Predicable
Predicable (Lat. praedicabilis, that which may be stated or affirmed, sometimes called quinque voces or five words) is, in scholastic logic, a term applied to a classification of the possible relations in which a predicate may stand to its subject. It is not to be confused with ‘praedicamenta’, the scholastics’ term for Aristotle’s ten Categories.
The list given by the scholastics and generally adopted by modern logicians is based on development of the original fourfold classification given by Aristotle (Topics, a iv. 101 b 17-25): definition (horos), genus (genos), property (idioma), and accident (symbebekos). The scholastic classification, obtained from Boethius’s Latin version of Porphyry’s Isagoge, modified Aristotle’s by substituting species (eidos) and difference (diaphora) for definition. Both classifications are of universals, concepts or general terms, proper names of course being excluded. There is, however, a radical difference between the two systems. The standpoint of the Aristotelian classification is the predication of one universal concerning another. The Porphyrian, by introducing species, deals with the predication of universals concerning individuals (for species is necessarily predicated of the individual), and thus created difficulties from which the Aristotelian is free (see below).
The Aristotelian treatment considered:
The definition of anything is the statement of its essence (Arist. τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι), i.e., that which makes it what it is: e.g., a triangle is a three-sided rectilinear figure.
Genus is that part of the essence which is also predicable of other things different from them in kind. A triangle is a rectilinear figure; i.e., in fixing the genus of a thing, we subsume it under a higher universal, of which it is a species.
A property is an attribute which is common to all the members of a class, but is not part of its essence (i.e., need not be given in its definition). The fact that the interior angles of all triangles are equal to two right angles is not part of the definition but is universally true.
An accident is an attribute that may or may not belong to a subject. A triangle may have “accidentally” one right angle but this not a mandatory feature for it.
Differentia is that part of the essence that distinguishes one species from another. As compared with quadrilaterals, hexagons, and so on, all of which are rectilinear figures, a triangle is differentiated as having three sides. Ignoring differences, species are seen as a genus, e.g. triangles are a species of polygons.
This classification, though it is of high value in the clearing up of our conceptions of the essential contrasted with the accidental, the relation of the genus, differentia and definition and so forth, is of more significance in connection with abstract sciences, especially mathematics, than for the physical sciences. It is superior on the whole to the Porphyrian scheme, which has grave defects. As has been said, the Porphyrian scheme classifies universals as predicates of individuals and thus involves the difficulties which gave rise to the controversy between realism and nominalism. How are we to distinguish species from the genus? Napoleon was a Frenchman, a man, an animal. In the second place, how do we distinguish property and accident? Many so-called accidents are predicable necessarily of any particular persons. This difficulty gave rise to the distinction of separable and inseparable accidents, which is one of considerable difficulty.
Some Aristotelian examples may be briefly mentioned. In the true statement “Man is a rational animal,” the predicate is convertible with the subject and states its essence; therefore, “rational animal” is the definition of a man. The statements “Man is an animal” and “Man is rational,” while true, are not convertible; their predicate terms, however, are parts of the definition and hence are the genus and differentia of man. On the other hand, the statement “Man is capable of learning grammar” is true and convertible; but “capable of learning grammar” does not state the essence of man and is, therefore, a property of man. The true statement “Man is featherless” offers an example of an accident. Its predicate is not convertible with its subject, nor is it part of the definition; accordingly, it expresses only an accidental characteristic of man.
The five predicables are a classification of terms used in logic to describe how a predicate relates to a subject: genus, species, difference, property, and accident. These terms, established by Porphyry and based on Aristotle’s work, help define and categorize things by examining their essential and non-essential attributes.
The five predicables
- Genus: A broad class that contains smaller classes. It represents part of the subject’s essence that is shared with other things.
- Example: “Animal” is the genus for “man”.
- Species: A narrower class that is a type of a genus. It expresses the complete essence of the subject.
- Example: “Man” is the species of “animal”.
- Difference: The attribute or set of attributes that distinguishes one species from others within the same genus.
- Example: “Rational” is the difference that distinguishes “man” from other animals.
- Property: An attribute that is not part of the essence but necessarily results from it.
