§13#2Ἀπορήσειε δ᾿ ἄν τις εἰ τῷ ἀναγκαῖον εἶναι τὸ δυνατὸν εἶναι ἕπεται.
One might raise the question whether 'to be possible' follows 'to be necessary'.
Εἴ τε γὰρ μὴ ἕπεται, ἡ ἀντίφασις ἀκολουθήσει, τὸ μὴ δυνατὸν εἶναι· καὶ εἴ τις ταύτην μὴ φήσειεν εἶναι ἀντίφασιν, ἀνάγκη λέγειν τὸ δυνατὸν μὴ εἶναι· ἅπερ ἄμφω ψευδῆ κατὰ τοῦ ἀναγκαῖον εἶναι.
For if it does not follow, the contradiction will follow, namely 'not to be possible'; and if anyone should say that this is not the contradiction, one must say 'to be possible not to be'; both of which are false of 'to be necessary'.
Ἁλλὰ μὴν πάλιν τὸ αὐτὸ εἶναι δοκεῖ δυνατὸν τέμνεσθαι καὶ μὴ τέμνεσθαι καὶ εἶναι καὶ μὴ εἶναι, ὥστε ἔσται τὸ ἀναγκαῖον εἶναι ἐνδεχόμενον μὴ εἶναι· τοῦτο δὲ ψεῦδος.
But indeed, on the other hand, the same thing seems to be capable of being cut and of not being cut, of being and of not being, so that 'to be necessary' will be 'to be contingent not to be'; but this is false.
Φανερὸν δὴ ὅτι οὐ πᾶν τὸ δυνατὸν ἢ εἶναι ἢ βαδίζειν καὶ τὰ ἀντικείμενα δύναται, ἀλλ᾿ ἔστιν ἐφ᾿ ὧν οὐκ ἀληθές, πρῶτον μὲν ἐπὶ τῶν μὴ κατὰ λόγον δυνατῶν, οἷον τὸ πῦρ θερμαντικὸν καὶ ἔχει δύναμιν ἄλογον.
It is clear, then, that not everything that is capable of being or of walking is capable also of the opposites, but there are some cases of which this is not true, first of all in the case of those things that are capable not according to reason, as fire is capable of heating and has an irrational capability.
Αἱ μὲν οὖν μετὰ λόγου δυνάμεις αἱ αὐταὶ πλειόνων καὶ τῶν ἐναντίων, αἱ δ᾿ ἄλογοι οὐ πᾶσαι, ἀλλ᾿ ὥσπερ εἴρηται, τὸ πῦρ οὐ δυνατὸν θερμαίνειν καὶ μή, οὐδ᾿ ὅσα ἅλλα ἐνεργεῖ ἀεί.
Now capabilities with reason are themselves capable of more than one thing, and of contraries; but irrational capabilities are not all so, but, as has been said, fire is not capable of heating and not heating, nor are any other things that are always active.
Ἔνια μέντοι δύναται καὶ τῶν κατὰ τὰς ἀλόγους δυνάμεις ἅμα τὰ ἀντικείμενα δέξασθαι.
Some things, however, even among those that act according to irrational capabilities, are capable of receiving opposites at the same time.
Ἀλλὰ τοῦτο μὲν τούτου χάριν εἴρηται, ὅτι οὐ πᾶσα δύναμις τῶν ἀντικειμένων, οὐδ᾿ ὅσαι λέγονται κατὰ τὸ αὐτὸ εἶδος.
But this has been said for the sake of showing that not every capability is of opposites, not even all those that are said to be of the same species.
Ἔνιαι δὲ δυνάμεις ὁμώνυμοί εἰσιν.
And some capabilities are homonymous.
Τὸ γὰρ δυνατὸν οὐχ ἁπλῶς λέγεται, ἀλλὰ τὸ μὲν ὅτι ἀληθὲς ὡς ἐνεργείᾳ ὄν, οἷον δυνατὸν βαδίζειν ὅτι βαδίζει, καὶ ὅλως δυνατὸν εἶναι ὅτι ἤδη ἔστι κατ᾿ ἐνέργειαν ὃ λέγεται εἶναι δυνατόν, τὸ δὲ ὅτι ἐνεργήσειεν ἄν, οἷον δυνατὸν εἶναι βαδίζειν ὅτι βαδίσειεν ἄν.
For 'possible' is not used in a single sense, but on the one hand because it is true as being in actuality, as it is possible to walk because it walks, and in general it is possible to be because that which is said to be possible is already in actuality; on the other hand because it would actualize, as it is possible to walk because it would walk.
Καὶ αὕτη μὲν ἐπὶ τοῖς κινητοῖς ἐστὶ μόνοις ἡ δύναμις, ἐκείνη δὲ καὶ ἐπὶ τοῖς ἀκινήτοις.
And this capability belongs to changeable things only, while that belongs also to unchangeable things.
Ἅμφω δὲ ἀληθὲς εἰπεῖν τὸ μὴ ἀδύνατον εἶναι βαδίζειν ἢ εἶναι, καὶ τὸ βαδίζον ἤδη καὶ ἐνεργοῦν καὶ τὸ βαδιστικόν.
And in both cases it is true to say that it is not impossible to walk or to be, both of that which is already walking and active, and of that which is capable of walking.
Τὸ μὲν οὖν οὕτω δυνατὸν οὐκ ἀληθὲς κατὰ τοῦ ἀναγκαίου ἁπλῶς εἰπεῖν, θάτερον δὲ ἀληθές.
Thus, of the 'necessary', it is not true to assert 'possible' in the former sense without qualification, but in the other sense it is true.
Ὥστε ἐπεὶ τῷ ἐν μέρει τὸ καθόλου ἕπεται, τῷ ἐξ ἀνάγκης ὄντι ἕπεται τὸ δύνασθαι εἶναι, οὐ μέντοι πᾶν.
Consequently, since the universal follows the particular, to that which is of necessity there follows the being able to be, though not in every sense.
Καὶ ἔστι δὴ ἀρχὴ ἴσως τὸ ἀναγκαῖον καὶ μὴ ἀναγκαῖον πάντων ἢ εἶναι ἢ μὴ εἶναι, καὶ τἆλλα ὡς τούτοις ἀκολουθοῦντα ἐπισκοπεῖν δεῖ.
And indeed, perhaps the 'necessary' and 'not necessary' are the principles of being or not being for everything, and one must view other things as following from these.
Φανερὸν δὴ ἐκ τῶν εἰρημένων ὅτι τὸ ἐξ ἀνάγκης ὂν κατ᾿ ἐνέργειάν ἐστιν, ὥστε εἰ πρότερα τὰ ἀΐδια, καὶ ἡ ἐνέργεια δυνάμεως προτέρα.
It is clear from what has been said, then, that that which is of necessity is in actuality, so that if eternal things are prior, then actuality also is prior to capability.
Καὶ τὰ μὲν ἄνευ δυνάμεως ἐνέργειαί εἰσιν, οἷον αἱ πρῶται οὐσίαι, τὰ δὲ μετὰ δυνάμεως, ἃ τῇ μὲν φύσει πρότερα τῷ δὲ χρόνῳ ὕστερα, τὰ δὲ οὐδέποτε ἐνέργειαί εἰσιν ἀλλὰ δυνάμεις μόνον.
And some things are actualities without capability, such as the primary substances, while others are with capability, which are prior in nature but posterior in time, and others are never actualities but capabilities only.