^

IMPRIMI POTEST
R. J.

Meyer, Praep

S. J.
.

Prov

Miss

Sti. Ludovici, die 7.

Sept. 1911

NIHIL Sti. Ludovici, die 17.

OBSTAT

Sept. 1911
F. G. Holweck,
Censor Librorum

IMPRIMATUR Sti. Ludovici, die 18.

Sept. 1911
"Joannes J. Glennon,
Ludovici,

Archiepiscopus Sti.

Copyright 1911, by

Joseph Gummersbach

Becktold

Printing and

Book

Mfg. Co., St. Louis, Mo.

"CI.A297887

CONTENTS

^
Introduction
CHAPTER

PAGE

vii

The

Term

Being

II

Unity

and

Commonness

of

Being
...

13

III

Unity

of

Being

Not

Real

24

IV V VI

Inclusion

of

the

Modes

in

Being
...

49

Being

Not

Genus
Being

54

Composition

of

With

Its

Modes

article

Composition
Not Metaphysical

of

Being

With

Its

Modes 60

article

Composition
Logical

of

Being

With

Its

Modes

j6
Being

VII

Unity

of

Imperfect
Being

84

VIII

Analogousness

of

article

Notion

of

Analogy

90

ARTICLE

Intrinsic

Metaphysical

Analogy

of

ing Be-

107
article

Analogy

of

Being

Analogy

of

tion Attribu-

in

PREFACE

The

treatise
on

Being

herein

mitted sub-

is
an

attempt

to

simplify

subject
a

important
very

to

the

student

of

philosophy.

In

making

the

attempt,

the

author

has
sued pur-

the

method

adopted

by

him

in

his

treatise
on

Certitude.

INTRODUCTION

The
the

solidity
stability
laid,
of the

of

building
foundation.
is

depends
When
;

mainly
this this
to

on

its

is comes be-

poorly

building
the and

unsafe is

when
sure

undermined,
to

edifice
its

topple
its
to
a

the

ground
Now,
that
and

bury
the

inmates

under
is

ruins.

what

foundation is
to

building,
notions
all

metaphysics
principles
One
is of form

philosophy. groundwork
in
matters

Its
of

the
error

knowledge.

single enough
true

metaphysical
total and

often
all its

to

bring
and
not

about
leave

the doubt

downfall falsehood fate of the

science
And

in

place.
sciences
:

only
upon

does
rect cor-

the

natural
tenets

hinge

metaphysical
itself is

supernatural
;
so

religion
must

dependent
;

upon

them
can

for

faith

be

reasonable
are

and

how

it be denied

when

first

ciples prin-

perverted
but
to cast

and
a

?
at

We

need

glance

the for

History
our

of
tention. con-

Philosophy
All

fmcl

ample
false

proof philosophy
such
starts

the
has

of

modern havoc

times,
in

which
realm upon

wrought
truth,

frightful
with
erroneous

the

of

views

metaphysical
a

questions.
Hegel
bases

Thus,
his
mon-

to

give

just

few

instances,
vii

viii

Introduction

strous

doctrine of

of

philosophy

on

wrong

ception con-

"indeterminate his of
the
"

being"

(ens
on

ut
an

sic).
bitrary ar-

Spinoza

builds definition

wild
"

speculations
Kant of God
that

substance." existence the

ors endeavcannot

to

show

that

be

certainly
for

known

by

things
him

are
"

made,"
concept
"

the
cause

reason
"

that and the

with
"

both
of
not

the

of

principle
hence

causality

are

purely things

subjective,
in themselves. consist in
the

and

applicable making

to

Locke,
"

by

sonality per-

actual

self-consciousness,"

renders of
our

two

of

most

fundamental

mysteries
the

faith
persons

self-contradictory, namely,
in the

Trinity of
of person

Godhead,
as

and far

the
as

unity
lay
in

in

Christ.

Descartes,
to
"

him,

dealt
on

the the

deathblow

metaphysics

by
:

his
and

teaching
this
same

origin of
is the

possible being"
father of the
to

Descartes
movement
we
can

modern

philosophical
From this

from
see

Spinoza

Hegel.
it is, to

how

important
broad

lay the by

foundation
and

of

philosophy

and

deep

expounding
and

safeguarding
however

metaphysical
subtle and struse ab-

notions

principles,
may

they

be. such
a as

Considerations
us

these

have

encouraged
of the of the

to

undertake of
"

systematic development
the
:

concept
all

BEING,"
concepts
will

most

metaphysical
what
success,

metaphysical
pages

with

following

show.

BEING

CHAPTER

FIRST

The

Term

Being

Summary:

The

province
of

of
"

metaphysics
and
as a
"

The
"

tion no-

being

Being

"

ens

compared
and
a noun as

"

Being
a

employed adjective participle

indefinite of

participle
"Ens"
as

participial
as a

"

and

Chimerical
"

being
"

"

Wholly

being
The
"

described

onyms Synbeing

being

opposite

of

or

"nothing."

i.

The
of

Province

of
opens

Metaphysics.
with
For the

The

science of

metaphysics
idea of

ation consider-

the

being.
which

metaphysics
possess

vestigate inmost

those

notions

the these
:

far-reaching
are

universality.
common

Some all whilst

of

notions

literally
truth,
of

to

things
the

as,

being,
occur

unity,
in all

goodness;
or

others which such

two

pairs

opposites
between
one or

correlatives,
in

divide that

things
the is

themselves the other of

any

wise

either notions
as,

of

the

associated whatsoever:

predicable
and

object

cause

effect,

substance
I

and

accident,

Being
and existence. be called Hence these latter
cepts con-

potency

might things.
of St.

disjunctivelycommon
says that
et
ea

to

all

Thomas is
"

the quae and

ter subject-matipsum
those
con-

metaphysics
that

ens
"

sequuntur,"
which
are

is,

being

things

consequent

upon

being."
the

Metaphysics,
therefore

then, examines fundamental,

is felt

broadest, and
The
vast

the most these

of notions. the who

reign
realm

of of

notions and
on

throughout
He

existence hands

possibility.
any
one

lays
ing call-

sacrilegious
its

of

them

by

objective validity
the

into

question, thereby
crashing about
his

brings
head

edifice of
more,

knowledge
a one

; nay

such

would did

reduce

ing all be-

to

absolute
on

nothingness,
denial. Father

its existence

pend de-

his

Balmes in his he
own

expresses

this and

fundamental

necessity
"

striking
"

graceful
like

way

Ontology,"

says, all

lates circuother Hence

queen

life-giving fluid through (Fund.

These who Phil. has
v.

the

sciences" it is that
of

2,

n.

288).
the

metaphysics

been

called
prove

sciences. those of

considerations
and

the

folly
the

of

belittle

discountenance tell us,

study
is

metaphysics.

They
and

metaphysics
It is not could the

intangible, obscure,
but it is

prosaic.
how

tangible, in-

abstruse; and
that

it be
most

otherwise extensive
not

considering
and
most

it deals of

with

universal
;

notions.
to

It

is the

obscure,

but of

profound reality

for

it descends
to

lowest

depths

and

thought,

the

last

The

Term

Being
away down
as

3
the dations foun-

causes,

which
and

lie buried basis

of

all

things.

Metaphysics, True,
and it

finally,is
does
not

not

prosaic
to

; but

it is sublime.
attractiveness

lay claim
which

that

cination fas-

truths, clothed
possess:
man

with

all the

ery witchcan

of

fancy,

for with
to

the

concrete

only
of

present

itself to which

all that the

sense

fulness of the

fection per-

appeals

ful beauti-

but

metaphysics
whatever
up

is vast,

it is

comprehensive, flights
acteristics charthe

it eludes
can

the
; and

fancy
are

in its wildest
some

conjure
of
2.

these

of

the notion

sublime.
of

The

being.
that

The
is

foregoing
the
most

considerations

indicate of
all
may

being

metaphysical
is
a

metaphysical
be is the

notions
to

; for

it
has

term

which
and

applied
reason,

whatever too,

reality;
science
of

this

why

the

of

metaphysics

begins

with

the

analysis

being.
3.

Being
forced

and

ens
an

compared.

But

here
We

we are

are

into here

awkward the
not

situation. of the
we

concerned

with and
"

meaning
with

the Greek
are

English
term

word
ov,
or

"

being/'
the
to

Latin

ens." the

Now,
old
we

apt

to say

ascribe of so?
"

being
of
"

all that

philosophers

ov

and
Is

ens."
the
exact

Are

justified in doing
of

being

equivalent

the the

Latin

ens," which
r

is the

literal

rendering

of

Greek

ov

But

perhaps

some

one

might

ask,

why

refer

Being
the
not

to
are

meaning

of

the this

Latin

"

"

ens

at

all ?

We
in

discussing

subject

in

Latin, but

English.
There
are

several

reasons

why
term

we
"

should
"

take in this of

particular notice
connection.

of the

Latin first

ens

For, in the

place, the subject

most

being has
in

been,
works,

and

still is sifted

thoroughly teaching
of
of

Latin

which and the

to

expound
hence
a
"

the

the Latin
be

schoolmen;
" "

comparison being,"
with much

the but

ens

and

English
familiar

cannot

very

useful

all

the

original osophic philhas

the

Latin

sources.

Moreover,
stored from has
as

very in

of the treatises

thought
been word

up

English

garnered
" "

the

Scholastics.

Lastly,
into the

ens

been
any
one

incorporated
of
our

lish Eng-

language,
will
attest.

larger
them,

dictionaries

Thus,
the

of

the

Century
under

Dictionary, gives
"ens";
"

following quotation

To

thee, Creator
ens

uncreate,
1

O
1

entium, divinely great."

happens
language
that
of such

It

sometimes
of the
at

scholarly students
and Latin solecism
or

who Cicero
strosity mon"

are
are

fond

Virgil, Horace,
a

shocked
as

meeting
present for

the

participle
to

of with

the

verb

esse,"
upon

and the

feel

Schoolmen

uncouth

perhaps contempt incorrect using this and similar should We not expressions. judge the for this too philosophers harshly apparent it must of the For the Latin. purity upon
that
terms

inclined

look

and
lastic schosault as-

be

admitted

this and
some

tongue
of the

is

not

rich that

in

convenient
suitable mental funda-

philosophic expressions
ideas

phrases, and
most

it lacks

for of

ordinary
Thus,

and such

speculative thought.

words

The

Term

Being
question just mooted,
and the

Let Are
"

us

now

return

to
"

the
"

the
"

Latin

word

ens

English

term

being
To

synonymous

?
let
us

settle of

this
"

point,

first determine
compare

the

meaning
the
4.
a

being,"

and of
as

then
"

it with

various

acceptations
employed

ens."

Being

participle
as

and

as

participial adjective.

Being, ending
with
a

here
a

stood, under-

although

it has

the
noun

of

participle,
mean-

is, in reality,a verbal

"

twofold

uation individessentia," existentia," possibilitas," causalitas," personalitas," certitudo," moothers will be for in vain in looked tivum," and many
as
" " " "

"

"

"

classical
a

writers.

The

Romans

were

war-like
much

tion, na-

for not they care practical people: would This subtle theorizing. explain the comparative of their barrenness for in terms and language phrases The notions. abstract philosophic Greeks, conveying the of the the antipodes on were contrary, very in Romans relation their to philosophy; for, their tongue
teems

did

with

wonderful

wealth

of

clear-cut,

words and expressions, and justly glories metaphysical in and surpassing pliability for suppleness municating coma shades of meaning. then the nicest What
were
was

the
the

Scholastic thinkers. tongue wise to

in

philosophers
medium It
was

to

do?
of

The those
to

Latin
earnest

established

of
of

thought
Latin

and the think into

deep
Greek
it

not

feasible

substitute

another
to
are
occurrence

compelled
ourselves

did the not place ; they Greek idioms unchanged transplant Hence felt themselves language. they coin certain words and phrases, as we quent frethe As doing constantly. regards of of the participle esse," present
"

"

no

said be in offered, something can defence and Scholastic palliation of For, as usage. Andrew's Latin "the tells us, Dictionary part. pres. is used Caesar P. Prise, to ens according by 1140 p. and to Quint. 8. 3. 33." by Sergius Flavius according
can

ens," which apology

may

seem

to

some

barbarism

for

which

be

Being
that of
a

ing, namely
clearness, let
a

participle
For

and

that
of

of

participial adjective.
us

the the

sake

greater
between

first state
a

difference
in

participleand
then
The

participial adjective
our

general,

and

apply

it to

case.

participial adjective

denotes the

capacity,

ness, fitof

ability, readiness
an

for

performance
such expresses

action

whilst

the
or

participle as
exercise of

the

actualization

that

capacity,

fitness, abilityand

readiness.
"

Thus,
"

when
"

say,

the

physician
I

is observing
mean

or

the

gladiator is daring"
the
power latter

that
to

the
a

former

possesses

of observation
is

marked
to

degree, and
face

the
But

ready
I

or

pared pre-

danger.
is

when
the

declare

that of his

the

physician
or

observing

symptoms
the

patient
to

the the
in
a

gladiator daring
actualization of
actual

lion,

want
or

denote

that

power

readiness,
an

word,

the

performance

of

action. Now let

say
us

transfer

this
is
a

to

being.

Mind,
a

we

do

not

that

being
but it

participle or
it may have
denotes

ticipial par-

adjective;
of

that

the

force

either.

For

sometimes

merely
which
can

reality, capacity
exist, regardless
or

for of

existence, that
the fact
In

of this

its actual
case,

ence existhas

non-existence. of
I
a

being
for
ple, exam-

the

force when

participial adjective;
God

say, way

is

infinite where

being.
it

It

is

used

in

this

especially

performs

The

Term

Being
to

7
verb
"

the
as

office of
in

objective
"

case

the

"

to

have,"
of

the
has

following propositions, being,"

very A

blade

grass But

dew-drop

has

being."
alization actu-

being
of

frequently capacity
instance,
"

signifies the
existence. has that
the

the
this
"

for
it for

It force

is of

plain
the

that

in

participle
the

existing
for
case

which
of

alizes actucourse,

capacity
itself.
"

existence, is,
in

existence

point

would
are

be

the
voted de-

sentence,

The i.

Guardian
e.

Angels

loving,

beings,"

loving, devoted, existing

ties. reali-

5.

Ens word
as

as
"

noun
"

and

as

participle.
used

The
ways,

Latin

ens

is likewise
and
as

in

two

namely employed
to
"

a
as a

noun

participle.

When
ing mean-

participle, it is equivalent in
and
one
ens

existing," being
As
a

hence of
the has

corresponds

to

the

English

in
noun,

acceptations
the
same

just

given.
as

tion significafor
to

the

English participial adjective ;

often
used
as nouns

in
press ex-

Latin, participles are

capacity
"

for
est note

something,
substantia." in what

as

when

say,

Omne Let
us

vivens
now

being
common

and

ens
use

differ.

In

the

first

place, being

is in

in

our

everyday

language,
term

whereas

ens

is

osophical purely phil-

of

middle

age

Latin.
the in

As
seem

regards
that
in

the

meaning

of

two,

it would
ceptation, ac-

English, being,
the
same
as

its

ordinary
which

denotes

that

exists.

Being
also
"

This
word that

is
"

the

prevailing signification of
Thus,
"

the
us

ens

in Latin.
"

St. Thomas
used
"

tells
to
"

the the for

word

ens

is

chiefly
the
term

nate desigis
served re-

existent, whilst

res

expressing
mere
as

essence

in its

most

abstract

form

or

the

capability for
hinted

existence.
"
"

However,
be of used
a as a

before,
and
"

ens
"

may

also
sense

noun,

being

in

the
it

participial adjective, provided

the
is
context
or

appears

from
use
"

in

some

other

way

that

such

intended.
"

Being

is also
the
"

frequently auxiliary
it is
The

taken verb is

as
"

the
to

ent presas

participle of
in
out

be,"

the
"

sentence,
;

enterprise

being

carried in

and

very
"

often,
is
"

employed

place
;

of
e.
"

the g.
"

copula
"This
is
never

in
so

participial constructions
."Of
.

being
used

course,

ens

in

this

manner.

The the
"

above
two
"

comparison acceptations

shows
of
"

that, excepting
"
"

last

being,"

ens

and

being
Let
us

are

substantially equivalents. analyze

as a

now

little

more

accurately the
force of
a

nature

of

being

having
For

the

cipial partiin this

adjective.
sense

it is
are

with

being

only,

that

we

at

present
But thus

concerned.

6.

Chimerical
our

being.
of

before

entering
we

upon

analysis

being
its

taken,

must

first somewhat
can

restrict
a

meaning. namely,
present,

For in
our

being
the real busi-

exist in

in

twofold

state,
At

and

the

logical

state.

The

Term

Being
that is

tiess

is

with

"

real from
"

being,"
the

being
not

which
with is

can
"

exist

apart

mind,
whose
mere
"

and

logical being
to

or

being
of

existence

confined of
mere

the

region
sort
or

thought.
ens

Being
a

this

latter

is

called

rationis,"
which

creature to

figment
outside
a

of
of

the

mind,

is

never

be

found

cognition.
square of
as

Thus,
thing, some-

should
or

conceive attribute

triangular
to
a

being
and

number

animals
or

sitting
rocks
lute
"
"

in

council

making

speeches,
to

to

and

stocks

listening in rapture
that in all these existence
of
cases

Orpheus'
the
"

it is

plain
can

ing becept ex-

signified
in the

have
:

nowhere
sort

mind
or
"

being

this
and
"

is
not

mere

mental

product
be
to

figment,
chimerical
"

might

tingly unfitcording ac-

called

being.
"

For,
one
or

Webster,
denotes
no

chimerical
"

in

of

its

meanings
of
7.
concern

the

same

as

having
in

ble capa-

having Wholly
here,

existence

except

thought."
Our
of

indefinite

being
with
and

described. this that kind in of

then,
real

is not

ing, be-

but

with

being,
that

its

most

general

acceptation,
and"

is,

as

shorn

all

terminati de-

specifications
even

whatsoever.

Hence,
as

we

abstract
it

from
or

the

circumstance,

to

whether
as

is

actual is it the is
a

merely

possible.

Being
concept

here

taken,

most

indeterminate
in which

conceivable;
has

concept

abstraction
a

been of

pushed
whatever

to

its ultimate

limit,
or

concept

stript

discriminates

The

Term

Being
"

"

nothing," of which
"

"

beinglessness
names.

and

"

ingness noth-

form
or

the

abstract

Nothing
meaning,
take If then
"

non-being
to
"

admits
sense

of
in it

twofold
we

according
"

the
"

which

thing

or

being
that

which

negatives.

these
"

stand

for
"

which denotes is
"

actually exists,
the not,
is
not at

nothing

merely
whatever
"

ent, non-existcan

and thus

includes

yet
an

be:

understood
as

nothing

empty

concept,
but
"

might

perhaps
all

seem

first
"

sight,
ing Nothas

the

plenitude of
in
"

possible reality.
is

taken

this

sense

technically known
this the
my

"

positive

nothing.
verse
"

It has in

meaning
second
son,

in

the
of

following
Machabees

found
I beseech and

book
look

thee,
all

upon and and

heaven consider
mankind But
"

and

earth

that
out

is in of

them,

that

God

made

them

nothing

also."

nothing
"

"

has

also the

another

signification.
of
"

It
or

sometimes
"

denotes in be

negation

thing
as

"

being
can

its broadest this

case,
or

acceptation
it conveys that which

that
same

which

; in

the

meaning
exists
nor

as

the
can

impossible, exist,
"

neither

and

is, in

philosophical
To be this gated rele-

terminology, region of
all

styled
"

absolute

nothing."
"

absolute

beinglessness
contradictions

must

absurdities,
;
as a

and

ceivabilities inconblock

square

circle, a
a

thinking
finite under

of the

wood,
like.

tree

suffering pain,
are

God,
the

and

They

all

included

fig-

12

Being

ments

of

the

mind

(entia
of

rationis),
this
sort

mentioned is

before.

