| | |
| Paragraph 1 |
In the case of predicates constituting the essential nature of a
thing, it clearly terminates, seeing that if definition is possible,
or in other words, if essential form is knowable, and an infinite
series cannot be traversed, predicates constituting a thing's
essential nature must be finite in number. |
| Paragraph 2 |
If we must lay down a rule, let us entitle the latter kind of
statement predication, and the former not predication at all, or not
strict but accidental predication. |
| Paragraph 3 |
We shall assume, then, that the predicate is invariably predicated
strictly and not accidentally of the subject, for on such
predication demonstrations depend for their force. |
| Paragraph 4 |
(2) Predicates which signify substance signify that the subject is
identical with the predicate or with a species of the predicate. |
| Paragraph 5 |
(3) If A is a quality of B, B cannot be a quality of A - a quality
of a quality. |
| Paragraph 6 |
I assume first that predication implies a single subject and a
single attribute, and secondly that predicates which are not
substantial are not predicated of one another. |
| Paragraph 7 |
The argument we have given is one of the so-called proofs; |
| Paragraph 8 |
As dialectical proofs of our contention these may carry
conviction, but an analytic process will show more briefly that
neither the ascent nor the descent of predication can be infinite in
the demonstrative sciences which are the object of our
investigation. |
| Paragraph 9 |
If this is so, it follows that the intermediates between any two
terms are also always limited in number. |
HTML by 
created 1996/11/25 modified 2009/04/26