§7.5#2Ἐπὶ δὲ τοῦ συμβεβηκότος τὸ μὲν καθόλου ῥᾷον ἀνασκευάζειν ἢ κατασκευάζειν· κατασκευάζοντι μὲν γὰρ δεικτέον ὅτι παντί, ἀνασκευάζοντι δ᾿ ἀπόχρη ἑνὶ δεῖξαι μὴ ὑπάρχον.
In the case of the accident, the universal is easier to overthrow than to establish; for the one who establishes must show that it belongs to everything, whereas for the one who overthrows, it is enough to show that it does not belong to one.
Τὸ δ᾿ ἐπὶ μέρους ἀνάπαλιν ῥᾷον κατασκευάσαι ἢ ἀνασκευάσαι· κατασκευάζοντι μὲν γὰρ ἀπόχρη δεῖξαι τινὶ ὑπάρχον, ἀνασκευάζοντι δὲ δεικτέον ὅτι οὐδενὶ ὑπάρχει.
Conversely, the particular is easier to establish than to overthrow; for the one who establishes, it is enough to show that it belongs to some, whereas the one who overthrows must show that it belongs to none.
Φανερὸν δὲ καὶ διότι πάντων ῥᾷστον ὅρον ἀνασκευάσαι· πλεῖστα γὰρ ἐν αὐτῷ τὰ δεδομένα πολλῶν εἰρημένων, ἐκ δὲ τῶν πλειόνων θᾶττον γίνεται συλλογισμός· εἰκὸς γὰρ ἐν τοῖς πολλοῖς μᾶλλον ἢ ἐν τοῖς ὀλίγοις ἁμάρτημα γίνεσθαι.
It is also clear why of all things a definition is the easiest to overthrow; for, since many things are stated, the data given in it are the most numerous, and a reasoning is formed more quickly from more data; for it is likely that an error occurs in many things rather than in few.
Ἔτι πρὸς μὲν ὅρον ἐνδέχεται καὶ διὰ τῶν ἄλλων ἐπιχειρεῖν· εἴτε γὰρ μὴ ἴδιος ὁ λόγος, εἴτε μὴ γένος τὸ ἀποδοθέν, εἴτε μὴ ὑπάρχει τι τῶν ἐν τῷ λόγῳ, ἀνῃρημένος γίνεται ὁ ὁρισμός·
Furthermore, against a definition it is possible to argue also by means of the others; for if the explanation is not peculiar, or if the rendered term is not the genus, or if some one of the elements in the explanation does not belong, the definition is overthrown.
πρὸς δὲ τἆλλα οὔτε τὰ ἐκ τῶν ὅρων οὔτε τἆλλα ἐνδέχεται πάντ᾿ ἐπιχειρεῖν· μόνα γὰρ τὰ πρὸς τὸ συμβεβηκὸς κοινὰ πάντων τῶν εἰρημένων ἐστίν.
But against the others, it is not possible to argue either from those points derived from definitions or from all the other points; for those points relating to the accident alone are common to all that have been mentioned.
Ὑπάρχειν μὲν γὰρ δεῖ ἕκαστον τῶν εἰρημένων· εἰ δὲ μὴ ὡς ἴδιον ὑπάρχει τὸ γένος, οὐδέπω ἀνῄρηται τὸ γένος.
For each of the mentioned terms must belong; but if the genus does not belong as peculiar, the genus is not yet overthrown.
Ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ τὸ ἴδιον οὐκ ἀναγκαῖον ὡς γένος, οὐδὲ τὸ συμβεβηκὸς ὡς γένος ἢ ἴδιον, ἀλλ᾿ ὑπάρχειν μόνον.
Similarly, the property does not need to belong as genus, nor the accident as genus or property, but only to belong.
Ὥστ᾿ οὐ δυνατὸν ἐκ τῶν ἑτέρων πρὸς τὰ ἕτερα ἐπιχειρεῖν ἀλλ᾿ ἢ ἐπὶ τοῦ ὁρισμοῦ.