Beinglessness
the very

entirely
of lute abso-

barren;

conception
ever

of

state

nothingness
For would
had

obtaining,
ever

is

itself

an

surdity. abing noth-

such

been

the

case,

or

could

exist.

CHAPTER

SECOND

Unity

and

Commonness

of

Being

Summary:

Inquiry

outlined
of ideas
"

"

Comprehension
Thesis
and
common :

and
of

tension ex-

Concept
to

ing be-

one

in

itself

all

things
Two
"

"

Preliminary exceptions
to

remarks Proofs
"

to

thesis of thesis

taken

"

swer An-

exceptions.

10.

Inquiry
the

outlined.
of
now
"

After

having
"

thus

plained ex-

meaning
let
matter
us

being
a

and

its
more

opposite deeply
of the

"

nothing,"
this

enter

little

into

by

determining

some

properties
In
at
once

of

being.
the with

examining
struck
term

concept
its
can

of

being,

we

are

absolute

universality.
to

For The

the

being
now

be

applied
upon all
or

everything.
the

question being
same as

forces referable

itself
to

inquirer,
one

Is
the in

thus

things
is it

and

concept

throughout,

manifold

its
ii.

signification ?v
Comprehension
and
any

extension in
our

of

ideas.

But of

before

going
we

further

exposition
from
have

being,
a

must

first

briefly
we

recall

lectics Diaquent fre-

few

notions of

which
and

shall

occasion

using

which,

unless

clearly

i-3

14

Being
would

grasped,
"

seriously hamper
namely
the
"

us
"

in

our

vestigati in-

notions
in their of
a

sion comprehen-

and

"

extension

logical meaning.
notion

By

the
we

comprehension
understand

(or
the

cept) con-

that
sum

which

notion

comprises, namely
which
go
to

the
up
"

total its

of the

attributes
Thus

make of

meaning.
for

the

comprehension

eagle,"

instance, is, corporeal,

living, irrational, feathered,

biped, having strong
for

rapacious
remarkable

talons

and

beak,

strength, size, graceful figure,

flight, etc.
of
a

keenness
name

of

vision, extraordinary
for
In

Another is
"

the

comprehension
term
seems

notion

content." its prevailing

prehension, comstituting con-

fact, this

preferable, since
more

meaning
the
a

suggests
sum

readily than
the For attributes

total notion.

of

given
its

comprehension,
the

according
act

to

primary
an

denotes signification,

of

grasping

object
of

with

the

mind,

whereas which above

the
a

radical

meaning

content

is all that from

a or

thing

contains. that than

It also the

appears

the
is

explanation

content

of

notion

really

nothing
what

else

its

meaning
or

definition;for
of
a

is the but the

meaning totalityof
the

definition

tion concep-

notes term

constituting it ?
to

Extension,
stands in
a

other

be
to

explained,
content.

very

close

relationship
In its

It

has

twofold
it

meaning.
the

primary
which
or
an

cation signifiidea

denotes

capacity
a

possesses,

of

representing

greater

smaller

Unity
number
express

and

Commonness

of Being
individuals;
or,

15

of

kinds, species, or
somewhat of
an

to

it

differently, it is the
idea
to
a

plicability ap-

more

or

less

wide

range

of

objects.
understood,
extension the is
measure a

Thus ideas.

property
of
an

of

It

is, as
breadth
"

it were,
or
"

idea,
terms

its scope,
"

sphere.

Hence when with in

an

the

scope," ideas,
The

breadth,"
used

sphere,"

predicated
extension. the
to

of

are

synonymously
is

word

extension

chosen for
manner,

above

because logical signification,

to
to
a

idea
to

apply

subject, is,

after

"extend"

it. To illustrate the the the what idea idea former

"

we

have has

just
a

said

by
sion exten-

an

example:
than

"tree"
"

larger
the
that

oak,"

because
than

predicaof the

bility of
latter ; in the
scope

is greater
"

fact,
of
"

oak-tree

is

contained

within

tree." unusual the

a

But

it is not
"

to

employ

the

word which

"

tension ex-

for

objects

themselves

can
tire en-

be

ranked

under of

given concept.
trees

Thus
as

the

aggregate
or
"

viewed
up

either

groups of

as

individuals

makes

the

extension

tree." The

objects
the in

classed of

under that

certain

idea

are

called

subjects
is

idea,
of

because

the

idea
as

question

predicable
are

these

objects
named

its

subjects.

They
parts

also

sometimes the

the

subordinate

or

simply

subordinates

Being
the idea oak
"

of
"

comprising
and
"

them. elm
are

Thus,

when
I

I say,

The oak

the
elm
"

trees,"

regard
to

"

and
"

as

subjects,

subordinate

the

concept

tree." have
in

Hitherto

we

viewed itself.
we

comprehension

and
as

extension,
related
to

each
one

Considering
discover
two vary

them

another, them,
that

this
in

iarity peculan

about

the
say,

verse in-

ratio, that
of and
"

is to

if the

comprehension
diminishes,
the
"

an

idea vice

increases,
For add
to

its

extension take
"

versa.

example,
it the
note

notion
;

man,"
at

and
once

white

it is
sum

plain
total

that

by

thus
I

making
narrow

the down
"

of

predicates
the

larger,

the
man."

sphere of
For
"

applicabilityof
"

the

concept

white
"
"

man

embraces

fewer

individuals

than

man

alone. ratio between

does
not

This
and

inverse

comprehension
obtain,
except
is

extension,
the
as new

however,
attribute
to

when such
to

(or mark)
some :

joined
individuals when

belongs only
it is in
if

of other

the

which mark

annexed

in

words

the

question
is
not

is restrictive.

For

it

restrictive, but
in
not

merely
concept

plicative, ex-

that
which

is, involved

the

to

it is

united, although
the above and

pressed distinctly ex-

by it, then
inverse
hold. and

law

regarding
does

the
not
"

ratio
Thus

of
take

content

extension
"

the
the

concept

rational

being
endowed

modify

it

by

accession

of

"

Unity
with the
the this lessen notion
12.

and

Commonness

of Being
"

ly

power

of

speech,"
and
"

"

capable

of

ceiving perto

incongruous

giving expression
: we

perception
the
"

by laughter
of

do of

not

thereby
the

number

individuals,
"

which

rational
one

being
in

alone and

is affirmable.
common

Being
After

itself

to

ail take

things.
up
to

this of
our

interruption,
discussion

let

us

again
we

the

thread

where

began
of any

inquire

whether

being
is
or one

as

predicable
the
same

thing
wherever

whatever,

and

concept
in of have

applied,

whether
will in
a

it is the

manifold
purpose
we

its

signification.
to
on

It

serve

clearness
to

formulate

thesis

what

say

this

subject.

THESIS
The
common

concept
to

being
all

is

one

in

itself and

things.
remarks.

13.

Preliminary
the
to

When is
one

we

affirm

that
want

concept
say of that

of

being
not

in

itself, we
in

it does

exhibit

its

tent con-

any

the which

determinations it is We

differentiatingthe
but in

objects
from of
sort

of of

predicated,
state

abstracts
refutation

all

them.

this
consider

certain
of
to

philosophers
or

who

being
all the

as

mosaic

agglomeration
can

of

jects obto to

which

it

be

applied.
I

According

them, when

I conceive

being,

really represent

Unity
some

and

Commonness

of Being

19

way

include
as

all

things; consequently
absorb into
are

it must

receive, and,
real
one

it were,

itself all the

differences from
another

by
:

which
but

things
if so, almost
to

distinguished
can

how
seem

it remain
oneness are clusive extain cer-

one? and

Hence,
commonness

it would

that

in each other.

respect

all
are

things
there

of

Again,
as

not

realities, such
created,
substance have

the
its

Uncreated
accidental of

and

the

and
no

tions, modificaat

which

points
enter

resemblance
one common

all, and
concept
But and
?

hence

cannot

into

let

us

first put how

we

our
can

thesis

on

firm the

basis above

then

see

dispose of

seeming
15.

paradox
First

and of

puzzle.
the prove

proof
We

unity
our

and

ness common-

of

being.
order
once

above
form
to

assertion
a

thus which there

In

that
one

the

mind

may

concept

is at

and first
all

common

all

things,
sort

must,

in

the

place,

be

some

of

resemblance

amongst
the

things,
to

that them

renders

it

possible for
one

intellect
;-

gather

all into intellect

common

common

notion

and and

secondly, the
separate
forms the

must

be

able
from

to

unravel

element

the from

myriad
one

through
Now

which

things differ
be denied
to

another. do bear

it cannot
sort at

that each

all realities

some

of
:

likeness

other

in

one

particular
are

least
to

they

are

all

something,
Lord

they

all

opposed
his

nothing.

The

Almighty

and

lowliest

2o

Being
are

handiwork infinite

something:

the
and

one

towering
other
:

to

hights, it is true,
above

the

just
both

rising
have

the in
not
common

abyss

of

nothingness they
human
are

yet

this
are

that The
its go

real, that
soul and

they

nothing.
so are

is

something,
which However

and
come

thoughts
whilst soul
may
are

tions aspiraendures.

and the

itself
and

much
and

permanent

the

ing fleetare

thought
similar the void in
of

affection

differ, they
set
over

this, that

they

against

nothingness.
an

There
agree.

is then But
one

element

in
to
not

which

all all that

things
things they
must,

for

the

mind
it

conceive

under should
moreover,

aspect,
alike be in able the and

is

enough
the

be

something;
to

intellect the

disentangle
it

common

feature

from it:

multiform this of
can

differences do. in
For its

which it possesses

diversify
the

power

abstraction aid
of

highest
the

perfection.

By

the
can

this
one

power, after

tellectua in-

faculty
all the

lop off,

another,

differentiatingmarks
at
a

between

things, until
in

it arrives

concept,
agree.

simple, all-embracing,
And this is the of
cept con-

which of

all

entities

totally indeterminate
of
"

being,
the the

being

in

general, phrase. drop,

one

ens

ut

sic," in

Schoolmen's

Take,

for
one,
as

example,
all his

concept

man:

by
such

distinguishing

acteristics, char-

rational, sensitive, living, corporeal,

and

substantial,

you

will

come

to

the

no-

Unity
tion

and

Commonness

of Being
you
cannot

21

being, beyond
of
all

which
then is

go.

The
mon com-

concept
to 16.

being

one

in

itself and

things.
proof being.
our

Second of

of In

the

unity

and

monness com-

the

argument
from is
a

just given,
consideration
We

we

deduced

conclusion

of
can

the

things of which
at

being
result

predicated. by

arrive

the

same

analyzing

the

concept
If
we
we

of

being

itself.
at
our

gaze

attentively
amongst
rest

stock
one

of

ideas,
fers dif-

shall from

discover
all

them

which
it is

the

in

this, that
all

entirely
and God

indeterminate,

stripped of whatever;
nor

specifications
it is neither
:

particularizations
nor

creature,

substance,
to

accident

it expresses
notwe

mere

opposition

nothing;

it represents

nothing,
possess

something,
such
more,
an

being
fact

in

general. just

That that

idea, depicting
a

and

nothing
no

is

of

consciousness,
into

which will
tent con-

sincere

observer

looking
concept
thus

himself,
in its

deny.
to

Now,
a

this

limited
very
reason

minimum,

is for that

est broad-

in for

its

applicability to
and

determinate of
an

realities;
are

content

breadth

idea,

in

verse in-

ratio

(No.

12).

There

cannot

be

anything
has

of

which

it is not
this

predicable.
very
we
"

For

whatever in
one

reality,is by
to
same

fact

placed
that

opposition
and

nothing.
concept
From the

Whence
"

infer
is
common

the

being

to

all

things. by
way

preceding proofs,

it follows

22

Being
corollary, that being is
sense a

of the

simple concept,

not

in

that, like spirit, it is without

but in

physical
and

parts,

this
one

sense

that
or

it expresses

comprises
into
not

but other

note
or

attribute, irresolvable
For
"

any
so,

notes

attributes. the
"

were

it

it could
"

not

be

common
can

predicate
of

of

"

all
own

things, since
parts.

nothing

be

affirmed

its

17.
to

Answer

to

the
commonness

two

exceptions
of

taken

the
now

unity

and
to

being.
set

We down
there
mon com-

must
at

reply

the the
of

two

difficulties We

the

beginning
concept

of

thesis.
is of

stated

that

if the

being

altogether
likewise
one

predicability,then
the differences since

it must

include from but hence if it in

discriminating they, too,

ceases are

thing

another,
so,

something;
to

being apparently
seem

be

one; to

would

impossible
yet
common

for
to

being

be

one

itself and In
must
answer

all

things.
that

to

this, we
the
as

readily grant
of

being
;

comprise just
so

differences

things
"

not,

however,
that alike. God and

""

differences," but
as even

as

being,"
are

is, in
Thus

far take

these marks

differences

the viz.

two
"

distinguishing
"

creatures,

self-existent The
"

and

"

riving de-

existence

from both of
"

another." them
as

concept
but
we

ing benot
see

comprises just
that
"

being,"
Hence

as

determining
can one

attributes. all the

being

embrace

differences,

and

yet remain

in itself.

Unity

and

Commonness

of

Being

23

The
there

other

objection
certain realities has
For

to

our

thesis,

namely

that have of

are

which been

seemingly already
out

nothing
in
our

in

common,

disposed
there the

proofs.
that this

we

pointed
since

pressly ex-

is

mistake,
and
all

Infinite

and
least

the in stand

finite,
this

substance that

accident,

agree

at

they
to
mere

are

something,

that

they

opposed

nothing.

CHAPTER

THIRD

Unity

Of

Being

Not

Real

Summary:

Question
Divisions

stated
of

"

"

Concept
Real

of

unity
"

"

unity
"

"

unity unity

ual Individ"

unity unity
Manner
"

Essential
of

Logical
sessing pos-

obtaining
"

concepts

logical
and

unity
"

Prescision Distinction

tive subjecreal
and

objective -Logical

logical
and

distinction mental
"

"

purely
Foundation
"

mental of

not

purely
not

distinction either of

purely
or

mental

Foundation Foundation
mental

perfect objective
in

imperfect
"

"

prescision
its relation distinct remarks
term

Purely
to

distinction

prescision
its modes

"

Being
"

not

really

from
to

Introductory
of
in

proofs
of

"

Meaning
four Some

"mode"
"

Modes of

ing be"

number
"

Proofs answered.

thesis

objections

18.

Question
of
us

stated.

We be
one

have in the

then

shown
it

the

concept
for
to

being
to

to

itself;
kind of
not

still

remains attributed
19.
a

prove

that

unity
real.

it, is
of

logical unity.

unity,
But and
a

and in

Concept

order

to

have of

clearer

understanding
of the

firmer

grasp
a

the

question

unity
24

of

being,

question

Unity
which shall
under
come

of Being
up for

Not

Real

25

consideration
we
as

again
briefly
as

and velop de-

again

various

forms, unity,

must

the of its main We within

call

concept

of

well

give

some

divisions.
a

thing

one

when

it is not
its
one

divided
ments eletroduce Into

itself, that
are

is, when
from

constituent another. it
ceases

not

separated
into
a

division
be
one

thing,

and

and
as

becomes

many.

Your
case,
; take

watch

is

one

object,

long

as

its parts,
are

face,
them
a

hands,
apart,
of

wheels, spring, etc.,

and you

united
one,
a

have
Hence

no

more

but

number

objects.

in in
are

general

thing

is

one

when

it is undivided

itself; and
synonymous

consequently,
terms.

unity

and

indivision Sometimes

the

words
to
"

"

and

divided of
to

from

all in

else,"

are so

joined
that

the
one

definition
"

unity
be
from

general,
which else.
one

the

is

said divided

that
all

is undivided If

in itself and
we no

this

is done,
as

longer

regard
we

the
it

exclusively
it
state

it is in

itself, but
to

view

that relatively, with which

is, as does,
of
"

opposed
or,
at

others, together
exist.
"

least, may
or

This

quality or
as

being other,"
called, is

otherness,"
of of

it

is

sometimes but

not,

however,
property

the

essence,
or

merely

necessary

unity
20.
us

oneness.

Divisions
pass
on

of
to

unity
the
main

"

Real

unity.
of

Let

now

divisions Real

unity.
is the

Unity

is either

real

or

logical.

unity

Unity
illustrate
our

of Being
by

Not

Real

27
it
a

definition
the
nature

an

example
of

"

is

impossible
as

for

(or essence)
nature
or

stag,
to

long
of
a

as

it remains wolf
or

the

of

stag,

be

that
23.

serpent

butterfly. unity, which

to
a

Logical
to

unity.

Logical

we

opposed

real, is the
of
a

unity
common

proper
to

concept

expressive
and

nature

many
"

things
"

multipliable
concept,
in

in

them.

Thus

man

as

a one

general
as

has the

logical unity.
or

For

it is

existing

ideal

logical order
of

through

abstraction;
or

and many

it is capable in the

being multiplied
of which it

becoming
be These

individuals

can

affirmed.

few, brief
here.

remarks
A fuller
on

on

the
account
"

kinds of

of

unity
is ing." Be-

will

suffice
in

them of

given

the

treatise

the

Attributes

24.

Manner

of

obtaining
But

concepts
is

ing possess-

logical point, closely

must

unity.
connected
on

there with

still another which

an

logical unity,
we can

be

touched

here, before
of
many

give

intelligent exposition
questions obtaining
25.

of the

the
manner

subtler of

about

being.

It regards

concepts

possessing
in
us

logical unity.
Scholastic

Prescision tell

metaphysics.
concepts

Philosophers unity
are

that

ical possessing log-

obtained
a

by
rather

what

they

call

"

jective oband
us

prescision,"
at

strange

sounding
I^et

first

sight meaningless

expression.

28

Being
explain
see

first then

what
we

is
can

meant

by

the

phrase
the

and

how
it in

best

clothe

thought

underlying
If
we

words.
our

inspect
that

store

of

ideas

with
are

care,
a

we

will
many

discover

amongst

them

there

good
ing, mean-

which, though
yet
relate
to

different attributes itself.

"

in content

or

that Thus
"

are

altogether
the
"

identical

in the
"

object

take

two

concepts,

substance verified

and

corporeal
are

it is

plain
since

that

as

in

bodies, they corporeal.

different. of
same

identical,
the
For
ings mean"

substance of
"

itself is
are

Yet

the

two

quite
"

stance subof

denotes and
"

independence
corporeal
is the

subject
as

inhesion

having

parts.
26.

Subjective
power
to
same

Prescision.

The break

mind
up

then is
two

has
one or

the and
more

separate
in the

or

what into

the

physical order,
or,
one

distinct

concepts,
or

if you of
two

will, it is
or more

able

to

prescind
which
same

abstract

attributes the mind which

turn
can are

are

physically identical.
still another
one

To
:

press ex-

under

form

the

represent
in

of

several

attributes

reality identical, and

the from
rest.

disregard
process

or

away

from

Now other call

"

this

of tified idenscision." pre-

considering apart
in the

each
we

attributes

object

subjective

This

so-called else than

subjective prescision
a

is

really
for

nothing

species

of

abstraction;

Unity
abstraction
embraces
as

of Being
broader of
term

Not

Real

29

"

than

prescision
to

"

the

power

the

intellect

view
as

apart
tributes at-

well

things
which

merely
are

joined together,
Thus

strictlyidentical.
a

if

fix my the

attention
members

upon

man's

eye the

without
mental

noting
process

other which

of his
is

body,

by

this

effected, is called
his eye

abstraction,
as a

whereas
substance is named 27.

if I consider
and

merely

living

neglect its sensibility,the

process

prescision.

