Book, Paragraph

 1      I,  15|         point).~Look also at the genera of the objects denoted by
 2      I,  15|   certain kind. If, however, the genera be subaltern, there is no
 3      I,  15|         animal, so that both the genera are predicated of it. Likewise
 4      I,  15|          then, as well, both the genera are predicated of raven,
 5      I,  15|   definition. But in the case of genera that are not subaltern this
 6      I,  15|          and see not only if the genera of the term before you are
 7      I,  15|        in one case.~Now since of genera that are different without
 8      I,  15|         term are differentiae of genera that are different without
 9      I,  15|         it forms differentiae of genera that are different without
10      I,  16|         examined within the same genera, e.g. "Wherein does justice
11      I,  16|   knowledge?: for in the case of genera that are very far apart,
12      I,  17|    things belonging to different genera, the formulae being ‘A:B =
13     II,  2 |   commonly made in regard to the genera of things, e.g. if one were
14     II,  2 |   inflected form, but always the genera are predicated of their
15     II,  2 |          the definition of their genera. A man therefore who says
16    III,  6 |       should take a glance among genera, dividing them by their
17     IV,  1 |      genus of knowledge. For the genera of relatives ought themselves
18     IV,  1 |       the species partake of the genera, but not the genera of the
19     IV,  1 |          the genera, but not the genera of the species: for the
20     IV,  2 |       well, and neither of these genera embraces the remaining one,
21     IV,  2 |          species falls under two genera, the one is embraced by
22     IV,  2 |          and that neither of its genera is embraced by the other:
23     IV,  2 |         to be necessary that the genera of the same object must
24     IV,  2 |       genus rendered; for if the genera be subordinate neither the
25     IV,  2 |      essence: for all the higher genera should be predicated of
26     IV,  2 |     itself, or one of its higher genera, partakes of the species:
27     IV,  2 |      show that one of its higher genera is predicated of the species
28     IV,  2 |      show that one of the higher genera is predicated of the species
29     IV,  2 |          and likewise if all the genera higher than this genus are
30     IV,  2 |         the genus, then both the genera higher than it, and it itself,
31     IV,  2 |      same object falls under two genera: the genera must therefore
32     IV,  2 |      falls under two genera: the genera must therefore of necessity
33     IV,  2 |        at the definitions of the genera, and see whether they apply
34     IV,  2 | necessity the definitions of its genera must be predicated of the
35     IV,  3 |        not the other. For if the genera have an intermediary, so
36     IV,  3 |    species have, so should their genera as well, as is the case
37     IV,  3 |          species and between the genera, yet it be not similarly
38     IV,  4 |       called by those of all the genera of its genus. For if the
39     IV,  4 |          names of all the higher genera in relation to a "half".
40     IV,  4 |           double" and its higher genera: for we say both "double
41     IV,  4 |        knowledge’ itself and its genera, e.g. "disposition" and "
42     IV,  4 |          in question are not the genera of "double", inasmuch as
43     IV,  5 |       terms rendered are not the genera, seeing that they do not
44     IV,  5 |      anything that exists in two genera or more into one of them
45     IV,  5 |          into both the aforesaid genera.~Moreover, people sometimes
46     IV,  5 |       excess" and "vehemence" as genera, then inanimate things will
47     IV,  6 | contraries are found in contrary genera, so that the better species
48     IV,  6 |      hand, the comparison of the genera and of the species one with
49     VI,  2 |         object will occur in two genera of which neither contains
50     VI,  5 |    elementary rules in regard to genera, as has been said before.’~
51     VI,  5 |  language which transgresses the genera of the things he defines,
52     VI,  5 |        has stated all the higher genera, seeing that all the higher
53     VI,  5 |       seeing that all the higher genera are predicated of the lower.
54     VI,  6 |      same thing cannot be in two genera of which neither contains
55     VI,  6 |         Both, then, could not be genera, and consequently, if "state"
56     VI,  6 |        used of two non-subaltern genera. Else the result will be
57     VI,  6 |          be in two non-subaltern genera: for each of the differentiae
58     VI,  6 |            If, then, each of the genera as well is true of that
59     VI,  6 |          be in two non-subaltern genera. Or perhaps it is not impossible
60     VI,  6 |        used of two non-subaltern genera, and we ought to add the
61     VI,  6 |        animal" are non-subaltern genera, and "biped" is the differentia
62     VI,  6 |        used of two non-subaltern genera, it is clear also that there
63     VI,  6 |          limbs together with the genera that are higher than this,
64     VI,  7 |        unreal.~Moreover, of both genera and differentiae and all
65    VII,  3 |         category of essence; and genera and differentiae are so
66    VII,  3 |        same genus or in contrary genera. The differentiae, too,
67    VII,  3 |      same genus: of things whose genera are themselves contraries
68    VII,  3 |         will be the same and the genera contrary; or both genera
69    VII,  3 |         genera contrary; or both genera and differentiae will be
70    VII,  3 |  inflexions and coordinates. For genera and definitions are bound