384 ANTIENT METAPHYSICS. Book V. 



And here, again, we may fee, that, in a true affirmative propofuion 

 of the firft kind, when the genus is praedicated of the fpecies, there is 

 a very great difagreement betwixt the two ideas, in this refped, that 

 the one comprehends or contains the other ; whereas, the other is 

 contained under it, as the part is under the whole ; for that is the re- 

 Lition which genus and fpecies have to one another ; the genus, cmi- 

 mah for example, comprtheading rnan^ horje^ dog. ^^i-x. as parts of it. 

 Attain, in the other way of praedicating, where an accident is praedi- 

 cated of a iubftance, the dijagreement is very great ; for the accident 

 is inherent in the fubftance, and cannot exift without it ; whereas, the 



fubftance 



relation that is betwixt Socrates and the philofophifing fubftance. The inftance he 

 eives of the other is, when we fay, * That this man is hocrates ;' where, fays he, we 

 praedicate Stcrates^ the individual, of man the fprcies, inftead of praedicating in the 

 natural way the fpecies ;»an, of Socrates the individual. But this propofition is like- 

 Avife refolvable into a natural praedication of the fame kind ; for the plain meaning 

 of the propofition is, that a particular fuhjiance belonging to the fpecies man is the fame 

 \i\\k\.x}a^ fubftance CTiWo-i. Socrates. The third manner of praedicating is, he fays, 

 ■when accidcnty inflead of being praedicated oi ^Jiibjiance in the natural way, is prae- 

 dicated of another accident, of which he gives this example, fpeaking of Socrates, r» 

 9«^«(xg«v T»t/T» <p<?,4(ro?'ov icri. * This bald thing is a philofopher.'' But the refoiution of 

 this into a natural praedication is flill more obvious : for it is faying no more than 

 that t.\vt fubftance, which is bald, has the quality of philofophifing, where the quality, 

 in the natural way, is praedicated of the fubftance. This is plain in the Engiifh tran- 

 flation where we muft ufe the word thing, which, in fuch an expreflion, can denote 

 nothing but fubftance ; whereas, in the Greek, Avhere the article fupplies the place of 

 any noun, it is not fo very obvious. In Englifli, and, I believe, in every other lan- 

 guage, there are many expreflions like this ; as, when we fay, that * Goodnefs is a- 

 • miable,' ' Wifdom is profitable ;' where it is plain that we ufe the abftra£l nouns, 

 goodnefs and wifdom, for the fubftantive noun and the adjeftive : So that it is the 

 fame thing as if we praedicated the quality of amiablenefs of a good man, or oi being 

 profitable of a wife man 



And thus, I think, it moft evidently appears, that all prcpofitions of every kind are 

 either praedications of the two kinds I have mentioned, or refolvable into thefe. 

 Whoever defires to be further informed upon this fubjed, may confult Aiiftotle, in 

 his Laft JnalyticSs lib. i. cap- 22. and his Commentator Philoponus, p. 52. who, I 

 think, has explained the matter much better than Ammonius. 