Objective
not

Prescision,

But
to

the

word

prescision is
process also of
an

only

applied

the

subjective
it

of

prescinding
the

identical
or

properties; resulting
from

designates
attribute which

condition

state

existing separated
:

others
the

with

it is identified
mean
"

and

this

is what

Schoolmen
The

by
"

"

objective
"

prescision."
to
"

qualification
because
to
a

objective

is added of

scision," pre-

the of

object"
division of from

thought
ideal

is subjected
order.

process

in the
a

Thus itself
you

when
to

the

concavity
apart
of

circle its

presents

your
an

mind

convexness,

have

instance

what

is

meant

by

"

jective ob-

prescision."
Let
and

it be

noted in

here this

that
last

the
sense

terms
are

abstraction
very
common: un-

prescision
the

phrase

"objective
in

prescision,"
seem,

is

likewise
it is
never

extremely
used

rare,

fact, it would
in

except
;

perhaps
reason

translations
be

from

the

Latin

for

this

it will

pref-

30

Being
where
at

erable,

all
turn

feasible,

to

give

these
some

pressions ex-

another

by

employing

cumlocuti cir-

But

the

question
identical

now

arises,
exist
this

do

attributes in
no

physically thought?
doubt;

really
of

separate
can

Yes,
an

they do;

there of
show

be

it is
It

incontestable
for
us

fact
to

ness. conscious-

only remains
about.

how
for
one

this
tribute, atother an-

can

come
even

How

is it

possible
to

in the which
as

ideal

order,

shut

out

with

it

is, in reality,identical, and

freed from that this its
own

present

itself
to

altogether
It

self,
take

so

speak?
unless

is

plain

cannot

place,
are

these

physically
distinct

identical

ties qualiorder
Hence
;

first rendered

in the

ideal

for the

separation

presupposes
can

distinction.

question,

how

two

(or more)
apart
in

physically
solves re-

identical

attributes into

exist this

thought,
can

itself
render

other, how
which
it
are

the

mind

distinct

things

in
seem, ;

themselves

indistinct?
that
"

Berkeley,
was no
answer

would
to

thought
he says
:

there

this
one

for

deny
conceive

that

can

abstract

from

another,
it

or

separately,
should mistake.
But
must

those exist

qualities which separated."

is

impossible
is
a

This,

however,
28.

Distinction.

to

settle

this

question
what then
at

we satisfactorily,

first
"

briefly define general,

and

is

meant

by

"

distinction various

in

enumerate

its

divisions,

noting

the

Unity
same

of Being
of their

Not

Reed

31

time
matter
"

such
at

properties,

as

bear

on

the

issue.
"

Distinction denotes

is

opposed
or

to

identity,
of

and

hence
or,
to

an

absence of

want

identity;
we

give
say,
we

definition whenever

it in
one

the

concrete,
not

might
other,
29.

that have

entity is
some

the

distinction
real
"

of
and
"

sort.

Distinction is
as

conceptual.
"

tinction Dis"

either the

real

or

conceptual

cording ac-

lack

of
"

identity belongs
independently
"

to

the the

"

things
or

in

themselves is

of

mind,
the Thus

else

only in the

concepts,"
"

which

intellect
one

forms
two

regarding
apples

the

"

same

thing.
as

of

is not
to

the the

same

the
; but
cient an-

other, without
"

any
"

reference and
"

intellect
orator ;

Demosthenes Greece
exists
"

the

greatest

of the

are

really identical
in

and

tinction disI

only
man.

the

two

concepts

which

have
30.

of the

same

Division

of

conceptual
named
two

distinction.

Conceptual,
may

sometimes into

logical, distinction
classes, of

be

divided

further

mary pri-

importance
in Scholastic

in matters
as

philosophical, known
the
" "

phraseology
"

distinctio

ra-

tionis

ratiocinantis

and

the

distinctio
are

rationis

ratiocinatae," expressions
met

which
in

sometimes

with
31.

in their

Latin

form

English purely
"

treatises.
mental.

Conceptual
"

distinction

The the

distinctio

rationis of
the

ratiocinantis

(literally, reasoning

distinction

thinking

or

32

Being
is called
"

mind),
"

in

English

"

purely

"

conceptual
the
sult re-

or

purely

mental of
any
are

distinction, as
the

being
the the

altogether
power

action

of for
to
or

reasoning
distinction

without such
as

grounds
extrinsic
same

except

the

object.
one

We

simply repeat
do
mode

the

idea
some

make

idea in the

duty
of

for

two,

with

slight change

expression.
the
the

Thus,
between

foundation
two

for
"

my
"

distinguishing
and
"

ideas
fact

Napoleon
the

parte/' Bona-

is
bears
course,
same

the
names;

that and

French

Emperor is,
of

two

this

circumstance

external

to

the in

person
to

signified.
the

The

is

to

be

said

regard

distinction
and

between definition
two

the

object

defined

(e.

g.

man)
in

its

(rational animal),
or

and,

tween general, bethe

same

more

concepts

having
a

content,
in

but
content

each
;
as

emphasizing
when
two

different the
one

note
same

that

conceive

right angled triangle by

the

ideas, the
out

ing makthe
lief, re-

right angle
the

stand

clearly, and
into

other

throwing
without,

hypotenuse

strong

however,
constituents

altogether
of

shutting
in

out

the

remaining
For,
in

the

figure
for

tion. ques-

these the

cases,
two

the

basis

the

tinction disis be

between
not

(or more)

concepts,
it is to

anything
for in

in the

object itself,but,
extrinsic and
to

looked the
with

something
less

it, namely
distinctness the
contents

greater
which

or

clearness

the

attributes

composing

Unity
of the
32.

of Being

Not

Real

33
the mind.
tal. men-

ideas

present

themselves
not

to

Conceptual
We
now come

distinction
to

purely

the

distinction
"

which in

is

called

"

distinctio

rationis

ratiocinatae in

lastic Scho-

terminology,
distinction It differs the
one
"

and,

English, conceptual

not

purely
the for
same

mental.

from

preceding forming

in

this, that
concepts

here of
but

foundation and the

several
not
"

reality,is
itself.
Hence

outside,"

in

"

the

object
often

it is, that

losopher phi-

style it conceptual
the

distinction

"founded
33.
not

on

reality" (i. e.
of But which
mental.

object).
distinction foundation
to

Foundation

conceptual
what is the rise

purely
the

in

thing
In

itself other

gives
what

this

tinction? dis-

words,
the

is the which

ness suitablerenders

on

the

part

of

object
to

it

possible for the

that
are

intellect

distinguish
This

attributes

physically
awaits
up
our

indistinct? solution.

is the

lem prob-

that To

clear
to

this
fact

point,
that

we

must

first

direct
sessed pos-

attention of identical.
to

the

every

object
are

is

many

perfections which
same

physically lent equivaperfect

ently differtake
a

The

object is, as
which found exist

it were, in it in
and

many

realities may be

identity, yet
combined
human
"

separate

in
:

other

objects.
up
"

Thus of
"

individual

it is made

the

tions, perfec"

bodily substance,"
all

life,"
Yet

sensation

and

"

reason,"

identified.

bodily

sub-

Unity
sentient,"
is

of Being

Not

Real

35
that
of

altogether
is
"

different

from of

tionality, ra-

which

the

character

being

tional." ra-

Let for the

us

add

an

instance
between
two

where
two

the

foundation
is perfect. im-

distinction
Take the

concepts
of

attributes

God, Justice
one

and

Mercy;
the

they

are,

indeed,
not
we

conceivable
For

without

other, yet Mercy,

perfectly.
will
find

if

we

analyze
divine,
other
course,

God's it is

that, being
includes which
all

infinite, and

therefore
one

possible perfections, Justice.

It is also exists the other

of

is, of
e.

plain that, unlike

of
man

g.

animality, which
beasts,
be this
none

outside

in
can

brute
ever

of in of
any

Divine

attributes

found kind
and

being

except

God.

It

is

distinction, which

obtains

between

being
35. Let
us

its determinations.
of
to
"

Foundation
now

objective

prescision.
"

return

objective prescision
identical

or

the
Its
true

separation explanation
of

of is

physically
now

attributes. what holds

clear, since
not

conceptual
likewise
to

distinction the

purely
of both

mental,

applies
identical and
two

separation
the
same

physically
the
for
one

attributes
other

by
the

mind

the

have

foundation;
can

if

qualities identical
distinct
in

in themselves,
it is

be
that

dered renone

conception,
apart
foundation in

plain

of

them

can

exist
the

thought
for the

from

the

other. of

Hence

separation

physically

identical

attributes

(or objective

36
prescision)
and The

Being
is likewise the
two

equivalence
or
more

of

one

the

same

object

to

perfections.
attributes it does,
is also
times some-

separation of physically identical

ideal of
order

in

the

taking
in

place,

as

in

virtue

something
virtual distinction

the

object,
the

called

prescision by
which

Schoolmen the
way

; to

just

as

the

paves

it, is styled virtual

Note foundation

distinction.
as

also, that, according

is

the

aforenamed

perfect
the

or

imperfect, the separation

identical attributes accounted
on

existing object
or score

between

of

an

in

conception,

is likewise
as

fect persame

imperfect, just
is divided into
mental

distinction

the

perfect and
distinction The

imperfect.
in

36.
to

Purely

its

tion rela-

prescision.
ratio

purely

mental

tion distincinvolves

(rationis
some no

cinantis)

likewise

sort

of

prescision which,

however,

implies
consists

separation of identical this, that

same

attributes, but

in
the

of

two

concepts
the
one

having

altogether
some

contents,

emphasizes
the and of dim

tribute at-

(or attributes), which

other less

sents repremarked

only
manner.

in

somewhat the
process

Hence,
last
case,
means

prescinding,
one

in

this

merely clearly
and

this, that

tion no-

represents
attributes
Thus
"

less

certain distinctly
out

which

another animal

brings
of the
a

prominently.
kind, fond
cry, called pur-

domestic

feline

of

mice, characterized
and

by

plaintive

mewing,

sometimes

amusing

itself

by

Unity
ring,"
expresses between

of Being
the
same

Not

Real

37

"

as

cat," the
"

only
cat
"

difference
conveys
on

the

two

being, that
marks and

only obscurely
which
the

the

ties, peculiari-

other

more

explicit concept

lays

stress.

Prescision method of

thus

taken with

is
no

purely

subjective
in the

procedure

foundation

object.
37.
modes.
we

Being
These
now

not

really

distinct
been
our

from

its

remarks

having
unfold

premised,

shall
to
us

gradually
kind
our

teaching

in

regard
Let with

the
start

of

unity possessed
of

by being.

investigation
thesis.

this

subject

the

following

THESIS It
that

is

self-contradictory
exists
of any
an

to

suppose

there

extra-mental between

tinction dis-

sort

being

and

its determinations.

38.
this

Introductory
we

remarks that

to

proofs.

In
is

thesis

deny
real it is
or or

indeterminate
or,

being
in

possessed
words,
from
to

of

physical unity
and

other

that its modes

really

physically
We

distinct
say

determinations.

this
Dun

refute

the who

Scotists hold that between

(or
there

followers

of
an

Scotus)
mental

exists and

extra-

distinction

being

any

of

its

3"
modes,
"

Being
v.

g.

existing in
to

itself."
"

This

tion distincformalis

they
ex

choose rei."
out

style
use

distinctio
term
"

natura

They

the

formalis
what

"

to

point

the

distinction
or

between

they

call

"formalities"
as

metaphysical animality.
"

grades

(No.
"

57),

rationalityand
"

The the
same

qualifying
as

phrase
external

ex

natura
"

rei
and

means

in

nature
"

may

be

rendered

into

lish Eng-

by
But
and

extra-mental."

before

taking
the the of

up

the

proofs
we

of

our

thesis

discussing meaning
of

objections,
term term
" "

shall

explain

the

mode." mode." the

39.

Meaning

Mode,
same

in
as

its

widest

signification, denotes
or

modification has
no

limitation; it is something existence,

but

which
to
we other an-

independent
as

clings
e.

its determination. is
a

Thus, motion,

g.,
a

say

that
an

heat

mode

of

figure
like.

mode

of of

extended existence in
the

body, fluidityand
of

solidity modes
the

the

metals, and
case mean we

But
a

present
We

regard
it
a

mode

in

specific

sense. or

by
To

concept
that

termining de-

modifying
manner.

another,

and

in

very
note

particular
that
a
a

understand is

this,
of

modifying
as

concept
or

generally
is

such

nature

to

amplify
to new,

enlarge the
it

tents con-

of
expresses

the

notion

which
not

affixed;
in

it

something
to

contained
A
"

the
cept con-

concept
of

which kind

it is added. is called
a

qualifying
differentia
"

this

and

Unity
the

of Being
"

Not

Real

39

qualified notion, happens,

that

genus."

But
to

it

times some-

the of it

concept
its

joined

another
not
large en-

as

determination its contents;

out

meaning,

does

adds

nothing
various be

new,
states

but
and

merely

brings
in
one

clearly
a

the
can

conditions
whenever way,
to
"

which

thing
"

found.

Now,
in this

concept
"

qualifies
mode in

another

it is called differentia." illustrate the

to
:

contradistinction

To

if I say,
"

"

The

soul
"

is

spiritual
thing some-

substance,"
new

concept
notion it before
"

spiritual
substance
;

adds
"

the in

;
"

something
"

not
a

included
true

hence,
to

spiritual
"

is

differentia
I
state
"

relatively
God
a

substance." pendent indeis

a

But

when

is

an

absolutely
"creature God
"

being" being alio),

and
"

(ens

se),

and
on

existing dependency
the additions in

(ens

ab

"absolutely
on

independent"
do
not
"

existing
the

dependence
of
new

another,"
concept
or
"

amplify they
it:
add

content

the

being

nothing
merely
God this

to

being
to

distinct
us

from

they

make
and

known

the

manner

in which force of

creatures

possess

being.
not

The be

last

Example
until
we

will
have

perhaps
gone
a

fully appreciated
in
our

little further

investigations, when
treated. of
which

this

point will

be

professedly
40. Modes

being
we

four
to

in do

number. in

The treatise
"

modes
are

with

have

this

four, namely,

"self-existent"

(a se),

de-

40

Being
existence in itself"
as

riving

from

another"

isting (ab alio), "exand

(per

se),

"existing
for

in

another
four

in

subject"
affect

(in alio);
being

these

qualifications being
from
as

immediately,
or

since

being

is either

self-existent of
a

rived deof

another, independent
or

subject

inhesion

dependent

on

such of

subject:
as

hence
or

they

are

determinations
so

being
Other

being

of ing be-

being properly (such rational)

are as

called.

additions

to

spiritual,bodily, living, sensitive,

modifications and of
more are or

less determinate tions determinasense.

being,
of

consequently only
we

being
then,

in

an

improper
determinations understood is

Whenever,

speak
is to the

of be

of
in its

being,
strict

the

expression
unless
context

meaning,
or

contrary
a

expressly
ceptation. ac-

stated,

the

warrants

different

Should

any

one

feel
we

annoyed
been this

at

the

many

proved un-

assertions bear in mind

we are we

have
at

making,
of
our

let him

that,

stage

tion, disquisidefining;
now supported un-

merely hope
to

explaining
substantiate

and
our

afterwards

statements. 41.

There

is

no

extra-mental

distinction First

between

being
now

and
to

its

modes:
our

proof.
between which

We that

are

ready
is
no

prove

thesis, namely

there
and

extra-mental The
two

distinction

being
we

its modes.

arguments
to

shall

give, though

applying

all modifica-

Unity
tions

of Being

Not

Real

41

of
to

being whatsoever,
shed

are

principally
of

duced introto

light

on

the

relation

being

its

four

so-called

modes.
:

We

proceed

thus

If

being

is

distinct

from outside

its modes

(or primary
we

determinations)
infer

of thought, then

rightly
be
to

that, however
still,when
garded re-

closely

united

it may

them,

in

itself in
of

the
of

physical order,
them of
;

it is altogether clear tions modificaof

clear

all

and

if

them,

it is likewise

clear
to

all further

superadded
as

them.

Consequently,
of
we

being
would

it exists

independently
indeterminate;
the
presence

the

mind,

be

wholly
to

would,
of
a
a

therefore,

have

admit

reality which

possesses

physical universality:

thing

which

is

utterably inconceivable.
Suppose
animal It very
nor

there

were

such

thing

as

universal it look
? in

outside be
an

the

mind,

how

would

would

exceedingly
it would
nor

strange
be

being
mammal
nor

truth!
bird
nor

For fish

neither
nor

reptile
It

insect

any be
nor
a

other

kind
nor

of
a

animal.

would
nor
a

neither

myriapod
a

centipede
Its
nor

quadruped
neither feathers
bare.
nor

biped

nor

apodat
hair would

skin

would
nor

be
nor

covered

with
nor

wool

scales,
queer

it be

altogether
walk it be
be

The

creature
nor

would
nor

neither would

fly
to

nor one

swim

crawl,
a

fixed of

spot.

In

word,
what

it would is
common

destitute
to

thing every-

except

all

animals.

Unity
be then

of Being
distinct in

Not

Real

43

said,

are

not

the

external
are

object,
tiated differen-

it would
from
one

follow

that

things by
the

another

very

same

reality

in which

they

agree.

For,

to

take

ticular par-

instance, God
that

and

creatures

agree

in
in

this,
this,

both the that

Now

possess

being,
is

and

they

differ

that and him.

being of God
of

altogether independent, wholly

distinct
"

the if

creature

dependent
from
and
"

on

being
"

is not

its determining

modes

independent
be God
at
once

ent," depend-

then
creatures

it would resemble
can

the differ this

a

ground
from

why
him.
tradiction? con-

and

But

how

this In

be?
our

Is not

patent

fact,
would both

contention, it might
make God be
and
creatures

be

further

urged,
since
same

identical,
from The the

would
"

undistinguished

reality
subtle

being."

objection,
means

though
It the
seems

it may
to
"

seem,

is
on

by
an

no

insolvable.
use

hinge

ambiguous
we

of
two

term

agree."
in

For

when
we

say
mean

that

things they
are

agree

something,
in
a tain cer-

often

that
or roses

identical

property
that the
I
two want
e.

quality.
1
hold

Thus,
in my

if

tell
agree

you

hand
are

in

color,
in
means

to

signify they

that
can

they
be

identical

color, i.
of
one

that
common

represented
viz.
course,

by

concept,
case

red

color.

The
not

identity
real.

in

this

is, of

logical,

It will

be

readily granted

that

in

the

meaning

44

Being
there is
no

just given,
God
and of

contradiction
agree and For
to

in

supposing
by
son rea-

creatures

to

differ

the

same

reality.
reference

agreement
the

or

identity here,
diversity
to

has
real

logical, and
can

the

order;
the of the
same

and

there

be

no

contradiction
and

unless

predicate

is

firmed af-

denied
same

same

thing,

and

that,

too,
But say,

in the
some

sense.

one
can

might
there be there

demur

at

our

answer

and
or

how

identity in
is

the

logical
in

ideal real? We in

order, when

only diversity

the

need
to

not

go

far
such

for

reply

to
or

this.