Consequently, it is not possible to argue from the one to the other, except in the case of the definition.
Δῆλον οὖν ὅτι ῥᾷστον πάντων ὅρον ἀναιρεῖν, κατασκευάζειν δὲ χαλεπώτατον· ἐκεῖνά τε γὰρ δεῖ πάντα συλλογίσασθαι (καὶ γὰρ ὅτι ὑπάρχει τὰ εἰρημένα καὶ ὅτι γένος τὸ ἀποδοθὲν καὶ ὅτι ἴδιος ὁ λόγος), καὶ ἔτι παρὰ ταῦτα, ὅτι δηλοὶ τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι ὁ λόγος, καὶ τοῦτο καλῶς δεῖ πεποιηκέναι.
It is clear, then, that of all things the definition is the easiest to overthrow, and the most difficult to establish; for one must reason all those points (namely, that the mentioned elements belong, that the rendered term is the genus, and that the explanation is peculiar), and moreover, in addition to these, that the explanation signifies the essence, and that this has been well done.
Τῶν δ᾿ ἄλλων τὸ ἴδιον μάλιστα τοιοῦτον· ἀναιρεῖν μὲν γὰρ ῥᾷον διὰ τὸ ἐκ πολλῶν ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πολύ, κατασκευάζειν δὲ χαλεπώτατον, ὅτι τε πολλὰ δεῖ συμβιβάσαι, καὶ πρὸς τούτῳ ὅτι μονῳ ὑπάρχει καὶ ἀντικατηγορεῖται τοῦ πράγματος.
Of the others, the property is most like this; for it is easier to overthrow because it consists of many elements as a rule, but most difficult to establish, both because one must bring agreement on many points, and in addition to this, because it belongs to the subject alone and is counter-predicated of the thing.
Ῥᾷστον δὲ πάντων κατασκευάσαι τὸ συμβεβηκός· ἐν μὲν γὰρ τοῖς ἄλλοις οὐ μόνον ὑπάρχον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ὅτι οὕτως ὑπάρχει, δεικτέον· ἐπὶ δὲ τοῦ συμβεβηκότος, ὅτι ὑπάρχει μόνον, ἱκανὸν δεῖξαι.
But the accident is the easiest of all to establish; for in the other cases, one must show not only that it belongs, but also that it belongs in that way; whereas in the case of the accident, it is sufficient to show that it only belongs.
Ἀνασκευάζειν δὲ χαλεπώτατον τὸ συμβεβηκός, ὅτι ἐλάχιστα ἐν αὐτῷ δέδοται· οὐ γὰρ προσσημαίνει ἐν τῷ συμβεβηκότι πῶς ὑπάρχει, ὥστ᾿ ἐπὶ μὲν τῶν ἄλλων διχῶς ἔστιν ἀνελεῖν, ἢ δείξαντα ὅτι οὐχ ὑπάρχει ἢ ὅτι οὐχ οὕτως ὑπάρχει, ἐπὶ δὲ τοῦ συμβεβηκότος οὐκ ἔστιν ἀνελεῖν ἀλλ᾿ ἢ δείξαντα ὅτι οὐχ ὑπάρχει.
On the other hand, the accident is the most difficult to overthrow, because the fewest data are given in it; for it does not further signify how it belongs in the accident, so that in the other cases it is possible to overthrow in two ways, either by showing that it does not belong or that it does not belong in that way, whereas in the case of the accident, it is not possible to overthrow except by showing that it does not belong.
Οἱ μὲν οὖν τόποι δι᾿ ὧν εὐπορήσομεν πρὸς ἕκαστα τῶν προβλημάτων ἐπιχειρεῖν, σχεδὸν ἱκανῶς ἐξηρίθμηνται.
The topics, therefore, through which we shall be well provided to argue against each of the problems, have been listed almost sufficiently.