- Example: “Being able to use tools” is a property of humans because it flows from their other attributes, but is not part of their defining essence.
- Accident: A non-essential attribute that may or may not belong to the subject.
- Example: “Being white” is an accident for a swan; the swan would still be a swan even if it were a different color.
AI responses may include mistakes.
[2] https://www.britannica.com/topic/predicable
[3] https://philosophy-models.blog/2019/03/05/porphyry-on-universals/
[4] https://amateurlogician.com/predicables/
[5] https://people.ucsc.edu/~abestone/courses/uchicago/readings2.pdf
[6] http://iteadthomam.blogspot.com/2008/08/logic-i-lesson-4-five-predicables-part.html
[7] https://etc.usf.edu/lit2go/pdf/passage/3898/deductive-logic-012-part-2-chapter-6.pdf
[9] https://www.biblicalcyclopedia.com/P/predicable.html
[10] https://quizlet.com/727670111/the-five-predicables-flash-cards/
The “five universals” most commonly refer to the quinque voces or five predicables in the Western philosophical tradition, specifically within Aristotelian and scholastic logic, introduced by the 3rd-century Neoplatonist Porphyry in his work Isagoge. These are categories used to define and classify things, not a list of specific universal properties (like “redness” or “humanity”). [1, 2, 3, 4]
The five predicables are:
- Genus: The general kind or class to which a subject belongs (e.g., “animal” for a human).
- Species: The specific kind that falls under a genus (e.g., “man” for a human).
- Difference (Differentia): The quality that distinguishes a species from other species within the same genus (e.g., “rational” for a human).
- Property (Proprium): A quality that is not part of the essence but necessarily follows from it (e.g., “risible” or capable of laughter, for a human).
- Accident: A quality that a subject has contingently or by chance, not as a necessary part of its essence (e.g., “being white” or “sitting”). [4]
Interpretations Across Philosophical Traditions The philosophical debate on the ontological status of these universals (known as the “Problem of Universals”) varies significantly across different traditions:
• Platonic Realism (Extreme Realism): In the Platonic tradition, universals (called “Forms” or “Ideas”) are considered to be real, objective entities that exist independently of the physical world and the human mind, in a separate, higher intellectual realm. Particular physical objects are merely imperfect copies that “participate” in these perfect, eternal, and unchanging Forms. • Aristotelian Realism (Moderate Realism/Immanent Realism): Aristotle and his followers, including many medieval scholastic thinkers like Thomas Aquinas, rejected the idea of a separate realm of Forms. They argued that universals are real but exist within the particular objects themselves (in re). The human intellect can abstract these universal essences from the particular things observed in the world. • Nominalism: Prominent in the later Middle Ages with figures like William of Ockham, nominalism is an anti-realist position that denies the existence of universals as real, mind-independent entities. According to nominalists, universals are merely names or general terms (voces or sermons) that people use to label groups of similar objects based on perceived resemblances. Only individual, particular things are real. • Conceptualism: This view holds a middle ground between realism and nominalism. Conceptualists argue that universals do not exist as independent external entities, but they are not merely names either. They exist as concepts or mental constructs within the human mind, formed by our cognitive processes to classify and understand the world. This view was common among British empiricists like Locke and Hume. [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11]
In essence, while the five predicables provide a standard logical classification within Western philosophy, the metaphysical understanding of their existence is a central point of divergence among these key traditions.
AI responses may include mistakes.
[1] https://www.encyclopedia.com/religion/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/universals [2] http://www.logicmuseum.com/joyce/reid_aristotle.htm [3] https://philosophy-models.blog/2019/03/05/porphyry-on-universals/ [4] http://iteadthomam.blogspot.com/2008/08/logic-i-lesson-4-five-predicables-part.html [5] https://www.ontology.co/universals-history.htm [6] https://iep.utm.edu/universa/ [7] https://fiveable.me/key-terms/europe-1000-1500/universals-vs-particulars [8] https://www.britannica.com/topic/universal [9] https://study.com/academy/lesson/universal-overview-examples-philosophy.html [10] https://philnotesblog.wordpress.com/2017/04/02/universals-and-particulars/ [11] https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Universals