For

order

have in

agreement

identity
it is

of

divers that

things
there
and

the
be

logical order,
some

enough
it in
case,
ceived con-

should such

foundation is in the the

for

reality: namely
as

there

present

resemblance identical.
us
"

between

objects

This of

leads

naturally agree."
"

to

the

other

signification
term

the

word the
two

Sometimes resemble
"

this
; thus

also
I

denotes

same

as as

when

regard
my

friends

agreeing
resemble the
very

in

disposition,
other
"

meaning
natural
creatures

is, that
bent.
agree
are

they
Hence
in

each
statement
same can

in

their
and

God

the

entity by
mean

which the
same

they

distinguished,"
at
once

that of the

principle is
and

the

ground

similarity
and

dissimilarity,or
of

the between

resemblance God and

the

want

resemblance

Unity
creatures.

of Being
resemblance

Not

Real

45

This

is, of

course,

only

imperfect.
But For have would verb
"

here
as

serious

difficultypresents
and

itself.

these

two,

similarity
to

dissimilarity,
real
sense

both
seem,
to

reference
as

the

same

order,
of

it

if, in this
there

second
were a

the

agree,"
in

contradiction
same

after

all
say

asserting that
creatures, it resembles

the

very

ity, real-

of

should

be and

at

once

the from

reason

why

God

differs

him. There
statement.

is, however,
For
to
one

nothing
and the

inconsistent
same

in this be
a

reality may
of such of
on

equivalent
similar

different
on

perfections
of
one

character, that
to

account

them
account

it is
of

something
it
is

else,
to
"

and the
"

another,
"

dissimilar with from

"

same.

Thus,
in eral, gen-

white but

"

agrees

red

in

color is for

differs
"

red

"

in what this
two

peculiar
the
son rea-

to

it,namely,
that
"

whiteness,"
"

and

white

embraces within
some

perfections,
differ,
are

color

and in

whiteness,
concept
of God
one

itself,which
extent,
but In

indeed,
exclusive
manner,

to

not
same

another the

in

reality.
may

the

and and

creature

resemble modes
of
one

each

other

in

being being

differ

in the

being,
and is and in

although
the
no

and

its modes

are

but

same

identical

perfection.
assertion the

Hence that
same
"

there God

contradiction
are

in the

creatures

distinguished by

entity

46
which

Being
they
of

agree,"
the

in

either

of

the

two

above

meanings
The further
modes
not
seem

statement.

explanation
inference

given
from
our

also

disposes

of

the

teaching
and

that,

if the
are

differentiating
distinct
to

God

creatures
we

from

being extra-mentally,
God
and
at
creatures.

would
us

identify

Let
of
are

not

be

needlessly
: as

alarmed
as

this

bugbear

theism pan-

long

God in

and

creatures

tical idensemble re-

in

being only
each other

concept,

and the

merely

in the the

real order, is

deduction
rantable. unwar-

of

our

deifying
If the
we

universe

utterly
to
were

identity
could
as

referred

real,
of

then, indeed, pantheism.

defenders of

not matter

repel

the

charge

But
an

the

stands,
distinction

it is the
between open
"

extra-mental

being
to

and

its

modes,
For

who

lay

themselves

that

charge.
outside the

if, as

they claim,

being
modes,
is
an

"

exists and

mind

stripped of

all its

hence
common

also

of
to

individual all

existence, it Consequently,
is also
this in

entity
same

things.
me,

the

being

which
of

is in

God
make

dependent in-

thought,
else lower

and

is to
to

all of

things God,
the
creature.

or

God

the

level

This

last

captious
a

puzzle

is

sometimes

posed pro-

under
even

slightly different
thus
:

form,
in

and

that
is
can

seriously,
with else

If

being
then

general
modes
For

identified
be

its

modes,

these

nothing

than

being

in

general.

Unity
thing
so,

of Being
which
no

Not

Real

47
But among if

is that
can

with
be

it is identified.
and

there
an

variety

diversity
false. in this

things,
There of

inference
are more

altogether
flaws
than
one

process

reasoning.

For,
its

in

the

first

place, if being
modes
are

is identified identified

with

modes,

the
I

also

with
say

it; and

hence,
this
and This

have

as

much

right
exists
from

to

that,
the

on

supposition, nothing
that much

except
them

modes,

being vanishes by
way of
joinder. re-

altogether.

But

to

answer

directly: it would
different
be
a

rather
are

seem

that

if two
the

realities result

in

concept

tified, iden-

should
of

third
so,
"

reality, sharing
in
"

the

perfections
if you
"

both.
"

And

fact,

it is.

Thus

combine the outcome

being
is In

and

ent self-existis at
once

into
and

one,

God,
a

who

being by
from
"

self-existent.
"

similar

manner,

uniting

being
the
of

"

and

"

deriving
concept
both
"

existence
"

another,"
is

compound
which from

ure creat"

formed,
existence

being
are

and

"

deriving

another

"

te. predica-

To is

illustrate

by

case

not

at

all
;

parallel,
you

it

true,
and be

yet

somewhat

analogous
a

if

pour

wine
not

water

into

goblet,
nor

the

contents

will
but
a

simply
of

wine,
two.

simply

water,

mixture
It
"

the

further
"

follows
"

that

by
"

thus and

identifying
with
"

being

with

self-existent

deriv-

48

Being

ing

existence

from

another/'
God
and

there

result which

two

complete
similar
in in

objects,
the
real

creature, of

are

order what

things
have

and

identical for

the

logical,

just

we

contended

all

along.

CHAPTER

FOURTH

Inclusion

of

the

Modes

in

Being

Summary:

The

problem
its modes them order
order
"

stated
"

Thesis:
least
as

Being being,
"

cludes inbut

at

as

it

expresses

only
"

being
in

The

physical meta-

Being
concept

the
may

ical metaphysinclude
a

perfection
Proof of

without

expressing

it

"

thesis.

44.

The

problem
distinct
not
so

stated. from its

Being

then

is modes

not

physically
but
answer

determining

is

it

at

least
us

metaphysically?
state

Our
think
on

is,

no.

Let

what
the

we

this

point

more

explicitly

in

following

thesis.

THESIS

The hence

abstract

concept
as

of
in the
as

being,
the

and
physical meta-

being

it

exists

order,
modes
at

contains least

four
but and

mary priit
in

being; being,

expresses
no

them way.

only

as

other

45.
prove

The

metaphysical
proposition
we

order.
must

Before

we

this

first

explain

what

49

Inclusion

of

the

Modes

in

Being
be of

51
said the

is, after
to

fashion, built
and

upon

it, may
the

pass

above

beyond
came

region
the the
its

physical, metaphysics
and and universal
as

to

denote from
now

abstract
concrete

distinguished
and has
not

determinate;
It

this

is

ordinary
ings, mean-

signification.
which this

also

several
us

other
to

it does

concern

notice

in

place.

The

metaphysical (in
a

order

is also

called

the

ical log-

restricted

sense), ideal, supersensuous

or

hyperphysical.
46.

Being
Let
us

considered
now

in

the above

metaphysical
to

order.

apply the
may,

the

cept con-

of
in
out
a

being.
mind

Being

then, be
first, as

regarded
itself and

twofold
of the
as

state,
or

namely
in

it is in

the

physical
to

order,

secondly,
action
order. former from
as

it is when of the have We

subjected
or

the

ing prescind-

intellect
done
now

in the

metaphysical
under

We

with
come

being
to

the
it

aspect.
the

consider
must

second
in
our

point

of

view. the

We

show,
of
ing, beits it

stated
even

thesis, that

concept

in the
modes

metaphysical order,
at

includes but that

determining
represents
47. A

least
as

as

being,

them concept

only

being.
include To
same
a

may

perfection
confusion,

without
note

expressing
that
a

it. the
and

avoid

it is

not

for
express

concept
or

to

include the
same.

perfection,
It
may

to

represent
without

include

something

52

Being
not

representing it, though

the the for be
antecedent

vice

versa.

Thus,
contains
as

of

syllogism, indeed,
not express

conclusion,
if it
needed
a

yet it does
no

it

such

did,
for

process

of it.

ratiocination To

would this
may

inferring homely

illustrate
:
a

point by
contain
"

rather

example

purse

money you
a

without

necessarily indicating
this is

it.
a

Perhaps
is not
to

reply
concept;

true,
seem

but

then

purse
a are

it would
and

that
express

for

concept

include

something
same.
"

to

it,
this jective sub-

altogether the
be
so,

We
is

answer

that of
the

may

when

there

question
mental

concept
;

(the purely
we

tion) representa-

but

here

speak
;

of it

the
is

objective
this
at

(the
we

object represented)
affirm
can

and

which the

contain
or

something

without it to

same

time

expressing
Proof
our

presenting
Let

the
be

mind.
remarked

48.
that

of

thesis. here

it also
to

it is

intention

only,
as

settle whether
;

being
contains
in
one

contains them of the

its modes in any other

being
way,
we

whether
shall

it

decide

following
is
a

theses

(thesis 5).
of what cedes; pre-

Our

thesis
we

direct

corollary
The

show
in

it thus: the

concept order,

of

being,

as

it exists
all

metaphysical
for otherwise

evidently
not

includes
be
common

reality:
to

it would
Now

all
are,

things
of
would

(thes. 1).

the
were

modes

of
not

being
so,

course,

real; since,

they
Hence

they
must

be them

nothing
at

(thes. 2).
as

being

include

least

reality

Inclusion

of

the

Modes

in

Being

53

or

as

being,

in

the too,

metaphysical
not

order. modes

And

it for

expresses

them,
case

indeed of

as

"

in

that in free

the

concept

being
as

would
We

not

be

one

itself

(thes.
of the close
at

1)
its

but
"

being. by
any

not can-

being
:

modes

amount

of and that

abstraction
them

connection and

between

being
character,
is the is

is

of

so

unique
separation
involve

any

attempt
in of

complete
it would since modes

doomed

to

failure;

fact,

very

struction deelse

being,

being vaguely

nothing
and

than

its

determining

obscurely

conceived. Such
and

is their which

not

the

case

with
Take

most

other the

notions mal aniof

modifications.
is

concept
addition

determined
in

by
no

the contains

rational.
for

Animal,
is

way,

rational-;
any

rationality
modes identical of

not

animality,
is

whereas

of
deed, in-

the

being
with it does

being.

Animality
in the in

is,

rationality
not

physical
the
physical. meta-

order.

But

include

it

CHAPTER

FIFTH

Being

Not

Genus

Summary:

Transition

to not

new

thesis
"

Thesis: force of
"

Being
terms, Proofs

genus genus,
"

"

Precise
and

species,
of thesis

differentia of
"

Confirmation
of

thesis

by
not

the any

authority
of the

St.

Thomas

Being

five

predicables.

49.

Transition considerations

to

new

thesis.

The the
way

ceding prefor

have
:

paved

our

next

thesis,

viz.

THESIS

The

concept
as a

of genus.

being

cannot

be

garded re-

50.

Precise differentia. between

we

force

of

terms

species,
show and the the
the
"

genus, intimate

and

Before
our

we

connection

present

ing precedprecise
"

thesis, meaning
well
"

must

briefly explain
of the notions
all
term
"

and

force the
"

genus

as
"

as

of

related for

species
the

and

differentia the

they

bear

on

solution

of

question

mooted.

54

Being
The of
an
"

Not

Genus

55
whole the
two

species
or

"

expresses group of

the

essence

object
the
and

objects;
to
"

"genus"
or more

represents

attributes

common

species
mark

the
any

"

differentia
one

sets

forth

the

by
the

which

of
"

these

species differs
"

from
genus

others. which etc.,

Thus,

vertebrate

is

the

under

mammals,
as

birds,
The these

reptiles,
essential
classes

amphibians
element from the

fall

species.
any
one

distinguishing

of

rest, is its differentia.

for
a

Now,

genus

to

be

truly such,

it is
added

quired re-

that constitute be

the the

differentiating marks
various
to

to

classes

under
to

it, should
say, such

altogether extrinsic
it
nor

it,that is
in

neither
is not

contain the
a

be
common

contained

it. is of

If
not

case,

the
in

attribute
sense

considered

genus

the
nor

proper
are

the

word,

but
marks

quasi-genus,
accounted These and
the
as

the

distinguishing

true
two

differentiae,but
necessary
must

quasi-differentiae.
the genus in

requisites of
be

differentia
a

carefully
of

borne

mind,

right understanding

this

thesis

hinges
51.

on

them. is
not
a

Being
first

genus:

First
our

proof. thesis,
runs

The

argument
is
not

to
a

establish

viz., that
thus: which hence is
a

being
is

generic
to

concept,,
be
a

Genus
is
not

understood
in of

concept

contained

the them
to
"

differentiae, and
; thus
"

is not
true

predicable
in

animal For

"

genus

respect

rational."

56
"

Being
"

animal

denotes

an

organized
"

being
"

endowed

with in
and
man

sensation,
from

whilst his

rational

signifies that
understanding plain that
latter
"

which

faculty
;
now

of

reasoning proceeds
concept
I

it is

the

former

is
am

not

involved
not

in the
to

; and to

consequently,
rational But included also and in is
not to
so

allowed the

say,

be

possess

faculty
"

of

feeling."
essentially
and

with the

"

being
of

for

it is

in

concept

any
so

entity,
that

hence

the

limiting modes,

it may

truly
or
garded re-

really be predicated of,

;
"

say,

self-existence it cannot be
sense

creatureship
as
a

for

this
"

reason,

genus

in

the

technical
proper
to

of the
any

the modes

word. of

Nor

would
"

it be

call

being

differentiae," without agreed

that
a

since qualification,
must not

it is

differentia

include called
sense.

that

which

it determines.

They
in

may
a

be loose
52.

or quasi-differentiae

differentiae

Being
us now

is
pass

not
on

genus:
to
our

Second other

proof.
this the tively relaAs of

Let

proof;
to

considers
genus,

the whereas

differentiae the

in

reference the
genus

first viewed It said

to

the from

differentiae. what
we

proceeds
at

thus:

appears

the of
are a

beginning
true

the lie
no

thesis, the

determinations outside of it and

genus in

altogether
sense

therefore

comprised
best understood in the

within

its

contents. to
"

This the
ample ex"

will

be

by recurring
first argument.

given

Animal

Being
is
a

Not

Genus

57
in
no
"

genuine
the
the

genus,

since of

rationality
But For

way ing," becan

enters

notion
case

animality.

with
there

is

quite different.
whatever

be

no

determination outside
and

outside is
a

of

being;

because

of

being
cannot

there
be
are

ness, only nothingdetermination.

nothing
modes

Hence the

the
content

of

being
at

enclosed
as

within and

of

being,
is
not
a

least

being,

therefore
It is

being

genus.

plain that application

the of

argument
the
under

just given,
thesis

is

direct

previous

(thes.
The

3),
first

to

the
we

matter

consideration. also stands

in

proof

advanced
to

intimate
to

relation

both

the

second
For
not

argument
could

and
not

the

preceding
its

thesis.
if it
were

being

include

modes,

essentiallyand
say this
are

explicitly
show how

predicable of

them.
last

We

to

closely these
53. confirmed Let
us

discussions
that

linked is of
in
not

together.
a

Statement

being

genus,

by

the

authority
our

St.

Thomas.
to

corroborate character

teaching
of

regard
two

the

non-generic
from

being by

passages lect. in

St. Thomas.

He
"

says enim

(lib. 3. metaph.
genus

8, parag.
definitione

k.)

Non

ponitur
non
"

differentiae,quia differentia
"

pargenus

ticipat
does because
not

genus
enter

that the

is

to

say

The

definition does writes

genus

of

the

differentia,
involve the

the And
non

differentia

not

genus."
"

again
potest

he

(1

p.

3.

a.

5.):

Ens

esse

alicujus.

Omne

Being

Not

Genus

59

reality
the very

fully
root

constituted,
of

whereas
it is

being
the of and
most

lies

at

everything,
the

damental fun-

of

all

constituents

an

entity.
go, and

Moreover,
the
But

an

accident which with it

can

come

thing
not
so

of

is

an

accident,
away

remains.

being;
left.

take

being,

and

you

have

nothing

CHAPTER

SIXTH

Composition

of

Being

With

Its

Modes

ARTICLE

Composition

of

Being Metaphysical

With

Its

Modes

Not

Summary:

Inquiry
the

outlined
"

Meaning
a

of
"

restricting ical Metaphysof

applicability grades
"

of

concept notion

General
"

tion composiinto
physical, meta-

Division

of

composition
and

physical, proof
second of

logical

First
"

thesis

"

Preliminary Adequate
and
"

remarks

to

proof
of

"

inadequate
Second

conception
"

perfection
"

proof
remark

An A

inference
query

An

explanatory
Third
"

"

answered

proof

"

Scholium.

55.

Inquiry difficulty
an

outlined. from
all

There
we

now

arises

serious demands the

one

have be be

said,

which
on

answer.

It

cannot

denied,

hand,
down
to

that
to

being
more

may
concrete

determined

or

narrowed
e.

concepts,
But how and

as,

g.

substance if

and

accident.
no

is

this

possible

being

has all 60

differences,
within

if,

moreover,

it includes

being

itself?

Composition
We

of Being
evolve

With

Its

Modes

61

shall

what

is

to

be the

held
next
to

on

this three this

rather theses.

perplexing
It is found

question
more

in

convenient that which

Hence

begin
not
are

discussion

by

showing
manner

being

is

mined deternarily ordithesis

in the rendered
on

in

concepts
the of

definite. of
our

first
a

this

phase

subject

will be

negative

character.

THESIS The
in

5 is
not

concept
its

of

being

restricted
to

applicability, by
concept

adding

it

another from
"

adequately
technical

distinct

it,

or,

in

language,

by

metaphysical Meaning
concept.
of

composition." restricting
the

56.
of
a

applicability
to

Before
we

proceeding
explain
in
we

the

proof
of

of
some

the

thesis,
of the

must

the

meaning
first
convey

terms

used

it; and
to

of

all,

let
we

us

make of

clear

what

want

when
or

speak

restricting,limiting, contracting,
the^ applicabilityof
to
we
or a

narrowing
We
are

down

concept.
a

said when

restrict determine
scope

the

applicability of
content

concept
its

its
of

and

duce re-

extent

predication by
mark.
"

the
I

addition
restrict
"

of
the

some

distinguishing
"

Thus,

notion
and
to

living being
limit the
if I

by

attaching joining
can

sensitive,"
rational
"

I it
:

latter

by
I

"

and,

choose,

still

62

Being
narrow

further

down
"

the

predicability
"

of

the
ing be-

compound
"

notion the and

rational, sensitive, living

attributes

by

qualifying
the when like.

white,"
we

"

learned/'
this ideas

Recall of

what the of
a

said

on

matter

speaking
This method

extension the

of

(No.
of
or
a

n).
concept

reducing
sort

breadth

constitutes of two

of

position com-

putting together
been of
are a

concepts,

and

hence

it has

called

by metaphysicians by
kinds
a
"

the

determination Now which order 57.

so,
we

concept
several

composition."
of
more

there
must

composition fully
in

consider
up
our

little

to

clear

notions.

Metaphysical
we

grades.

But

before which

ing doenters
"

have

to

explain

point
of
"

into

the

proper

understanding
use,

composition
occur

in its present
in
our

and

will

also

frequently
the

later

discussions, namely
"

meaning
of of

of

the These
are

phrase

metaphysical
metaphysical
than the

grades
grades
different

being."
being
tributes, at-

so-called

nothing

else

essential

whether

or generic, specific,

individual,
this
man

constituting
Peter

finite the and

individual. attributes

Thus,

comprises

rational, sensitive,

living, corporeal,
the distinctive
person

substantial, together with

which makes called
several

mark and

him

this

ticular par-

has

been These

by reputable perfections
because

writers
are

"

Petreity." "grades"
as

called
are,

(gradus,
the
rungs
or

steps),
rounds

they

it were,

by

the

Composition
aid of which
to

of Being
the mind

With

Its

Modes

63
the ticular par-

ascends

from
a

the

universal

when
few

analyzing
lines

concept.
serve

The
to

example
illustrate
our

given

back, will

meaning.
are

These because
one,
as

grades by
means

qualified
of them

"

as

metaphysical,"
is in

what
many,

physically
as

becomes the

metaphysically projects
to

much

mind

into

the

object, distinctions by
its
own are

which
power

it contrives of

create

innate
none

abstraction, where

there

in

external identical

reality.

