§2.2Εἷς μὲν δὴ τόπος τὸ ἐπιβλέπειν εἰ τὸ κατ᾿ ἄλλον τινὰ τρόπον ὑπάρχον ὡς συμβεβηκὸς ἀποδέδωκεν.
One topic indeed is to observe whether he has presented what belongs in some other way as an accident.
Ἁμαρτάνεται δὲ μάλιστα τοῦτο περὶ τὰ γένη, οἷον εἴ τις τῷ λευκῷ φαίη συμβεβηκέναι χρώματι εἶναι· οὐ γὰρ συμβέβηκε τῷ λευκῷ χρώματι εἶναι, ἀλλὰ γένος αὐτοῦ τὸ χρῶμά ἐστιν.
And this error is committed especially regarding genera, for instance if someone should say that being a color belongs as an accident to white; for being a color does not belong as an accident to white, but color is its genus.
ἐνδέχεται μὲν οὖν καὶ κατὰ τὴν ὀνομασίαν διορίσαι τὸν τιθέμενον, οἷον ὅτι συμβέβηκε τῇ δικαιοσύνῃ ἀρετῇ εἶναι· πολλάκις δὲ καὶ μὴ διορίσαντι κατάδηλον ὅτι τὸ γένος ὡς συμβεβηκὸς ἀποδέδωκεν, οἷον εἴ τις τὴν λευκότητα κεχρῶσθαι φήσειεν ἢ τὴν βάδισιν κινεῖσθαι. Ἀπ᾿ οὐδενὸς γὰρ γένους παρωνύμως ἡ κατηγορία κατὰ τοῦ εἴδους λέγεται, ἀλλὰ πάντα συνωνύμως τὰ γένη τῶν εἰδῶν κατηγορεῖται· καὶ γὰρ τοὔνομα καὶ τὸν λόγον ἐπιδέχεται τῶν γενῶν τὰ εἴδη.
Thus, it is possible for the one laying down the thesis to define it even by designation, for instance that "being a virtue has belonged as an accident to justice"; but often, even without defining it, it is clear that he has presented the genus as an accident, for instance if someone should say that whiteness is "colored" or that walking is "moving." For from no genus is the predication made paronymously of the species, but all genera are predicated synonymously of their species; for the species admit both the name and the definition of the genera.
Ὁ οὖν κεχρωσμένον εἴπας τὸ λευκὸν οὔτε ὡς γένος ἀποδέδωκεν, ἐπειδὴ παρωνύμως εἴρηκεν, οὔθ᾿ ὡς ἴδιον ἢ ὡς ὁρισμόν· ὁ γὰρ ὁρισμὸς καὶ τὸ ἴδιον οὐδενὶ ἄλλῳ ὑπάρχει, κέχρωσται δὲ πολλὰ καὶ τῶν ἄλλων, οἷον ξύλον λίθος ἄνθρωπος ἵππος.
He, therefore, who has said that white is "colored" has neither presented it as a genus, since he has spoken paronymously, nor as a property or a definition; for the definition and the property belong to nothing else, but many of the other things are colored, such as wood, stone, man, horse.
Δῆλον οὖν ὅτι ὡς συμβεβηκὸς ἀποδίδωσιν.
It is clear, then, that he presents it as an accident.
Ἄλλος τὸ ἐπιβλέπειν οἷς ὑπάρχειν ἢ πᾶσιν ἢ μηδενὶ εἴρηται.
Another topic is to observe the things of which something is said to belong either to all or to none.
Σκοπεῖν δὲ κατ᾿ εἴδη καὶ μὴ ἐν τοῖς ἀπείροις· ὁδῷ γὰρ μᾶλλον καὶ ἐν ἐλάττοσιν ἡ σκέψις.
And one must examine by species and not among infinite things; for the investigation is more systematic and concerns fewer things.
