as qua
 84      I,  24|              qua itself possessing the attribute, to a less degree than he
 85      I,  24|           knows that triangle has that attribute. To sum up the whole matter:
 86      I,  24|                possess qua triangle an attribute which it does not in fact
 87      I,  24|              subject as possessing its attribute qua that in virtue of which
 88      I,  24|                that which possesses an attribute through its own essential
 89      I,  24|          knowledge is attained when an attribute no longer inheres because
 90      I,  24|                 Why has isosceles this attribute?" and its answer "Because
 91      I,  33|              apprehension of, e.g. the attribute "animal" as incapable of
 92     II,  1 |            whether the connexion of an attribute with a thing is a fact, (
 93     II,  1 |        concerns a complex of thing and attribute and we ask whether the thing
 94     II,  2 |                or has not this or that attribute: whereas, if we ask whether
 95     II,  2 |            that, i.e. has this or that attribute, but without qualification
 96     II,  2 |               as having some essential attribute or some accident-are both
 97     II,  2 |                being possessed of some attribute, and in so far as they are
 98     II,  2 |                to be possessed of some attribute such as equal to right angles,
 99     II,  3 |            defining anything-essential attribute or accident-did we get knowledge
100     II,  3 |     demonstration reveals that a given attribute attaches or does not attach
101     II,  3 |                right angles, then this attribute has been proved to attach
102     II,  4 |                 a) syllogism proves an attribute of a subject through the
103     II,  7 |            that it has or has not some attribute. Therefore, since presumably
104     II,  7 |                it is possessed of some attribute he proves. What is it, then,
105     II,  13|                that subject). while an attribute may inhere in every triad,
106     II,  13|                on the other hand is an attribute inhering in every triad
107     II,  16|                as follows: if the same attribute is predicable of more than
108     II,  17|                four right angles is an attribute wider than triangle or are),
109     II,  17|               Deciduous is a universal attribute of vine, and is at the same
110     II,  17|             the following. Let A be an attribute of all B, and B of every
111     II,  17|             Then B will be a universal attribute of each species of D (since
112     II,  17|                D (since I call such an attribute universal even if it is
113     II,  17|            commensurate, and I call an attribute primary universal if it
114     II,  17|         inherence in D? Now if A is an attribute of all the species of E,