This

pluralizing
as

of

physically
above
to

attributes, lying
the

it

does,

and the

beyond

physical, belongs, therefore,

order.

metaphysical grades
are

Now,

these

metaphysical
on

mutually
in
the

exclusive,
ideal
or

and

this

count, ac-

exist
as

metaphysical
in

order

entirely separate
one

entities;

other

words,
from

any
rest

of

them

prescinds
same

altogether

the
such
two

constituting the
case,

individual. the fact

that

That any
as

is the of these

follows
are

from

grades
"

reciprocally deniable,
is not do this
to

when
"

I say,
nor
can

to
our

be

material

be

substantial

right
of

to

be

questioned;

for

the of

definitions

the

various

metaphysical grades
in

being

are
"

different; thus

the

example

just
"

adduced,
of
denotes
are
"

substantiality
of

"

expresses and
"

ence independmateriality
tions consideratreatise
on

subject

inhesion,
parts.
forth
"

multiplicity of fully
to set

These the

in

Unity,"

which

they properly

belong.

64
58.
of
and

Being
General notion
into
us
"

of

composition

"

sion Divi-

composition
Let

metaphysical,
return to

physical subject
with

logical.
"

now

the

of the

composition
determination

and

show

its connection of union into

and
in

restriction is the

concepts.
of

Composition,
which
are

general,

things

distinct.
and

It is divided It is

physical real, meta-

logical.

real, if the
e.

parts
stem,
violet.

put
the
It

together

are

really distinct,as sepals

and

g. the
a

leaves, the
is

the the

petals of
parts

metaphysical,
such

when

combined,

though

physically identical, are

that of
in
one a

conceptually
to

distinct,and
exclusive

way

as

be

mutually

another;
is the

in

other of

words,

metaphysical grades

composition
of

union

metaphysical

being.
The union is of both

physical
strictly so
it which

and

metaphysical
For,
to

parts
have
two

composition

called. is
are

genuine
realities

composition,
be added this condition

required
not

that

mutually
in
the

inclusive; and
two

is termed

fulfilled

kinds

of

composition,

physical

and

metaphysical respectively.
But called there is still
a

third

sort

of

composition,
short
to

logical, which, composition

however,
and
can

falls claim also but

of that
two
cepts con-

genuine
name

lay
it
we

only by analogy.
which
not
term.
are

In

have these

concepts
are

put
in

together,
the

distinct For

proper

acceptation
for
two

of

the

they

neither

stand

Composition
things,
of
of

of Being
one nor

With

Its

Modes

65

which

is not for from

the
two

other

ently independnotions
and

the

mind,

objective
one

completely
hence

prescinded

another,
On the the

reciprocally
notions
were,
we

exclusive.
are

other
same;

hand, these
for of if
any

not

altogether
not

they
sort

could

have

composition
do the the

whatsoever. this
way,

How

then
one

they
two

differ?

In

that

the

of

concepts

expresses

distinctly, what

other

contains, indeed, yet represents Composition

of this
sort

only indefinitely.
not

does

consist of

in
other an-

making

concept

definite

by the
to

addition in

altogether extrinsic
the
a

it, but
the

this, that
of is
dering ren-

mind

determines

and
or

evolves

contents out

notion

by expressing
latent in

bringing
other
was

what

already

it, or

in

words,
in it be

by

explicit what
It
say,
ness

before

merely

plicitly. imto

might

perhaps
in

not

inaccurate

that and

what

is added

this

case,

is definite-

precision.
now

Let

us

clear and

up

the

difference

between
two
parisons. comas

metaphysical
We
to

logicalcomposition
omit

by

physical composition subject

all
matter.
are

relevant ir-

our

present
that

Bear lame

in
and

mind,

however,

comparisons
in
some

therefore

always
with
want

fall short

respects.

We
"

shall

begin
you

metaphysical
to

composition.
head At face of
some

Suppose
say

sketch Franklin. of

the

one,

of

Benjamin
the

first, you
in broad

draw

merely

outlines

his

Composition
is added
from the
to

of Being
it. What outset, in
an

With

Its

Modes

67
there it
was

you

see

now

was

very

though
indistinct what

at

first
manner.

perceived
with
hidden
more

only
step
the

But

every under and

forward, shadowy
till
at

lay,
is

as

it were,
out

form,
the

brought

more,

last

noble

figure
itself

of
to

the
you of

great
in all
we

American its details

statesman

reveals
"

and

minutiae.
first
so

The
was

sketch

which

spoke by

in the

example,
to

given
the

definiteness

fillingin,

speak;

ture pic-

just
merely

alluded

to, is rendered
into

determinate what
was

by
tained con-

bringing
in

clearer

view

it all

along.
o"

59.

The is
are now

composition
not

being
First

with

its

modes

metaphysical:
ready
to

argument.
in

We
we

prove
not
"

our

thesis

which
to

state

that

being is

narrowed

down

its

primary

divisions

by
the

metaphysical
of and
a

tion," composiquately ade-

that

is, by

addition

concept
exclusive

prescinded
it.
seem

from

being
to

of

What
little

we

are

about than
a

say,

will,

in

fact,

else
and
a

repetition of
so

previous
present
down
a

conclusions,
thesis is

rightly
take the
in

for

the

only
Let

corollary of principles laid

our

before.

us

first

proof

from in

consideration relation We
called
two to

of

modes

of

being

their

being

general.
In

proceed
"

thus:

order

to

have
we

what

is

metaphysical
which

composition,"
are

require
exclusive.

concepts

mutually

68

Being
can we

Now,

exclude

being
For

from
is
"

its

modes?

No,

this

is

impossible.
all

being
because
from

essentially
ent/' self-existetc.

predicable
"

of

its

modes,

deriving

existence

another,"
possess

are

something,
it follows its modes.
can

and that

therefore

being.
shut
out

Hence

being
also the

cannot

be

from We

show

this
in

from

the

absurd that

sequences con-

implied
mind Let mode
or

assumption
its
to

the

can us

take make

being
the

from

determining
do
so.

modes. is
a

attempt
of

What it

thus

divested
It
a

being?
be is

Is

something
that
it is and

nothing?
since
"

cannot

maintained
a

nothing,
"

mode
not

determination, If, on
mode I
am

nothing
we

does suppose

determine. that the hence I

can

the

other

hand,
then
was

is

something,
where
I

it is
at

being;
outset.
same

and

just
the
no

the the

repeat

operation,
matter to

but often

with

result this of

always,

how
ing say-

reiterated; and
that the be
to

is tantamount

separation
One barrel

being might

from

its modes
as

cannot

effected. fill
a

just
a

well

dertake un-

without from

bottom

with

water

as

to

part

being

its modes.
to

60.

Preliminary Adequate

remarks
and

second

proof
tion concepto
other an-

of

thesis: of
a

inadequate
us
now

perfection.
based its modes.
must

Let
on

pass of

argument,
as

the
But

character
before
to

being

inclusive

of
we

beginning
a

the

proof,

first call attention

double

Composition
way of
at

of Being
the

With

Its

Modes

69
For,
as

regarding
in

concept
of

being.

hinted either else the

the

wording

the

thesis, being
and
"

can

be

conceived

adequately
and
a

perfectly, or
In
to

inadequately
conception
when

imperfectly.
is said
is

general
be quate adein

of

perfection
in

it expresses the
order. my

all that

required,
may
"

order
in the

that real

perfection
Thus,
mind

question
"

exist
quately, ade-

I conceive

man

when essential and

represents

all

that

his
sitive, sen-

definition

implies, namely,
life

rational,

organic
these
may
"

together

with

stance. bodily subsuffice But

were or

For
order
to

constituent exist
as as

elements
man.

in I

that

man
"

conceive

man

merely
not

sensitive

poreal cor-

being,
since
to

would is

apprehend
for know think these
man
"

him
as

quately, ademan
"

more

required
To
not

exist

apart

from

thought.
I

animal
"

perfectly, however,
" "

need

ality ration-

or

irrationality."
of
may

For
are,

lie outside

the that

concept
animal
as

animal exist

they
as
man

indeed, required
or

brute, but
conceive
a

not

precisely

animal.

Hence
to

to

fection pertributes at-

fully, it is enough
which
go
to

think up

just
the

those

make

particular
however

grade
low To

of

perfection under
scale what mind
on

consideration,
that
may
to

in the

of

being
we

be. the
case

apply
The

have

said

of when
as

being.
it

knows all that

being adequately
without
nature.

lays hold
cannot

which Now

being
it is

being

exist

in

plain

jo
that from since
as

Being
in order
to

conceive
we

being
set

as

realizable these of

apart modes,

thought,

cannot

aside
essence

they belong
For

to

the
as

very

being

being.

being
from
or

found of
to

in

God

is intrinsically because in

different God
is

that

creatures,

being,
sense
a

opposed

nothing

quite

different
are

from

creatures.

Creatures,
may

true,
so

not

non-entity, yet they

is
not
a

become it is
to

God

also

non-entity,
ever

but

utterly

impossible for him

"

to

be true,

reduced
"

ness. nothingdis," mutan-

The of

same as

holds

mutatis

being

constituting

substance

and

cident. ac-

Now,

it is of
or are

the
as

concept
to

of

being adequately
following
we

viewed,
that whilst
we

taken

all it in the

essentially implies,
proof,
the
cept con-

speaking
first
we

in the of of

thesis, where
dealt with
or

discussed

unity

being, being,

the

inadequate

which

omits
to

fails to
essence

represent
of ing, beis quate, ade-

something
viz. also

belonging
its modes. called

the

very

This the

inadequate logical, and

of

concept
the

sometimes the

metaphysical concept composition

not
are

being.
with its
ment. argu-

1.

The is We

of

being
Second
the

modes

metaphysical:
now

ready fact,
extent,
we
as

for

other

proof
pated anticiwell Our

of

our

thesis. it
to
some

In

have
we

already
could
not
so.

explain the above

argument
runs

notions thus
:

without

doing

Composition
If
were

of Being
of

With

Its

Modes

Ji

the of

composition
the

being
sort, be be

with then

its modes

metaphysical
would

being

quately ade-

considered

entirely clear
equally
which
very

of

its

modes,
of
be any added

and

hence the
to

would

susceptible
may
same

of

various it: in

differentiations other

words,

the

identical
is

being, which,
to
"

when

predicated
"

of

God,

joined

self-existent," could, when

be

affirmed

of creatures,
from

coupled
All

with

deriving
from

existence
the
as

another."
of

this

follows

very

definition

metaphysical
when

composition
I
as
"

above is being,"
in

given.

Consequently,
the

say,

God

concept

of

being

thus
as

realized
to

God

and
as

exhaustively being,
I would
"

conceived
not

all it includes
;

involve
are

self-existence

and idea

when of

state,
as

Creatures

being,"
and

the

being

objectified in
in

creatures to

wise likeis in

fully considered it, would Now,

either
For
not

regard

all that
on

not

imply
of these is

dependence
inferences is in

another.

utterly
which and the

tenable. un-

there

nothing

God

is self-

under

every there

respect
can

unconditioned

existent, and
which
on

be

nothing

in

creature

is

not

wholly
this
as

conditioned
reason,

and

dependent
correct to
pletely com-

God. that

For

it is not
of

say

being

predicated
its

God

is
modes

so

denuded
to

of

determining

as

not

include
add
or
"

them.

Whence
"

it follows
to

that

when
to

self-existent

being
"

as

attributed
as

God,

join

"

dependent

to

being

affirmed

72
of creatures,
I I

Being
really do
and draw
not out

affix

new
was

note,
in

but

merely

evolve

what

being

already.
What God
of and
we

have creatures,

said

of

being
true,
substance

as

predicated
of
course,

of
also

holds
to

being
the

in

reference

and is

accident,

since of
a

very

being
in which is
on

of
to

substance

independent
the
in very lute abso-

subject
of

inhere, whilst
to

being

accident

opposed
a

nothing
inhesion.

dependence
62. An
see

subject
From

of

inference.

the

above,

we

can

readily
lead the

how

the

assertion

that

being

is determined
would

by
to
a

metaphysical

composition
of God

pantheistical conception
since
same

and

world,

the

being

in
and

both
to

would
suppose

be this

of is

entirely the
a

nature;

form Since

of

pantheism.
the
modes
cannot

then

be

taken

from

being altogether,
to

neither
are

is

it
to

strictly
it. Such

accurate
an pression ex-

say

that

they

added

is allowable The addition in

as

only
case

in is

restricted

sense.

this such

merely
mind.

logical,that

is, conceived
63.
An

by

the

explanatory
assigns
We this
as a new

remark.
reason

Our

last

gument ar-

also
not
a no

why
4,

being
that

is

genus.

proved
name,

in thesis because and

being
its have
as

has
own

title to differences that

to

it contains
now we

being,
divisions

proven

the

objective concept

of

being

plied ap-

its

primary

moreover

includes

Composition
its

of Being
modes

With

Its

Modes

73
of
even

distinguishing
it
never

as

such,
them
as

though,
such,
a

course,

expresses
difference
and In
"

obscurely.

(The

between

concept
same,

including something
was

expressing
technical
"

the

given
" "

No.

47.)

language, being
but
not
"

involves
or

its modes

virtually

ally form-

explicitly."
query
cannot

64.

A
say,
as

answered. all this

e.

But
be

some

one

might
concept
of

said

of
as

any

generic

well,
and

g.

of Is

animal
not

predicated
as

brute in

man?

the

animality
as

found brute

man

wholly rational,and
and

inherent
we

in
say not

entirely irrational?
if

might
of be
man

not

that

animality

as

predicated
would and
is

does

contain
man

rationality, there
is not

something
rational?

in

which
answer

wholly
there

entirely something
not

Our

is, that
not

in

man

which
at

is

wholly rational, in fact,

in
are are

rational

all.

True,

the

physical
in
a

order,
man;
nature

animality
yet
that these
each the

and
two
can

rationality perfections
be
;

identified
of such

fully
and

or

adequately
in

conceived

without

other

hencev
the

the

metaphysical being
even

order,
in in

neither
and

includes

other, whereas
each

God the

self-existent, involve
order.

other

metaphysical
65.
modes The

composition
not

of

being
Third

with

its

is clear shall

metaphysical:
this
a

argument.
a

To
we

up

abstruse third

subject

little

more,,

give

proof, which,

however,

is

Composition
"

of Being
"

With

Its

Modes

75

self-existent

being.
said
to

This

is the that

philosophical
his
name was

reason

why
6

God

Moses,

Javeh,
and
were

"v, that

is, very
Hence

independent being itself,

it follows

underived.
a

that, if being
"

genus,

it

must

include this

self-existent
cannot

"

(a se), and regarded

makes
some
we as

consequently,
a

latter

be

differentia, since
addition that
to
"

this
genus. and
"

always
From
istent self-exrelation

real

to

the
"

this, then,
"

infer
stand

being
other

cannot
to

each

in the

of

genus

differentia. that
"

But
not
a

granting
true

self-existent

"

(a se)
not

is

differentia existence
as
"

of

being,

may

perhaps

"deriving
be
even

from

another"

(ab
and since

alio)
that ing, be-

considered less if
"

such?

No,

it cannot, For
"

than genus,

self-existent." would
mean

self-existent

ing bethe

(as just proven),

supposition, would

"derived
"

being,"

on

same

mean

rived self-existent, de-

being,"
This
same

senseless

medley reasoning

of
can

ideas.
be

process

of

readily

adapted se),
and of

to

"being

existing by

itself"
as

(ens per
in
a

"being
inhesion" relation

existing

in another

ject sub-

(ens in alio).
of
of

The

being
genus
to

to

its modes

fore, is, there; but

not

that

differentia

being

together with

any

of but

its four
one

primary

tions determina-

constitutes
can

complete by
is
two
one

concept,

which
cepts. con-

be

also
Thus

represented
substance

incomplete
complete

concept,

j6
a

Being
true
;

metaphysical
and this
means
"

grade

of

being,
can

genuine
be
"

genus

one

concept
two

also

ceived con-

by
"

of

partial concepts, itself," the

to

ing bepressing ex-

and

existing by

former

substance

according
as a

its

common

acter, charand

and,
the latter

as

it were,

concrete
same

subject,
as

representing
element

the

to

the the

criminatin dismon com-

which

determines

subject.
66.

Scholium. that

In
is not
as

our
a

last
genus in
we

proof
because

we

have
it includes
plained; ex-

shown

being

its modes
in

modes

the

manner

the claim

third
to

thesis the
name

pointed
of genus,

out

that

it has it

no

because
two

comprises
are

its

modes

as

being.
connected: the
as

These in

statements
as
a

very

closely
will modes

fact,

little reflection includes it contains the

show,
also

reason

why
cause is, be-

being

modes for
essence

them

as

being:
the
as

it

follows
of the

from

this, that being

and the

is of

very

modes;
from

hence,
so

just
are

being
from

is

inseparable

modes,

they

it.

ARTICLE The Composition Being

of

with

Its

Modes

Logical

Summary:

Subject

of of

inquiry

stated
with
"

"

Thesis:
modes

position Com-

being
of

its

logical
in

"

Two modes

proofs
of

thesis
are

Manner
out

which

being

evolved

of

being.

Composition
67.
pass
to

of Being
of

With

Its

Modes

JJ

Subject
the

inquiry
of

stated.

We
of how and

now

positive part
in

this

phase
show,

our

investigation,
in
matter

which of

we

shall

ing, berowed nar-

fact,
its

is

determined subordinate
our

down

to
us

supreme

bers. mem-

Let

compress

teaching
:

on

this

point into the

following

thesis

THESIS

6
and supreme
"

Being
down

is
to

determined
its

narrowed

four
known is

divisions,

by

what

is

as

logical by
the
a

position," commore

that

to

say, o"

definite

conception

vaguer

reality being.
The this
:

meaning Being
is

of
not

our

thesis

in in

other its
to

words

is

restricted

applicability

by
from

adding
which

something
it

extrinsic

it, something
which
is

fully prescinds
it; but
the
net

and

fully by

prescinded

from
what does

it is thus of

restricted

bringing
indeed,
68.

out

concept
express.
to

being

contains

but Two of

arguments

show its
to

that

the

position com-

being
at

with
once

modes
our

is

logical.
for
our

We

shall

proceed

arguments;

they

follow

immediately

and

readily

from

previous
Let
us

thesis.

begin

with

an

argument

from

exclu-

Jo
sion

Being
:

Composition,
is either

as

is

universally
or

edged, acknowl-

physical, metaphysical being

nor

logical.
it is not

Now

as

regards

and

its

modes,

physical (thes. 3),

Hence
our

metaphysical
Thus
we

(thes. 4).
have it be

it must contention that

be

logical.

proved
noted,

with such

little labor.

Let
as

however,

arguments
are
an

this, though luminous,

is so, out withit is

perfectly convincing, yet

as

not

very

they
at

show the

only
time

that

assertion the
reason

assigning

why

so.

Let

us

then that

add will

another,
tell
us

more

direct

stration, demon-

something
runs

of

the

grounds

for

our

thesis. is

It

thus
two

: are

Composition
put

logical, when
on

concepts

together which,
of
one

the

one
on

hand,
the

are

not
are

exclusive
not

another, and,
the
same.

other,
two

altogether
are

That

these where

tions condi-

required
concepts
is

is
are

plain;

for

mutually
the
position com-

exclusive

joined together,
and the
no

metaphysical:
at

where

there

is

no

distinction into
sort.

all

between there is is

notions

brought
of
any

conjunction,
For

composition
with
"

nothing
be

compounded
to two

itself:
stone

thus
a

it would

ridiculous That the

say,

is
are

bodily body."
case

requirements
of
no

fulfilled in the For the modes them. differs

of

being,

admits

doubt.

of

being
On the its

include other

being, and hand,

being
in

includes

being

general

from

modes;

for, although

it

Composition
includes such for and
:

of Being
yet
it does

With

Its

Modes

79
them

them,
and
are

not

express

as

the

modes in
we
"

differ

from

mere

being,
definite

they

being
"

general
can

rendered

precise.

