Logic

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 5

Chapter 13

Further Analysis of the Concept

1. Essence
 The term “essence” has a more restricted sense than it
often had in previous chapters. Broad meaning of
“essence,” if we grasp what a thing is, no matter how
vague and indeterminate “something”—or as “something
big,” “something colored,” “something far away,” and so
on we grasp it essence quiddity.

 But in the LOGICAL connection with the predicables and


definition we use “essence” in the strict or proper
sense, in which it includes only the basic intelligible
elements of the comprehension of a concept but does not
include the derived elements.

 Example the essence in this sense, of


“triangle” includes “figure bound by three
straight lines meeting by twos on plane” but does
not include “enclosing three interior angles.” The
three lines of a triangle are looked upon as prior
to the three angles and more basic than they. If
you think of the three lines meeting by twos at
three points on a plane, you think of what a
triangle is primarily and necessarily; as a
consequence of having this essence-as a
consequence, that is, of the three interior
angles. We do not think of the three angles as the
reason why a triangle has three straight lines as
sides, but of the three straight lines as the
reason why it has three angles.

 The essence (in the strict sense) of “man” is “rational


animal” rather than “speaking animal” or “tool-using
animal,” although the notes “speaking” and “tool-using”
suffice to differentiate man from all other kinds of
animals. The reason for this is that “rational animal”
is looked upon as prior to, and more basic than,
“speaking animal,” “tool-using animal,” and so on. Man
is not a rational animal because he can speak and use
tools; rather, he can speak and use tools because he is
a rational animal. Speaking and using tools may be
reasons for our knowing that he is rational animal-
since we can reason from man’s properties and
activities to his essence-but they are not the reason
for his being rational animal.

2. Universal as Abstract
 The word “universal” as synonymous with “distributed”
and as opposed to “particular” and “singular.”
 Is a concept that expresses the essence (quiddity or
nature) of many really distinct individual subjects but
leaves their differences entirely unexpressed.
 The concept of “man,” for instance, is a universal; and
what is signified by “man” is such an essence. Man is
universal because it expresses only what can exist
concretely and at the same time in each distinct
individual subject; and however much these objects
differ from one another in other respects, the essence
“man” can be predicated of each of them.

 The essence “man” is found simultaneously in


Peter, Paul, John, and Mary-Peter is man, Paul is
a man, John is a man, and Mary is a man (at least
in the sense that she is a subject having a human
nature). Peter, Paul, John and Mary are four
(many) completely distinct individuals subject-
Peter is not Paul, Paul is not John and so on.
They differ for instance, in sex,age,height, and
weight; in ability,virtue, and attainments; in
race, place of residence and social status.
 Transcendental concepts are similar to universals in
that what they signify can be realized concretely and
at the same time in each of many subjects-there are,
for instance, many beings, many good things.
Transcendental concepts differ from universals,
however, in that they express the differences among
things, as well as their similarities, and consequently
are never predicated of two things in exactly the same
sense.

 Direct Universal is a concept signifying an absolute


essence – that is, an essence (nature, or quiddity) as
such, abstracted from all individualizing conditions,
and considered without reference to the mode of
existence it has either in the mind or in things.
 All that a direct universal signifies can exist
in the real order.
 Reflex Universal is an essence, nature, or quiddity,
considered with reference to the individuals in which
it is verified and to its potential predicatability.

3. The Predicables
 Is a classification of reflex universals based on the
five ways in which they express the nature of subjects
of which they are predicated. They are listed as
species, genus, specific difference, logical property,
and logical accident. There are five (5) explaining why
there are five predicables;

A. General survey
 Every universal predicate expresses the
nature of the subject of which it is
predicated in one of the following ways.
Either it is expresses its essence or else
it do not. It expresses the essence of the
subject, it either expresses all the basic
constitutive notes and is predicated of the
subject as its; (1) Species, it expresses
either a determinable constitutive element
and is predicated of the subject as its (2)
Genus, it expresses the determining
constitutive element that distinguishes the
essence from other essences belonging to
the same genus and is predicated of the
subject as its (3) Specific Difference , it
either express an attribute that does not
belong to the subject necessarily and is
predicated of the subject as a (4)
Property; or else it expresses an attribute
that does not belong to the subject
necessary but only contingently and is
predicated of the subject as a (5) Logical
Accident.
 Schema emphasizes two very important
distinctions
A. The distinction between the notes that
constitutes an essence and those that
do not constitute it but merely
accompany it and;
B. The distinction between the first four
0f the predicables, which are
necessary to the subject.
Synoptic Schema
Every universal predicate expresses(EXAMPLE)The predicable that exemplified
the nature of the subject of whichwhen the adjoining member of
it is predicated in one of the following the disjunction is verified:
ways:
either as CONSTITUTING THE ESSENCE of the subject

either WHOLLY . . . . . . . . . . . .(“man,” “rational


CONTITUTIVE NOTES

animal”). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(1) SPECIES


ESSENTIAL OR

or PARTIALLY

NECESSARY NOTES
either as a DETERMINABLE
constitutive element. . . . . (“animal”). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2) GENUS

or as a DETERMINING
constitutive element. . . .. (“rational”). . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . .. .(3) SPECIFIC DIFFERENCE
NONCONSTITUTIVE NOTES

or NOT as CONTITUTIVE THE ESSENCE of the subject


NONESSENTIAL OR

but as ACCOMPANYING THE ESSENCE:

either NECESSARILY. . . . . . .(“risible.” “able


to speak”). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(4) LOGICAL PROPERTY

or NOT NECESSARILY BUT


CONTINGENTLY. . . . (“white,” “actually NOT
speaking”). . . . . . . . .(5)LOGICAL ACCIDENT NECESSARY

B. Detailed Explanation of Each Predicable


 All the predicables are universals.
Consequently all of them express the
nature of many really distinct
individuals and can be predicated of
each these individuals in exactly the
same sense. This is taken for granted in
the following definitions.
1. SPECIES – A species, in the
strict and proper sense, is a
universal that expresses the
completely determined essence of its
inferiors and only that.
2. GENUS – A genus is a universal
that expresses the incompletely
determined essence of its inferiors,
giving an incomplete answer to the
question.
3. DIFFERENCE – a difference is a
universal that expresses the
constitute note that distinguishes a
species from its genus or a genus
from a higher genus.
4. LOGICAL PROPERTY – is a
universal that expresses, not the
essence of the subject of which it is
predicated, but an attribute that
accompanies this essence necessarily.
5. LOGICAL ACCIDENT – Is an
attribute that is not conceptually
connected with the essence of the
subject that it is predicated of.

4. The Aristotelian Categories of Predicaments


 It will do this by clarifying the notion of “genus” and
by deepening our understanding of the law of the
inverse ratio of comprehension and extension.
 The Categories as Expressing Modes of Being
A. Is a classification of predicates, each of
which expresses some mode of being of its
subject while omitting other modes of being.
 The Notion of a Logical Category
A. We are ready to consider them as orderly as
orderly classifications of concepts and from
the point of view of logic. In preparing to
the definition of “category” we shall build
up category of substance and with the eye on
arrangement of genera, subgenera, species,
and individuals as displayed in our schema of
this category we shall give a descriptive
definition of category itself.

You might also like