E.g. there is the nose, and concavity, and snubness, which is compounded Nike Free 3.0 V2 out of the two by the presence of Arsenal Dame the one in the Sergio Aguero Jersey other, and it is not by accident that the nose has the attribute either of concavity or of snubness, but in virtue of its nature; nor do they attach to it as whiteness does to Sadio Mane Jersey Callias, or to man (because Callias, who happens to be a man, is white), but as ‘male’ attaches to animal and ‘equal’ to quantity, and Boston Red Sox Tröjor as all so-called ‘attributes propter se’ attach to their subjects. And such attributes are those in Gareth Bale Pelipaidat which is involved either the formula or the name of the subject of the particular attribute, and which cannot be explained without this; e.g. white can be explained apart from man, but not female apart from animal. Therefore there is either no essence and definition Schalke 04 Pelipaita of any of these things, or if there is, it is in another sense, as we have said.
But there is also a second difficulty about them. For if snub nose and concave nose are the same thing, snub and concave will be the thing; but if snub and concave are not the same (because it is impossible to speak of snubness apart from the thing of which it is an attribute propter se, for snubness is concavity-in-a-nose), either it is impossible to say ‘snub nose’ or the same thing will have been said twice, concave-nose nose; for snub nose will be concave-nose nose. And so it is absurd that such things should have an essence; if they have, there will Män Ralph Lauren Pants be an infinite regress; for in snub-nose nose Kvinnor Bags yet another ‘nose’ will be involved.
Clearly, then, only substance is definable. For if the other categories also are definable, it must be by addition of a determinant, e.g. the qualitative is defined thus, and so is the odd, for it cannot be defined apart from number; nor can female be defined apart from animal. (When I say ‘by Sevilla Jersey addition’ I mean Belstaff XL500 Replica Jackor the expressions in which it turns out that we are saying the same thing twice, as in these instances.) And if this is true, coupled terms also, like ‘odd number’, will not be definable (but this escapes our notice because our formulae are not accurate.). But if these also are definable, either it is in some other way or, as we definition and essence must be said to have more than one sense. Therefore in one sense nothing will have a definition and nothing will have an essence, except substances, but in another sense other things will have them. Clearly, then, definition is the formula of the essence, and essence belongs to substances either alone or chiefly and primarily and in the unqualified sense.
Book VII Chapter 6
We must inquire whether each thing and its essence are the same or different. This is of some use for the inquiry concerning substance; for each thing is thought to be not different from its substance, and the essence is said to be the substance of each thing.
Now in the case of accidental unities the two would be generally thought to be Charlotte Hornets Tröjor different, e.g. white man would be thought to be different from the essence of white man. For if they are the same, the essencelinks:
http://www13.plala.or.jp/gakuki3/cgi_bin/aska/aska.cgi
http://www.travelan.net/cgi-bin/search.cgi
http://www.rockclimbing.com/cgi-bin/gear/search.cgi |