Now

understand

why
to

"

the

logical composition
in
for else the

of

being
and

is said

consist

fuller
four the

expression primary
being
to

evolution
are

of

being;

the than

modes

really nothing
are

which

they
and

added, but
:

without
are,
as

its

indefiniteness

vagueness
up

they

it were,

being

lighted

from and

within distinct. is called

and

thus

rendered
is

determinate

Being,

then,

determined

by

what

logical composition.
69.
are

Manner evolved

in
out

which
of

the

modes
But evolve

of
some

being
one

being.
to

might ask,
named
of
to

how

is it
out
to

possible

the
the leave the

above
cept con-

modes

of
some

being?
one,

Suggest
and then

being
do

him

himself;
and the

you

think

that that

by

closest could

scrutiny develop
To
said

analysis
four

of

notion,
from recall

he it?
what
a

primary
this
a

modes

understand

the

better,
may

was

before

that
in
two

concept Ways.
under

include it

given
and the
stituents, con-

perfection
expresses thus

Sometimes

actually

the

entity
it
"

consideration,
for

contains
"

explicitly, as,
in
relation
to

example,

concept

man

its essential

bodily substance,
intellect. the

life, sensation,
mere

and

Now,

in notion

this

case,

analysis of

preceding

suffices

without

going

out-

80

Being
of

side

it, to
within

discover the
compass

any of
"

of its

the

notes

prised com-

meaning.
and
you

Look

attentively
perceive
and
"

at

the

notion

man," body,

will

in

it, substance,
these, then,
"

life, sensation explicitly

in
as

reason;

are

involved
"

or

formally
latter

in

the

concept

man,"

far
to

as

this
own

expresses

them,
and

each

according

its

peculiar
there
may

form

character.
way

But

is still another

in which not,

cept con-

comprise

perfection;
as

indeed,
it

as

before, by
as

expressing it, but containing

the the it under

including
its extension.
cannot

virtually or
In this
case, out

implied

attribute

be

drawn

of

containing concept
but in order
to

by

merely
the

analytical
involved

process;

perceive
I
can

perfection, independently
and

I need of the

outside

information,
which
am

gotten

concept
thus
modes
sort

contemplating;
come

thus, and
of of
to

only,
as

to

knowledge
Inclusion

the this
"

included
"

in

being.
"

is called because virtue

tual virthe
or

in

opposition
concept
it were, what
to

formal,"
the

containing
power,
as

possesses

of

expanding
within.
meet

and

unfolding
case

itself
very

into similar
or

it bears what
we

The in

is

with
For

the

logism syl-

reasoning
the The
a

process.

the
"

antecedent
"

may
"

contain

conclusion latter

either

virtually
whenever

or

formally."
arrive
at

happens
of the

we

can

knowledge
of the

consequent
Thus

by
I

mere

analysis

antecedent.

when

Composition
"

of Being
is
an
"

With

Its

Modes

81

say,

man

animal,"

by merely
I
or

searching
once

into that

the
man

notion is
a

animal,"

can
a

at

infer But

living being
that
no

substance. of
to

it often the

happens

amount

analysis
a

of

antecedent

will

enable do

you
so,

deduce

tain cer-

conclusion.
not to

To
be

you the

require

mation, infor-

gotten

from

consideration the how

will you

of the
"

major
men

premise
mortal

alone.
"

Take matter,
you

assertion,

All

are

no

closely
never

you

examine from

this it that

proposition, Togo
is

learn

mortal,
that

unless

first
man.

ascertain
This the

from

other

sources

Togo
the

is

knowledge

is

furnished

by

minor

of

syllogism.
But

perhaps
of

some

one
are

wants

to
out

know
of

how

the with

modes

being
of

evolved

being
is
gards re-

the

aid

outside in
"

information.

This
as

amply

explained
God
and in
not

Natural
and

Theology,"
in another and

creatures,

part

of

Ontology
It
to

respect
be
out
on

to

substance

accident.

might
indicate
can

of

place, however,
this is done.
of

briefly
Thus
"
"

the
out

lines the

which
modes and all

find
"

two

being

ditioned con-

(ab noting

alio)
how
to

"unconditioned" visible and

(a
are

se), by

things

perfect, im-

subject
and
a

change

hence existence And

conditioned,
to

then

rising
"

from
cause,

their God. itself

"

that

of the

first, absolute
existent
a

form and
"

concepts
in

in
of

(per se)

isting ex-

subject

inhesion"

(in alio), by

Composition

of

Being

With

Its

Modes

83

must

have like.
in

recourse

to

the

taste,

chemical

tests,

and

the

Thus,
of

similar

"

manner,

being,"
and

as

cated predi-

God,
itself

creatures,
under the

substance,

accident,
to

presents

same

guise
in each this of

the

tellect, in-

yet

what and

it

includes

case

is

wholly
I
must

different

to

apprehend
concept

diversity,
abstract

go for

beyond
further

the

mere

being
The

knowledge. why
we

reason

insist

so

much

on

the

proper

understanding
that
the

of

the

preceding
of the

matter

is,
ness

right
one

explanation
of the
most

analogoustrines doc-

of

being,
in

important
a

philosophy,
the

hinges,
of the

to

very

great

tent, ex-

on

acceptance thesis.

doctrine

expressed

in

the

last

CHAPTER

Unity

of

Being

Imperfect

Summary:

Subject Unity
thesis
"

of
of A

inquiry being question

creatures to

outlined
"

"

Thesis:
of

imperfect
answered

Proof blance Resem-

"

of Points and of

God

imperfect
Infinite

"

difference
in

between

ing be-

being
of

general.
outlined.
which
we

70.

Subject
remains
up
one

inquiry
more

There
must

still
clear of

point,
pass
to

before it

we

the of

analogousness

being;

regards being.

the The

kind

logical
of this off

unity
tion ques-

possessed
will has
to at

by

solution and
to

once

supplement
and
us

round

what
is

gone

before Let

help
our

elucidate
on

what the
matter
:

follow.

cast

views

under

discussion

into

the

following

thesis

THESIS

7
of of
true
sense

The

general

concept

being,
unity,
of

though alis the

possessed
not term.
one

in

the

fullest

71. claim

Proof for

of

thesis.

The
course,

unity

which
Now

we

being

is,

of

logical.

84

Unity
logical unity
represents
It the is the

of Being
in

Imperfect
one

85
concept

consists
common

this, that
of

essence

several

things.
agree

perfect

when
essence

the

several

things
any

in
in

common

without is not
"

difference
case,

that

essence;

if such
"

the
a

it is imperfect.

Thus, perfect unity

each other
in
;

animal
man

is

notion beast in
no

possessing
resemble wise be
said

for

and
and

brute
are

animality,
it.
to

tinguishe disof

by being
For
we

But
its

this four

cannot

in

regard
have

primary
are

divisions.
once

shown each other

that in

they

at

like
very than
not can-

and

unlike of

being,

since

the

being
that of be We

substance,

for

example,
the

is other
of

accident. called
can

Hence

unity

being

perfect.
this also from the notion of

show

transcendental
"

unity.
"

The that

one

in

its broadest
in

meaning
itself the
and

is defined divided
nor

as

which
all else.

is undivided
Now this

from

neither

first

the is the when

second

part
verified
a

of
in

description
concept
of

of

the

one

fully

the

being.
in

Not

first; for

notion

is undivided that that

to
recur

itself

it represents
agree and

only"
out

in

which which
to
our

several

things
are

shuts

by

they

criminate dis-

Thus,

ple, typical exam-

animality
the
common

is endowed of of the
man

with

logical unity
because brute the
to two

in the
clusion ex-

fullest

sense

word,
and holds

it is

element of

the

everything

that

apart.

86

Being
differences
"

The

rational
to

"

and

"

irrational
not
so

"

are

entirely extrinsic being. being,

far
as

animal.
its modes

But

with
as

It and

contains

within them

itself
in

it,
are

moreover,

includes with

so

they

identified also
not

it, not

only

in

the

physical, but being

for
a

in the

metaphysical

order.

Hence,

does

fulfil the

first condition

required
Here

perfect unity.
itself.
or

difficultysuggests being
to

How be

is

it

possible
with the

for

include

to

identified

four of
one

modes,

considering
To
meet

that

they

are

exclusive
note

another.

this

tion, objecin
to two

that
as

being

may

be
or

regarded
as

ways,

either

unapplied,
of

applied
viz.

its

respective
creatures,

subjects

predication,
accident.

God,
as

substance, and
it contains
as
so

If viewed
not

unapplied,
indeed,

the
were,
as

modes,

conjointly,

but,
in

it far

indefinitelyand
is either itself
or

junctivel dis-

being
in
as

ent self-existin
to

or

dependent, being

existing

another. the it
sarily neces-

But

if

is considered

applied
then

terminate de-

subjects
includes
some

above
one

named,

particular, representing
the

definite

mode,
when

without,
I say,
"

however,
God
is

it.

Thus
prises com-

being,"

predicate

self-existent, because
the
so

self-existence referred
to

is of
and

very

essence

of

being
other

as

God,

for
As

the

rest.

regards
which

the

part
that

of

the
one

definition

of

unity,

demands

the

be

divided

Unity
from
case

of Being
not

Imperfect
in

87
the

all of

else, it is

strictly verified
For since

being
in
a

either.

being
it is

is

essentially
to

contained conceive
as

its

modes,
without

impossible
it
as

mode

conceiving

thing, some-

being. being
; cannot

Hence of
not
oneness

be

one

in
so

the far

best
as

sense

it

is the

so

only
modes,
because

in and

it does
not set not

set

forth

it

does

them

forth, merely
them. and

the

mind

does

represent

There

is

no

separation
the

tween bethe

being

its modes
The
;

on

part
is

of

object expressed.
not

separation
in

purely

ical, log-

metaphysical
from its modes

other

words,

being

prescinds
72. A

inadequately only.
In be

question unity
of that
f
"

answered.

connection

with
correct

the
to

being being
We

it

might

asked,
modes
a

is it in

say

contains
answer

the
with

its

comprehension
You
may

tion. distincthe
not

say in its

that

being

includes but forms

must
as we

modes
as

as

being

comprehension,
For
a

such

definitely taken. comprehension

way of

what

part
be in

of
some

the

concept,

represented
and
over

by

it;

now,

have
the

said

over

again, being represents

not

modes
73.

as

being, but

in

any

other
to

manner.

Resemblance
This last
are

of

creatures

God
a

perfect. imreason

thesis
similar

also
to

gives
God

why

creatures

fectly. only imperthings

neces-

For may

in

order

that
other

two

(or more)
it is

resemble

each

perfectly,

88

Being
that
means

sary

we

should
one

be

able

to

conceive
cuts

them

by

of

concept,

which
that be Now
a

oft* their
a

differentiatingmarks
in
at

fully;
held differ.

is, by
similar
as

concept
do
not

which
once

the
agree

things
and

to

we

have of this with

shown
sort.

repeatedly, being
But
more

is not

concept
connection

about

this

in

the

analogy
74.
Points and

of

being.
of

difference in

between Before
we

infinite
leave
to
us

being
this

being
of
our

general.
and

aspect
the

subject
of of

proceed
let
to

sider con-

analogousness
or

being,
scholia

add

remark
our

two

by
of

way

complete

doctrine. The

concept
and

being, by
to

reason

of

versality its unitial essen-

owing

the been

fact

that

it is

to

all

reality, has
God
a

actually

mistaken
to

by

some

for Thus

himself, who

is essential of the
a

all

things.
of

misunderstanding
at

trine docfalse

being

is

the

root

of
refers

Monism,
all

philosophical system,
to
one common

which

phenomena
It
can

underlying principle.
the
errors.

is

prising sur-

how
to

ambiguity
For of

of

words be
so one

lead
to

such

vital the

it would

hard

ascribe different
to

confounding
so

concepts

radically
another

and

faintly resembling
than in
mere

anything
God and

else

quibbling.
possess
an

True,
all-

both

being
is the

general
in

embracing
different.

universality, but
God

senses

altogether
efficient and

pattern,

the

Unity
final
cause

of Being
the

Imperfect
of
is all all

89
things
tingent; con-

and

preserver
abstract
to

being things.
on

in is

the

predicable
but

of

all ing, be-

God the

external

himself;
to

other
not

hand,

is intrinsic what
to

all

reality.

God the

does very
as

constitute of that

he

made;

being

is

essence

which
less but
one

it is attributed.

Being

such, then,
for this its

expresses

than

any

other

concept;
and for

content

is it

single note;
of thing. every-

reason

is
on

predicable
the
It

The
most

idea

of

God,
of
on

contrary,
embraces

is the
ited unlim-

comprehensive
perfections,
and

ail.

this God.

account

is referable

to

none

but
us

the
one

Infinite
more

Let
same

add

remark

pointing
freak

in

the

direction. has God

come

By
about

strange
both
"

of

language,
in

it

that
to

being
"

general
Being

and in
ness

are

said
so

be

simply
reason

being.

general is
and

named
as

by

of of

its indehnite-

vagueness,

expressive

nothing
Hence,
as

cept ex-

that is called
all
"

in

which
"

all

things

agree.

it

simply

being negatively,
God,
on

denying
hand,
is
to

determination.
"

the

other he all

called
no

simply
of

"

being,
but

because
possesses This
sense,

is limited

form

being,

being

in

an

supereminent

degree.
a

appellation
not
as

then

is

given
or

him

in

positive
from

abstracting
but

prescinding including

all definite
all

perfections,
own

as

them

in

his

unspeakable

way.

Analogousness
are

of Being
and
very
our

91

far of

from

being

unanimous;
proves be

this

gence diver-

opinion

often It

confusing
to

and
remove

troublesome.
some

shall

endeavour,

of
the

the

stumbling

blocks

obstructing
both
in

the

path

of

sincere

inquirer,
interest
this

because itself
one

this

subject
the

is of

deepest
of
to

and
way

because
or

solution is

problem
very far

another
on

thought
many

have
vital
man

reaching
Thus fame treatise
no

bearings
Father in
"

other S.

doctrines. of
no mean

Liberatore

J., a

matters

philosophical,
" "

writes

in

his

On

Universals
because

This

point

is of

little

moment,
to

the

admission, that Being

is

with

respect
mately ulti-

God

and
leads

creatures,
to

univocal,

pantheism."
settlement almost in the
and

The

satisfactory
depends
established

of

the

topic
on

under
clusions con-

discussion

entirely

the
as

previous part,

well the

as

on

the
on

correct

precise definitions

of

notions
turns.

which

this

perplexing question chiefly

seem

In

fact, it

would

that
to

many

of

the

heated

controversies
are us mere wars

in of

regard
words.

the

analogy

of

being,
Let

then the bone that

that

first of

all, clearly
of
such

and

sharply
as

determine
been

meaning
of claims
of

terms

have The

the

contention
our

in
chief but
we

the

past.

concept
course,
same

attention must,
the
account
terms

is, of
at
"

analogy;
the
"

the
vocal uni-

time, define
"

notions
on

of

and

"

equivocal

of

their

92
close

Being
connection
of

with three

the

former.

The

tion exposias

these

notions, expressing
both ideas and

they
terms,

do

certain

peculiarities of
to

by right, belongs
of
our

Dialectics; the
render

requirements
a

disquisition,however,
development
in of this A
essence

somewhat lutely abso-

exhaustive

these

concepts

indispensable
76.
one

place.
univocal
common

Univocal

terms.

term

is

which
and

an signifies

to

several

objects
the
not
"

predicable of
Terms of but
term

all of

them
are

in

exactly
same

same

way. in
"

this also

sort

the

only

sound,
a

in

sense.

Thus
to
men

animal

is

univocal
;

in reference
I say,
"

and
an

brute

beasts
"

hence
is
an

if

An
"

Indian A
sparrow
"

is

animal,"
an

lion
"

animal,"
"

is

animal,"
same

etc.,

animal
a

invariably
sensitive of

means

the and

thing,"

viz. of

living,

being, tion predica-

it is

predicable
same

all its

subjects
as

in the
on

way,

namely
and
in

pendent essentially deof

"

the

Creator

independent
like
manner,

subject
"

of

inhesion.
to

So,

tue vir-

as

applied

prudence,
in
to

justice, fortitude,
each
case,

and
same

temperance,
identical

stands,

for

the

perfection,

wit, moral

lence. excel-

77. the their

Equivocal
hand,
are

terms.

Equivocal
which
are

terms,
affirmed
ings. mean-

on

other

those

of

various

subjects in entirely different

the
matter
" "

Thus,

noun

mass

as a

referred

to

quantity

of

and

to

religious service-

is

Analogousness
such
a

of Being
"

93

term

; also

the
"

word A

light

"

in

the

lowing fol-

propositions
"

feather

is

light," and
be

God

said

Be call

light made."
attention of words
to
are

It will
the due

hardly
that all culiarity pe-

necessary puns and

to

fact
to

plays
of
terms.
same

this

That

the

word
is of
a

should
mere

signify things
coincidence.

tirely en-

different,
either of
as a

For

result

mere

chance,
alterations

or,

perhaps
and it
mutations permay

the

laws

regulating
of
vowels
two

the and

consonants,

happen
somewhat derived

that in

words,

resembling

each

other rise
to

their

general make-up,
are

give
in
used
comes
a

forms
to

which the
two

identical instances

sound.

Thus,
"

take
a

before,
from

mass,"

quantity
(a

of
and

matter,
"

"

massa,"

lump)
"

mass,"

religious
whilst its

service,
"

from in the the

"

missa,"
of
" "

(dismissal),
not

light

"

sense

heavy
and

"

owes
"

origin

to

German

leicht,"

light

"

meaning
traceable
"

energy
to

making
word

objects
of

visible," is language,

another
v

that

namely

Licht."
terms
are

Equivocal
and

frequently

called
For

"

nyms," homoa

that

very

appropriately.
same,

monym ho-

(from
is

6fi6s,the
to

and

owfia,

name),
is
one

understood
but in

be

word

which
in

in

name,

manifold

in

meaning;
"

fact, taking
seem

it all

all,
to

"

homonymy
"

would
"

to

be

preferable

equivocation

in

the

scientific

94

Being
in which
we

meaning
term

take

it here,
use

as

this

latter

generally signifies
of
a

the

of with

expressions
a

susceptible
to
"

double the which

meaning
same

purpose

mislead.

For

reason,

the

word cographers lexihaps perphysical meta-

equivocalness,"
as

is

acknowledged

by

perfectly legitimate,
suitable than in
a

would and

be

more

logical

treatise

equivocation. Analogous
the univocal when
terms

78.
a

Analogous

terms.

hold

middle
;

place between they

are

and

cal equivoof
tions no-

for

those

which,

affirmed

their

various

subjects of predication, express

are

(or objects) that partly different.

referred
same name

partly the
term
"

same

and
as

Such

is the and
the bears

gloomy,"

to

man's

looks
to

the two,
some

weather.
either
sort
or

The because of
semblance rea

is

applied

gloomy

countenance

to

gloomy
expression
condition

weather,
can

because be
It traced

gloomy
the

facial

often the air.

to

gloomy
seen

of

will

be the
and

readily
common

that

the

notions

expressed

by

term,
are,
are

although
at

somewhat

similar
very

connected,
that

the

same

time,
same

dissimilar,

is, they

partly

the

and

partly

ferent. dif-

79.