Δεῖ δὲ σκοπεῖν καὶ ἄρχεσθαι ἀπὸ τῶν πρώτων, εἶτ᾿ ἐφεξῆς ἕως τῶν ἀτόμων, οἷον εἰ τῶν ἀντικειμένων τὴν αὐτὴν ἐπιστήμην ἔφησεν εἶναι, σκεπτέον εἰ τῶν πρός τι καὶ τῶν ἐναντίων καὶ τῶν κατὰ στέρησιν καὶ ἕξιν καὶ τῶν κατ᾿ ἀντίφασιν λεγομένων ἡ αὐτὴ ἐπιστήμη·
One must examine and begin from the first things, and then in order down to the indivisibles; for instance, if he has said that there is the same science of opposites, one must examine whether there is the same science of relatives, of contraries, of those spoken of according to privation and possession, and of those according to contradiction.
κἂν ἐπὶ τοῦτων μήπω φανερὸν ᾖ, πάλιν ταῦτα διαιρετέον μέχρι τῶν ἀτόμων, οἷον εἰ τῶν δικαίων καὶ ἀδίκων, ἢ τοῦ διπλασίου καὶ ἡμίσεος, ἢ τυφλότητος καὶ ὄψεως, ἢ τοῦ εἶναι καὶ μὴ εἶναι.
And if it is not yet clear in these cases, one must divide these again down to the indivisibles, for instance whether of just and unjust things, or of the double and the half, or of blindness and sight, or of being and not being.
Ἐὰν γὰρ ἐπί τινος δειχθῇ ὅτι οὐχ ἡ αὐτή, ἀνῃρηκότες ἐσόμεθα τὸ πρόβλημα· ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ ἐὰν μηδενὶ ὑπάρχῃ.
For if it is shown in any case that it is not the same, we shall have demolished the problem; and similarly, also, if it belongs to none.
Οὗτος δ᾿ ὁ τόπος ἀντιστρέφει πρὸς τὸ ἀνασκευάζειν καὶ κατασκευάζειν.
And this topic converts for both refuting and establishing.
Ἐὰν γὰρ ἐπὶ πάντων φαίνηται διαίρεσιν προενέγκασιν ἢ ἐπὶ πολλῶν, ἀξιωτέον καὶ καθόλου τιθέναι ἢ ἔνστασιν φέρειν ἐπὶ τίνος οὐχ οὕτως· ἐὰν γὰρ μηδέτερον τούτων ποιῇ, ἄτοπος φανεῖται μὴ τιθείς.
For if, after introducing a division, it appears to hold in all cases or in many, one must demand that he also posit it universally, or bring an objection in which case it is not so; for if he does neither of these, he will appear absurd in not positing it.
Ἄλλος τὸ λόγους ποιεῖν τοῦ τε συμβεβηκότος καὶ ᾧ συμβέβηκεν, ἢ ἀμφοτέρων καθ᾿ ἑκάτερον ἢ τοῦ ἑτέρου, εἶτα σκοπεῖν εἴ τι μὴ ἀληθὲς ἐν τοῖς λόγοις ὡς ἀληθὲς εἴληπται.
Another topic is to make definitions of both the accident and that to which it belongs, either of both individually or of one of them, and then to examine whether anything not true in the definitions has been assumed as true.
Οἷον εἰ ἔστι θεὸν ἀδικεῖν, τί τὸ ἀδικεῖν;
For instance, if it is possible to do injustice to a god, what is "to do injustice"?
εἰ γὰρ τὸ βλάπτειν ἑκουσίως, δῆλον ὡς οὐκ ἔστι θεὸν ἀδικεῖσθαι· οὐ γὰρ ἐνδέχεται βλάπτεσθαι τὸν θεόν.
For if it is "to harm voluntarily," it is clear that it is not possible for a god to be treated unjustly; for it is not possible for a god to be harmed.
Καὶ εἰ φθονερὸς ὁ σπουδαῖος, τίς ὁ φθονερὸς καὶ τίς ὁ φθόνος;
And if the virtuous man is envious, who is the "envious man" and what is "envy"?
εἰ γὰρ ὁ φθόνος ἐστὶ λύπη ἐπὶ φαινομένῃ εὐπραγίᾳ τῶν ἐπιεικῶν τινός, δῆλον ὅτι ὁ σπουδαῖος οὐ φθονερός· φαῦλος γὰρ ἂν εἴη.