Univocal,
From

equivocal,
the
and

and

analogous

cepts. con-

terms,

epithets univocal, analogous

have

monymous hobeen

(equivocal),
transferred
Hence
to

the

(objective) concepts
concepts
are

signified.
which
are

univocal

those

Analogousness
identical in every and way,
as

of Being
is, both
manner

95
what which

that
to

as

to

they they
whilst

signify,
are

the

in

referred

to

their

respective
as

subjects;
they do,
ferent, dif-

analogous
are

notions, expressing partly the

same

things which
are

and

partly

not are,

strictlyidentical, but properly speaking,

(or
of
no

only similar.

There

homonymous
being
concept
tional conven-

concepts,

homonymy
a

equivocalness)
terms.

exclusively being
a

property
and

For,
a

natural,

not,

like

term,

sign,
one

cannot

possibly
one

express

more

than
ever, How-

object
if
you

(or
so

group you

of

objects).
call

choose,
those thus

may
are

mous homonymonymous ho-

concepts

which

signified by
a

terms,
what

transferring, by
of the

trope,
to

is characteristic

sign (the term)

Scholastics
say
"

the

concept
are

signified.

The

that

concepts

styled homonymous
that them

by
reason

an

sic extrinthing some-

denomination,"
extrinsic
to

is, by

of the

(namely

common

homonymous
From

term).
we

what
that

have

just said, homonymy,

to

we

can

readily
analogy subjects
whether
or

infer

univocalness,

and

necessarily
of
a

imply
and

reference that

several

predication, given
term cannot

the

question

is

univocal, homonymous,
answered,
it
can

ogous, analtwo

be

until

at

least

objects,
mentioned.

to

which

be

ascribed, have
ask
me

been which

Thus,
three

if you of

under
word
"

of

these

classes

terms

the

bark

"

96
I falis,
some

Being
cannot

satisfyyou,
things
to

unless

you

first

name

of the
can

which the

it is attributed.

For
to

it

be

any

of
of

three

according
It is
say, cry

the

divers

subjects
to

predication.
covering,
or

univocal, if
of
a

applied
and
a

the

outer

poplar

sycamore,

to
at

the

uttered

by
of

mastiff

and

terrier

the

approach (equivocal)

stranger;
referred
sound

it is
to

homonymous
rind
an

when

the

of
angry
a

tree

and
it

the
is and

peculiar

made

by

dog;

analogous
the
terior ex-

when

predicated envelope

of of
a

small

boat
or

tree,
the

of

reproachful,

scolding language
made 80.

and

short, explosive noise

by

one

of the

canine Before of

species.
we we

Analogues.
divisions

pass
must

on

to

the

various the
we

analogy,
another occasion

explain
which

of yet signification shall of have

"

expression
of
"

frequent
the

using, namely
"

that

analogues."
mean

By

analogues
of which

(or
ogous anal-

analoga)
terms

we

subjects
are

(or concepts)
we

predicable.
countenance

For and

example,
the

when
as

speak
of

of

the

weather of the

gloomy,
and
as

love

and

fire
as

as

ing, burn-

eye

the

intellect

seeing, of
countenance

God

and

creatures

beings, then fire,eye

"

and
and

weather,
creatures,

love
are

and the

and
"

intellect, God
of their
spective re-

analogues

predicates, gloomy, being.

is the

burning, seeing,
this the

and

Analogue,
exact

taken

in

restricted Latin
"

sense,

equivalent

of

analoga-

Analog
turn,"
"

ousness

of Being
Harper
word

gy
S.

out

of
"

which ";

Father

J.
not

makes
as

analogate

however,
into
any
or

this

has

yet

found

its way

English dictionary.
objects
are

These

analogues,
terms
are

to

which

the

ogous analinto

applied,
and

distinguished
the

principal

(primary)
those
to

secondary;
the
common,

pal princi-

being
name

which

analogous original
ing; mean-

is
and

applied
the been

in

its proper
those

and
to

secondary, merely
of

which
on

the
account

same

term
some

has

transferred theirs of with

of

connection
81.

the

principal.
We
on
now

General
to

division various
at
on

analogy.
of

come we

the

kinds

analogy
as

which
a

must

dwell

greater
the

length,
under

having
tion. considera-

special bearing

subject

Analogy,
is
or a

then, in general, capability

with
a

as

here

understood,
to two

term's

of

being

applied
which

more

objects
and

meaning

is

partly

the It

same

partly different.
into
and
two

is

divided

classes, called
of

analogy
ing accordname

of

attribution
as

analogy
for
is

proportion,
the
same

the

ground

attributing
either
or
a

to
one

several

things
to

simple
a

relation

of of

thing

another,

else

resemblance

relations.
82.

Analogy
when
term

of

attribution.
essence

Analogy
signified by

is

of
the

attribution

the
is found

analogous

in

one

of

the

analogues
order,

(namely

the

principal), primarily,

first in

Analogousness
herent
may

of Being
animals
or

99

quality
be
an

of

none

but health

; other

things
it; they
of
name
an

conducive extrinsic
and
"

to

tokens

of
health

bear

relation
come

to

the

animal;
"

thus
to

to

appropriate

the

healthy
It would

themselves.
from

seem

the of

preceding
extrinsic
or
are

that

what

philosophers
rhetoricians these
or

call

analogy

attribution,
For
on
one

style metonymy figures of

of the

synecdoche.
founded

two

speech
relations
and

the

other

obtaining

between
tainer con-

cause

and
and

effect, sign contained,

the like.
to

thing signified,
and

material

thing

made

of

it, and
We
now

pass

the

other
the

subdivision intrinsic.
term

of
In

ogy anal-

of what

attribution, namely
is

this,
g.

signified by
to

the

common

(e.

wise), is intrinsic
to

all the
; but

analogues
the is
manner

(and
in

not

the

principal only)
in each
one

which
ent; differit is its

it exists
for found

of

them them

essentially

in

of

(the principal),
and

independent,
whilst
in

unconditioned the
others

in

fulness,
it is less

(the secondary),
in
an

dependent, perfect

conditioned, and
Thus

essentially expressed
both God

state.
"

the

property
to

by
and that

the

term

wise," truly belongs

this
of that
vast

man,

with wisdom
on

difference, however,
creature

the

the

is

limited

and

dependent
it without It
is
now

of

the
or

Creator,
in
an

who

possesses

restriction
easy
to

infinite
a

degree.

assign

reason

why

the

ioo

Being
"

word
of verb add
case,

attribution
For

"

is used the

to

describe

this kind
of
"

analogy.
"

original meaning
"

the
to

to

attribute way
term

"

is

to

join

in

addition,"
in

by
a

of

increase."
g.

Since, then,
attributable
a

our

(e.

healthy),
to

marily prinite defiferred trans"

and class

properly
(e.
as

objects of
has in

certain

g.

to

animals),
"

been addition

and,
others medicine
of
a or

it were,
very

joined

to to

different

character hence
to

(e.
that
"

g.

complexion), question
another above
"

it is be of

the

analogy

in But

is said
way

tion." attribufor

of

accounting

the itself

choice
to
us.

of The

the

denomination

suggests
"

phrase

analogy
describe
a

of attribution
"

was
"

probably

first used in

to

extrinsic

ogy, anal-

since

this,
and

certain

quality
inherent
to

(e.
in
one

g.

healthy), truly thing,

in which is

properly
or

merely
it is
not

ascribed thus

attributed Both

others above
to

inherent.
come

the

explanations,
same.
"

however,
the

practically
of
to

the

As

regards
of

combination
"

words, remark,
ard standseveral

analogy

attribution

we

wish
any

that

it is not

acknowledged

by

of

our

dictionaries, although

it is used
on

by

distinguished English
the relation is between

writers the

philosophy.
and

As

primary
we
"

secondary perhaps
causative Such

analoga
be
"

generally causal,
to

might
or

allowed

substitute

causal

analogy
modes

for

analogy
are

of
once

attribution.
more

of

speech

at

suggestive

Analog
and

onsness

of Being
of
a

101

intelligible,and

hence

less

pedantic

character.

84.
to
"

Analogy
last kind

of

proportion.
of

We

now

come

the

analogy,

namely

that

of

proportion." Analogy
to

is

so

named
in
proper

when
a

term

is

tributed at-

something
or

meaning
one,

different

from
reason

its

primary
a

and

that

by

of
sort

certain

resemblance

of
on

relations. the and

semblance re-

This

of
or

analogy,
agreement
that

then,
of

is based

relations;

it is

for

this

reason

it is called consists
sense,

analogy
in in
the
an

of proportion;

for

proportion
in
a

equality

of

ratios,
of

or,

wider

any

similarity
ease,

relations.
is not
us

The

similarity in

present

however,
But
let

perfect.
our

make

definition heard called

a

clearer brave
a

by

an

example.
e.

We

have

all

warrior,
in of
tle. batthe

g.
"

Judas
Lion
are
"

Machabeus,
is here
now an

lion
term

analogous

kind

we

just
is

discussing.
to
a

In

its proper

significationit
But

applied
is it

well

known
to
an

mal. ani-

why
a

also On

referred of
For

Judas
ment agreea

Machabeus,
or

man?

account

resemblance

of

relations. his of
"

brave

warrior
in
a

bears
manner
on

himself

towards
to

foes
a

in

battle
in his
"

similar other brute

that

lion

attack and
"

beasts. in
"

Brave

warrior
relations
"

"

lion/' then,
in battle
"

stand and

certain
beasts

to

foes

brute

respec-

102

Being
and these For themselves relations the
or are

tively;

similar of

to

tain cer-

extent.

behavior

both

when

defending
the and

ized attacking, is characterand rage. of

a no

by boldness, fierceness,
resemblance
a

However,
warrior
means

of

the

conduct is the

lion For of

in

their the

conflicts of is

by

perfect.
defender

wrath

self-sacrificing
it
is

his

country
and in the

calculating;
from

guided

by
it is

reason
a

proceeds him;

tion: self-devoThe
;

virtue of of

it is heroism. beast

ferocious
it is the
outcome

onrush result of
mere

maddened

is blind

unreasoning
brutish

instinct; it is the

passion.
of the in first the
bers mem-

Sometimes of is made
as

the

comparison
involved

the with
one,

relations
one

analogy however,
two;
and

object only;
as

not,
for

just
hence would

but

doing

service in the in the of

upon

this
seem

case

is included be
"

former.

Such tion citaHow that

to

the

case

following
" "

from
sweet

the

Merchant

Venice this
on

the
as

moonlight
the

sleeps
of
one

bank,"
his
a sense

is, just
in

sight

stretched
to

couch of the
on a

deep, healthy sleep, gives rise

and of
repose

peace

in

looker-on,

so

also

does

view
grassy

the

moonlight
Here
the

peacefully shining tranquil sleeper

considered
as

bank.
may

and

the

moonlight
to

be third

both term,

referred
tator. spec-

the

same

namely

the

same

The

phrase

"

analogy

of

proportion

"

is

not

Analog
recognized
other,
"

ousness

of Being
any
more

103
than the
haps per-

by lexicographers
of attribution."

analogy

We

might by
In
"

not

inappropriately replace
resemblance

it

analogy rhetoric,
For,
ference trans-

based
this

on

of is
"

relations."
called
a

kind

of
to

analogy
Webster,

metaphor.
is the
set

according
of
to

metaphor
one

the

relation
set

between for the

of

jects obbrief

another
e.

purpose the

of sea." between

explanation,
As
two

g. the

ship plows
resemblance which

stated
sets

before, the

the

of of
For
as,

relations, into

the

so-called
is
not
are

analogy perfect.

proportion
where
e.

can

be

resolved, compared
3
case :

the the
two

relations
ratios
our

identical,
the
common

g.

and

8,

predicate analogously,
and

(in
but

firmed y2), is af-

not

univocally.
analogy
of portion. proogy anal-

85.

Extrinsic Like

intrinsic of

analogy
resemblance

attribution, the
of that
relations

resting
extrinsic
as

on

is either
same son rea-

or

intrinsic, and

for

the

in the

previous
when

case.

It is extrinsic

what
g.

is is

expressed
intrinsic
the

by
to

the
one

analogous
of the
sort

term

(e.

lion)

the

analogues
the

"only, namely
merely
to
essence

principal,
some

others,
of

secondary,
the

bearing
It

resemblance when the is

principal.

is

trinsic in-

signified by
in

the

gous analo-

term

found

all the them

the
manner

analogues
in
not

truly
it

and is

properly,
referred
to

although
each of

which

is

the

same.

104

Being
example
take
and

As

an

of
term

this
"

kind

of
as

analogy,
applied
and

we

might quality

the

accident,"
Both both
are

to

quantity. they
is

truly
in the

really
;
cident ac-

accidents, because
and

inhere

substance

hence
"

what is

designated
to

by

word
and

"

intrinsic
manner

both in

quality
each

tity; quan-

but
to

the

which

is

related
to

the

same

subject
different. accidents

(substance),
As stand

is held in

be

essentially
these
two

the
to

relations substance

which
can

be

expressed thus,
also
"

by
as

sort

of

geometrical
determines
not

proportion,
so

just

quality

substance,

does
we are

quantity,
can

though
see

just
this

in and

the

same

way,"
cases

easily
to

why
fall

similar

supposed
of

under

the

head

of

analogy
86.

proportion.
and

Metaphysical
still remains into
our

physical
of

analogy.
intrinsic which
on

There

the

subdivision
and
as

analogy
claims

metaphysical
here,

physical,

attention
of
our

bearing

directly

the

proofs
Intrinsic
or

next

thesis. based
on

analogy
on

(whether
of

causal
is
even

lations re-

resemblance
an

relations)
conceived

physical metaas

when

essence,

stripped of all its differentiating marks,

the
same

is partly
to

and

partly

different instance

in

relation of
this

its

various

analogues.
is
"

An
"

kind

of

analogy
divisions.

being
The

as

applied
term

to

its four
"

primary
"

qualifying

metaphysical

Analog
is used because

oiismss

of Being
essences

105

abstract order.

belong

to

the

metaphysical
Intrinsic

analogy
the

is

physical
name

when
taken

the

essence

signified by
with
and its

common

together
the
same
"

distinguishing notes,
different. of
an

is partly
"

partly

Thus

living being
a

as

predicated
is such
an

elm-tree

and

mocking
is

bird
garded re-

essence,

if with
In the

it

(living being)
and

as

coupled

non-sensitive

sitive sen-

respectively.
as

fact, if
attributes
are

we

include of
a

viduality indi-

one

of

predicate,
gous, analocan

then

all

common

concepts

physically
created
sense,

since
never

individuality
same.

in this

things
"

be

the of is

In

man,"

as

predicated
Franklin
the
one

Daniel

Webster
;

and

Benjamin
" "

physically analogous
is identified with
and

for

man

in

case

what in

makes the

Daniel

Webster
what This

this
constitutes

individual,

other,
that
as

with

Benjamin
analogy
it

Franklin

person.
"

kind
because

of

is denominated
essences,
as

ical," physare

regards

they

in

themselves

in

the

physical

world.
and

87.
vocation.

Metaphysical,
The
two

physical,
classes

logical just
a

uniplained ex-

of

analogy
to

stand univocalness

in

close

relationship

fold threephysical, meta-

(or univocation),
and

namely
as

physical, understanding
be of

logical; and analogy

without of
some

the

proper
cannot

the

being

rightly appreciated

knowledge

Analog
its
"

ousness

of Being
Such
of
a

107
is stance, sub-

differentiating
"

modes.

concept

being

as

predicated
accident.

God,
be

creatures,
seen

and that

It will
and

from

this,
ogy anal-

logical univocalness (No.

metaphysical

86)

coincide.

ARTICLE

Intrinsic

Metaphysical

Analogy

of

Being

Summary:

Discussion of Proofs

indicated

"

Thesis:

Analogy
"

being
of

intrinsic thesis.

and

metaphysical

88. done

Discussion with
of the

indicated.
tedious

We

are

now

task,
the

perhaps,

but

tant, imporfor

defining

notions of the

requisite
subject
thesis
we

the
sideration. con-

proper

understanding
In the
our

under

following
views in

shall the

gin be-

to

unfold

regard

to

analo-

gousness

of

being.

THESIS
"

Being
and

in

general,"

as

predicated
and notion:
at
once

of
cident, ac-

God

creatures, is
an

substance

analogous
case

the

analogy

in and

the

being

trinsic in-

metaphysical.
of thesis.
in the

89.

First
terms

proof

As thesis

all

the

usual un-

occurring

have

been

io8

Being
in
out
we

explained
once

the with
shall and

preceding
our

pages, For

we

can

at

set

proof. speak

the

sake
as

of
ferred re-

simplicity
to

first

of

being
then
to

God

creatures,
to

and

point

out

that
and

what

applies
as

them

applies

substance

accident Let
us

well. that the

begin by showing
there be
at

analogy
be

of

being,
This

if such

all, must

intrinsic.
an planation. ex-

is

so

plain
For

that

it is

hardly truly
with
were

needs

being
it is of
the

inherent them it
not

in
in
so,

God the
the have
mains re-

and

creatures;
sense

identical

strictest

word;
"

contradictory
to

of

being,
of
"

non-being,"
Hence,
as

would it

be

predicated
to

them.

only

show

that
from
same

being
all its
and

ing such," namely, be-

prescinded
is

differentiatingmodes,
when

partly the
to

partly different,
creatures.

attributed
as a

God
from

and

This

follows
we

corollary
that it is

the

fifth
to

thesis,
cut

where

stated

impossible fully
or

off

the

entiating differ-

modes for

adequately
God is

from

being;

the

very

being

of

infinite, all-perfect,
and
creature

underived,

independent,
the
very

unconditioned

self-existent, whilst
is

being

of the

finite, imperfect,
and

derived,
Hence in

dependent,
God
and and them. and

tioned, condi-

produced.
and

creatures

at
"

once

agree
"

differ in

being;
to

therefore
"

being

is

analogous

regard
God

What

we

have with

said

concerning
of

creatures, accident.

holds

equal right

substance

and

Analog
For, both,
the
on

ousness

of Being
being
as

109

on

one

hand, other,

truly

inheres of

in

and

the

predicated
from
"

either,
in

it cannot itself modes have refrain

"

be and of
"

fully separated

existing

existing

in another,"
and ideas accident.
so

the

respective
But
as we

substance

developed
from any

these

fully before,

we

further
in

exposition.
the

The

idea

conveyed presented

previous
form

argument

is sometimes

in

another
common

by

ing say-

that

"

being

"

is, indeed,
that

to

its four

primary
to same,

divisions, but
it exists that
and

the

mode, them,

according
is not
it is the

which
and
same

in

each

of
reason

this

is the

why
when

partly

the of
way

partly

different and

predicated
This

God,
of

creatures,

substance,
the
case

accident.

putting

is

perfectly correct;

it
position ex-

must,

however,

be

viewed "Mode"
for very

in the

light of
be

the taken

just given.
a

must
a

in

very

restricted
and
enters

sense

qualification which
of that the

affects
which

the
in from

essence

entity
be
are

it modifies

such that which

wise

it cannot
For

fully prescinded
other

entity.
can

there

modifications
from do
"

be

perfectly

stracted ab-

the render
"

concepts
them irrational

they limit, and analogous.

"

fore there"

not

Thus,
"

tional ra"

and

modify
its nature.

animal
Man

without,
brute
are

however,
the

altering
same

and

possess

animality; spite
of the

in
added

this

they

perfectly alike
of

in

cations specifiTo
ex-

rationality and

its

opposite.

no

Being
it
to

press

technically, the being,

are

modes

of

being

are

trinsic in-

the

differences
to

(or quasi-modes)
animal. is
intrinsic
us

of

animality
go.

extrinsic
of

The

analogy
Second
to

being
proof.

and

metaphysical:
another the

Let

subjoin
of of

argument
"

prove

the

analogousness
on a

concept

being,"
It
runs

founded thus:
or

process

elimination. The either univocal

abstract

concept

term

of

being,
is

is
or

homonymous
;

(equivocal), analogous,
univocation if
or

if

univocal, the
or

either the

metaphysical
analogy
would which
once

logical; and
extrinsic
be

analogous,

is
seem

either
to

intrinsic.