For if envy is "pain at the apparent prosperity of some decent person," it is clear that the virtuous man is not envious; for he would be base.
Καὶ εἰ ὁ νεμεσητικὸς φθονερός, τίς ἑκάτερος αὐτῶν;
And if the indignant man is envious, who is each of them?
οὕτω γὰρ καταφανὲς ἔσται πότερον ἀληθὲς ἢ ψεῦδος τὸ ῥηθέν, οἷον εἰ φθονερὸς μὲν ὁ λυπούμενος ἐπὶ ταῖς τῶν ἀγαθῶν εὐπραγίαις, νεμεσητικὸς δ᾿ ὁ λυπούμενος ἐπὶ ταῖς τῶν κακῶν εὐπραγίαις, δῆλον ὅτι οὐκ ἂν εἴη φθονερὸς ὁ νεμεσητικός.
For in this way it will be manifest whether what has been said is true or false, for instance, if the envious man is the one who is pained at the prosperity of the good, and the indignant man is the one who is pained at the prosperity of the bad, it is clear that the indignant man would not be envious.
Λαμβάνειν δὲ καὶ ἀντὶ τῶν ἐν τοῖς λόγοις ὀνομάτων λόγους, καὶ μὴ ἀφίστασθαι ἕως ἂν εἰς γνώριμον ἔλθῃ· πολλάκις γὰρ ὅλου μὲν τοῦ λόγου ἀποδοθέντος οὔπω δῆλον τὸ ζητούμενον, ἀντὶ δέ τινος τῶν ἐν τῷ λόγῳ ὀνομάτων λόγου ῥηθέντος κατάδηλον γίνεται.
And one must also assume definitions instead of the words in the definitions, and not stop until one comes to what is familiar; for often, although the whole definition has been given, the thing sought is not yet clear, but it becomes completely clear when a definition is spoken instead of one of the words in the definition.
Ἔτι τὸ πρόβλημα πρότασιν ἑαυτῷ ποιούμενον ἐνίστασθαι· ἡ γὰρ ἔνστασις ἔσται ἐπιχείρημα πρὸς τὴν θέσιν.
Furthermore, to object by making the problem a premise for oneself; for the objection will be an attack against the thesis.
Ἔστι δ᾿ ὁ τόπος οὗτος σχεδὸν ὁ αὐτὸς τῷ ἐπιβλέπειν οἷς ὑπάρχειν ἢ πᾶσιν ἢ μηδενὶ εἴρηται· διαφέρει δὲ τῷ τρόπῳ.
And this topic is nearly the same as observing the things of which something is said to belong either to all or to none; but it differs in the manner.
Ἔτι διορίζεσθαι ποῖα δεῖ καλεῖν ὡς οἱ πολλοὶ καὶ ποῖα οὔ.
Furthermore, to define what kinds of things we ought to call as the majority do and what kinds we ought not.
Χρήσιμον γὰρ καὶ πρὸς τὸ κατασκευάζειν καὶ πρὸς τὸ ἀνασκευάζειν, οἷον ὅτι ταῖς μὲν ὀνομασίαις τὸ πράγματα προσαγορευτέον καθάπερ οἱ πολλοί, ποῖα δὲ τῶν πραγμάτων ἐστὶ τοιαῦτα ἢ οὐ τοιαῦτα, οὐκέτι προσεκτέον τοῖς πολλοῖς.
For this is useful both for establishing and for refuting, for instance, that in designations we must address things just as the majority do, but as to what kinds of things are of such a nature or not of such a nature, we must no longer pay attention to the majority.
Οἷον ὑγιεινὸν μὲν ῥητέον τὸ ποιητικὸν ὑγιείας, ὡς οἱ πολλοὶ λέγουσιν· πότερον δὲ τὸ προκείμενον ποιητικὸν ὑγιείας ἢ οὔ, οὐκέτι ὡς οἱ πολλοὶ κλητέον ἀλλ᾿ ὡς ὁ ἰατρός.
For instance, we must say that the "healthy" is "productive of health," as the majority say; but whether the object before us is productive of health or not, we must no longer call it as the majority do, but as the doctor.