These

all the

possible suppositions
Now
we we can

can

affect

the

question.
;

at

drop logical univocation

it coincides be

for,

as

showed

(No. 87), Further,

a one

with

metaphysical analogy.
is
not

it will

readily granted, being

that is

homonymous
in
name

term,

is,

term to

which

is

only,

and

applied
"

many

things

without
as,
e.

any g.

agreement
word
" "

in

meaning
in

whatsoever,

the
:

light
is Nor

the

following
"

two

sentences to

Down

light," and
is it
a
as

It is

ning begin-

be

light."
that

univocal

concept;
from

because
its

in

case,

being,
what other

abstracted be

distinguishing modes,
same

would

altogether
and
as

the
to

both it

as

to

it expresses

what

implies ;
of all
same

in

words,

it would
under

be its
so,

predicated
scope, in

the

objects

ranged
but

the

manner;

this

is not

Analogousness
as we

of Being
previous
But

in

pointed
then,
must

out

in

the

proof.
the

ing, Be-

be

analogous.
in

analogy analogy

cannot

be
are

extrinsic, since

extrinsic

there

always
of for but extrinsic
common

two

concepts

(recall the various

the
term

meanings
stands

"healthy"),
one

whereas

ing be-

undivided the

concept.

over, More-

in

analogy,
term

reality signified
to
one

by
of

the the Whence

is

intrinsic

only
to

analogues,

whilst that

being

is intrinsic
an

all.

it follows

being is
is at
;

analogous
intrinsic have
can cluded ex-

concept,
and

and

that

its

analogy
86)

once
we

metaphysical
every any other

(No.
rival

for

claimant the

which

lege al-

title to
to

describing

character

of of

being
ication. pred-

in

relation

its four

primary

subjects

ARTICLE
Analogy

3
of

of

Being

Analogy

Attribution

Summary:

Question being

proposed
of
"

"

Thesis:
attribution
"

Analogy
An

of

analogy
remark

ductory intro-

Proof
of

"

warning
"

"

Being
not

and
a

analogy
univocal

proportion
but
an

cident Ac-

analogous
"

concept sometimes block

to
"

"

Explanatory
strictly univocal
"
"

remarks
"

Being

A
"

stumbling
as
"

removed univocal called skein

of

Analogical
and
"

opposed
"

"

proper

Being
"

rightly
A

logical univocal
unravelled and
"

notion

tangled

No

predicate

affirmable
"

God

creatures

univocally

Conclusion.

H2

Being
91.
now

Question
"

proposed.

The of

further

tion ques-

arises, is the
or

analogy
of
"

being
"

that both
in

of ?

"

attribution shall

that

proportion
these

or

We
next

give

our

reply

to

queries

the

thesis.

THESIS The
God

9
in reference and known
to
cident, ac-

analogy
and is

of

being,
is

creatures,
what

substance

technically

as

analogy
An
upon

of

attribution.

92.

introductory
our

remark.
we

Before
to
note

tering en-

proof,
and

want
are

that,
gous, analo-

just

as

terms
so

concepts
are

named

likewise

the

objects
them. animal and
"

(entities,
Thus,
isms, organ-

realities,or
the
two

essences) signifiedby
of
"
"

objective qualities possessing

of health
are

viz.
of

indicative

health," both
"

which
are

denoted

by

the

adjective
93.

healthy,"
of

analogous
Let
us

entities.
now more

Proof

thesis. is

take than have is

up
a

the

thesis, which
of the the is

really
of

no

corollary
shown because of that the which

preceding.
analogy

We

just

that

being
in
we
"

intrinsic,

being
it is

truly inherent
and

all the know

things
further when
logues ana-

amrmed;

intrinsic

analogy entity
as

is of found is

attribution,"
in
one

analogous

of

the

(the secondary),

essentially inferior

to

Analog
the
same

onsness

of Being
in the
on

113

entity
the

as

realized

the

other

(the being

primary),
due Now
to

inferiority of
dependence
what with
have

secondary
the in

its this

entire is

principal.
regard
to

just

happens
God
any and

being
the

as

identified
cannot

creatures.

For

creature

being whatsoever,
he

unless

God
not

exists, because

is

the but

ultimate also

ground
the

only

of
all
as

the that
a

existence,
can

of
side out-

possibility of
of him.
of
"

be of

conceived this
utter

And creatable

result
on

pendence de"

things

God,

their
to

ing be-

is

conditioned,
of

limited, subject
or

change
;

and

capable
it
"

destruction

annihilation
ways.

in

word,
"

is of

imperfect
God,
on

in

countless

The.

being
very

the

contrary,

has

attributes,
ditioned, uncon-

the

opposite

of

the

preceding:
:

it is

infinite,immutable
of
all We
to

it is the

plenitude

perfection.
can

argue

in

similar

manner

in accidents
of

regard
are,

substance their
very

and

accident.

For

of

nature,

modifications from

substance,
least
upon urally), nat-

incapable of existing apart

and whilst

it

(at

hence,

in

entire

dependence
itself for
and

it,
no

substance

subsists
to

in

needs its
own

subject
subject.
The

in

which

inhere;

it is

analogy
have

of

being
"

then

is that
of

which intrinsic

losopher phi-

styled

analogy

tribution. at-

94.

warning.

Let

us

add,

by

way

of

Analog
that
term

ousness

of Being
of
which

115

the is

various

analogues
whilst

the

common

predicated,
stand
as,

independent
relations

of
to

each
some

other, yet
third

in

different for do

reality,
and does

instance,
to

the

accidents

quality
however,
as

relation
not

substance.

Such,
of

happen
four
are

in main

the

case

being
For,
mon com-

affirmed and third

of
creatures

its

divisions.
to

God

not

related who

any

object;
is

since

God,
to

is

altogether
tures crea-

independent,
are

related

nothing,
to
now

whilst

immediately
we

referred

God.
can
"

What

have

said

just

be

readily
tandis." mu-

adapted

to

substance

and

accident,

mutatis

96.

Accident

not

a
us

univocal,
next

but
a

an

ogous anal-

concept.
about very
a

Let

make

few

marks re-

question

sometimes with
"

mooted

and
cussions, disvocal uni-

closely

connected

our

previous
"

namely
or an

whether
term.

accident

is

analogous

Our

answer

is, that, like being, it is

For the nine

an

gous analo-

term.

categories

of

accidents

(viz. relation, quantity, quality, action, passion, place, time,

of
are

position,
whilst

and

possession
in

or

manner

holding),
all

agreeing
of in
reason,

this, that
differ
are

they
tially essen-

modifications the
for
manner

substance,
which

in
to

they

referred

it ; and

this nine

accident is

as

predicated
same

of

the

above

genera

partly

the

and
prove

partly

different, that

is, analogous.

To

n6

Being
would
that

this, we
of in

have accident

to

show,
is

just

as

in the
or

case

being,
its

determined,
"

restricted

applicability by
once

logical composition."
we

This
infer of

point

demonstrated,
of

could

then

by

way

corollary
nine method

that

it is
in

predicated
an

the

aforenamed

categories
of

ical analogis very

to

sense.

The the
one

procedure
we

similar establish
and

to

by
of

which

endeavored

the

analogy
this
over

being.

On
is of

this lesser

account,

also and

because

matter

tance impormany
to
selves our-

passed

in

silence
we

by
not

very

writers
enter
more

on

metaphysics,
fully into
it.
our

do

intend
content

We

shall

with

illustrating Thus,
"

view
"

by
an

concrete

example.
so

relation Both

is

accident,
substance
;

and but

is

"

quality."
(e.
g.

modify

quality
within; hand,
so

science) perfects
(e.
g.

it

exclusively
the
lead

relation

similarity), on
as

other
our

modifies
to

substance

to

thoughts
it. and
This

something
that the

beyond,
manner

and

apart

from

shows

in which
same

quality
is ferent dif"

relation
;

determine

the both
are

subject
"

consequently

named

accident

only analogically.
The

analogy,
of

in

this

case,

however,

is

not

analogy
the

attribution,
classes takes
to

but

of

proportion.
are

For
dinated; coor-

various
none

of

accidents of
alone.
on

all

precedence
substance

the

rest; Now

they
since

are

subordinated

this

dependence

of

accidents

their

substance

Analog
can

onsness

of Being
sort

117

be

expressed

by

of

mathematical
No.

portion prohence

(as exemplified
is that 97.
our

before,
is

85),
of

it

the

analogy

here

analogy

proportion.

Explanatory exposition
of

remark.

Before
to
a

bringing
us

analogy

close, let
will of this

add
us

few

explanatory
a

remarks,

which

help

to

gain
98.

more

thorough
sometimes

mastery

subject.
In of

Being

strictly
we

univccal.

our

previous
as

discussions,
to

spoke

chiefly

being
and
a

related It

God,
be

creatures,
asked what
to

substance,
sort

accident.

might

of

concept

being
and
one

is, when

applied
contained

the

genera, the kind

species,
scope

individuals
and the
same e.

within What

of

category.
g.
man

of

concept

is

being,
men,

when

predicated Joseph,
it is is
a

of the

plants, animals,
like? Our
answer

this is that in

and

then
case,

univocal
to

concept.

For in

being,
the

that
way;
man,

opposed

nothingness
of
same

same

the

being
is

cated prediof the

plant, animal,

Joseph,
substantial

sort,

namely
then is

created

being.
the
same

Since
manner

being
of

predicated

after
a

all
a

finitesubstances,
concept
Indian
" "

it is
in

true
to

genus, them.
"

and

hence

univocal
an

regard being
"

Thus,
horse
means

if I say, is
a

is

and

his

being,"

being,"
same,

in

each
"

instance,

altogether the

namely

something

finite, existing in itself."

99. are,

stumbling
true,
a

block

removed.

There in the

it is

few

stumbling

blocks

ii

Being
of of
be

path
ness

the

sincere

inquirer
are

into

the

analogoussuch
as

being; they
removed

not,
a

however,

cannot

with

little

thought, patience,
that be
ing accord-

and

good
to
our

will.

Thus,

it is

urged
not

doctrine, God
since
there

would is
"

the
above

est highand
"

being, prior
God
we

something
indefinite it. In
taken

to

him,

namely
under
"

being
answer

for
this

is contained

to

reply

that

being,"
is

thus
to

in

its greatest
order of

generality,
cognition, in
we so

prior
far
as

God is

in
not

the

God

that

which
our

know

first; what
is the
us

first

presents
the

itself to

intellects this

creature;
to

consideration
of

of in

enables

form
other

the

concept

being
as cause

general and
and

of

some

notions, such
a

effect, and
to

then rise
to

by
the

simple

process

of the
is

reasoning
Creator,

knowledge
Again,

of

the God

Being
in

of the

beings. purely
under
"

being

prior

to

logical order,
the

cause beof

God the

is contained notion
as

extension
But

transcendental
of

being."

if

we

speak
then

being being
which

it is

independently
excellence,
is is God.

of

thought,
is above

the

first in
none
"

which

all and
ioo.
"

to
"

prior,
as

Analogical
"

opposed
To let word
"

to

both
up

univocal

and
a

"

proper."
little more,

clear
us
"

this
tion atten-

particular point
to
a

call

double
it

use

of

the
to

analogical."
"
"

Sometimes this is the

is

opposed

univocal
we

and

significationin

which

have

taken

Analog
it all

ousness

of Being
sometimes
to
"

119

along
then
as

"

and

"

proper."
"
"

What

is

the

meaning
with

of
a

an
"

analogical
? To

concept
understand The mind that
an

contrasted

proper

this, let

us

give

the

definition
an

of both.
to

proper

concept
of

presents
very

object

the

by

means

the the
means

nature

constituting
presents
of that

object, whilst
object,
but
not

analogical concept
of of the the
nature nature

by
means
a

object,

by by

of and

something resembling

else, known
the To
a

proper

concept

object presented.
illustrate
man

the

definitions blind
and

just given; Suppose

another

born of

possessing
the
ment, state-

the

power
"

seeing should
are

both
it is

make clear

Swans
who

white,"
blessed
"

that has

the
a

one

only

is of

with
"

eyesight
he

proper
nature

concept
of
"

white
"

for

knows

the what
blind

whiteness that
an

by

conceiving
But
or

properly
man
can

constitutes have of
"

quality. improper
He
can

the

but

analogical
an

concept
of
"

whiteness."

form

idea

that whiteness

color,
"

only

because like

the the

sensation
other
tions sensasenses

of

is somewhat

(e. g. those
of and In of
we

"experienced smell), of

through
he

the
has

hearing
direct
a

and

which

proper

perceptions.
manner,
we

similar

derive
finite

the

concept
which

Infinite conceive
some

Wisdom

from
a

wisdom,
and

by
faint

proper

concept
to

which
"

bears

resemblance

the

former.

120

Being
much will
of
to to

This

suffice the

for

our

purpose;

fuller
cepts con-

development belongs

formation

of

analogical

Natural this
as

Theology. acceptation
predicated
as

According
"

of of

the

word

analogical," being
a

finitethings
of

is

proper

concept,
one;

and I
as

affirmed

God,
means

an

analogical
the
"

(for

know derived

God
from

by

of

concept
This will

"being" help
us

creatures).
statement

to

appreciate
what the

the

sometimes

heard

that

notion
but

of

being
the

signifies first, is

created

being,
of

that
is

reality signified by the first and

10
1.

notion

being

found

foremost

in
as

uncreated
to
a

Being.
God,
creatures, univocal

Being
and

related

substance,
notion. There
are

accident,
us now

logical
to

Let

pass

another

point.
the

certain
call

philosophers, principally being

and that
as

Scotists, who
creatures,
want

related

to

God,

substance,
understood is

accident the
"

univocal, but
univocation
in agree

it

question
with their univocation that the is
we

merely
for

logical.

We

fully

view;

logical (not metaphysical)

in

consists

nothing

else

but

this,
ceived con-

concept
one

of

being, inadequately
and

in

itself;
too.

this
we

kind

of

unity

claim is

for

being,

What

deny

is, that
words,
The
and all

being
that

metaphysically univocal, fully

of conceived
is

in other
one.

being

remains

divergence

opinion

purely verbal, phase

of the

disputes concerning

this

subject

Analog
have

ousness

of Being
extent
at

121

been,

to
mere

great
wars

least,

mere

logomachies,
102.

of

words.
unravelled. skein
to

tangled
one more
an more

skein

There unravel.

still remains We asserted

tangled
than
once,

that

the

being

in

creatures

is of

entirely different
the
hard
to

order
on

from the

that

in

God,
But

because

former
see

depends why
this

latter.

it is
For

reason

should
and the

hold.

is not,

for
son

instance,

the
on

being
the

existence

of
neither

the

dependent
nor

father, and
are on

yet

being

human father
man

nature

that
and then from

account
son

different
are

in and

and

son.

Father

being
created

univocally.
be

Why
diverse

should

being
being,
the

essentially
sooth, for.

self-existent

because,
Here

the
our
"

one

depends readily

on

other?
that and
"

is and gether alto-

reply.
"

We

admit

being
son

"

man

are

predicated
same
on

of
;

father
we

in

the
son

meaning
the

also but
we

grant

that

the that

depends
is
an

father;

maintain

there

essential
of

difference
on

between and
us

the
that in

pendence deof
serting as-

the
on

son

the

father,

the

creature

God,

which

justifies
of
son

the
in God and
to

radical
creatures.

diversity
The for

being
is

as

found
debted inhe of of his his

merely
once

the

father

his

existence;
the
processes in virtue

has

been

brought
go energy
as
on

into

being,

development
own

within

him

vital
case

independently
God
is of

of

his

parents.
another

The

regards

quite

Analog

ousness

of

Being

123

the

end

of

our

long,

toilsome
of

journey
being.
not

through
The labor

the

far-stretching
in

plain
it

expended misspent;
and

traversing
as

has the

been,

we

hope,

for

being
of it

is

most

fundamental

universal
in

notion

all,

it

is

clear
but

that have

any
most

error

regard
consequences;

to

could what

not

disastrous

St.

Thomas

says

(S.
"

th.

1.

q.

85.
in

a.

2),

applies
magnus

here,
est

namely,
in fine."

Parvus

error

principio

ALPHABETICAL

INDEX

(the

numbers

refer

to

the

pages.)

Accident, Analogical Analogues, Analogy

not

uni

vocal,
to

but

an

analogous
118.

concept,

115.

as

opposed

proper,

96.
of

being,
and

90;

analogy analogy
101

of

attribution,
of

97;

trinsic ex-

intrinsic

attribution,
and
of

98

analogy analogy

of of and

proportion, proportion, metaphysical, attribution,

extrinsic

intrinsic

103;

analogy
107;

being
of

trinsic in-

analogy
not

being

analogy
114.

of

112;

but

of

proportion,

Being

and

"ens"

compared,
as
a

3;

chimerical
and

being,
as a

ing 8; be-

employed adjective, nothing,

not

participle wholly
of of 54;

participial
9;

5; the
24;
a

being opposite
inclusion
genus,

indefinite

described, unity
in of of

being,
the

10;

being
49;

real,
not

modes

being, being
but

being
its

composition

with

modes, unity being,

60;
of
90; 107;

not

metaphysical, imperfect,
of of

60; 84;

logical,

76;
of

being analogy analogy

of

analogousness
and
of
physical, meta-

being being

intrinsic

analogy being
to

bution, attri-

but

not

proportion,
117; and

114;
as

sometimes

strictly

univocal, substance,

being
accident

related
a

God,

tures, crea-

logical

univocal

tion, no-

120.

Chimerical

being,

8.

125

126

Alphabetical
of

Index

Comprehension Concept,
how

ideas,

13.

restricted,
concepts,
94;

61 ;

univocal

concepts, concepts,
94.

94 ;

equivocal

analogous

Differentia, meaning
Distinction in
31 31
;

of,

54.
30 ;

general,
;

distinction
distinction
not

real

and

ceptual, con-

conceptual
distinction

purely

mental,
33
;

conceptual
of
33.

purely

mental,
not

foundation

conceptual

distinction

purely

mental,
Ens

and

being

compared,

"

"

3 ;

ens

as

noun

and

as

participle, 7.

Equivocal
Extension

terms, of

92;

equivocal
13.

concepts,

94.

ideas, of,

Genus, Grades,

meaning

54.

metaphysical, order,

62.
49;

Metaphysical Metaphysics,
Mode,
of

metaphysical of,
1.

grades,

62.

province
of, 38;
of

meaning
modes

number in of

of
49.
10.

modes,

39;

inclusion

being

being, being,
27;
to

Nothing,
Prescision

the in

opposite

metaphysics,
in

subjective purely
mental

prescision,
tion, distinc-

28;

prescision 36.

relation

Proper,
Species,

analogical meaning univocal,

of the

as

opposed
54.

to

proper,

118.

of,
92;

Term,
Unity

equivocal,
of
of

92;

analogous,
17 ;
commonness

94.

concept

being,

and

unity real,

(oneness)
24;

being,
of

17;

unity
24;

of

being
division

not

general

notion

unity,

of

Alphabetical

Index

127

unity,

25

real

unity,
26
;

25

individual
;

unity,
27
;
manner

26 of

sential es-

unity,
concepts
of

logical

unity,

taining ob-

possessing 84.

logical

unity,

27;

unity

being

imperfect,

Univocal sometimes

terms,

92

univocal

concepts,

94

being
to

strictly
creatures,

univocal, substance,
120;
no

117; and

being
accident

as

related

God,
univocal
and

logical
of

notion,
creatures

predicate
122.

affirmed

God

univocally,

Univocation,

metaphysical,

physical

and

logical,

105.