In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

GENUS AND DIFFERENCE I WOULD like to give the reader a firm thread to hold during his journey through the labyrinth which follows. My aim is to investigate the relation between Genus and Difference; and ,the whole of the discussion which follows is subordinated to this one aim. In order to accomplish this design I have to go abroad into the fields of grammar, logic, analogy, and participation. The very extent of the problem shows it to be a philosophical one, and shows, therefore, that my inquiries here can do little more than skim the surface of the subject. Nevertheless they may have value in leading to its more systematic study. An ambiguity presents itself at the very outset. We use the words " difference " and " genus " in two different ways: one as indicating a mode of predication, the other as indicating a mode of being, the mode, namely, which determines the mode of predication. So, for example, we can say that canine is a difference, meaning either that the term " canine " is predicated in the predicable of difference, or that the mode of canine being is what differentiates dogs from cats and from all other animals. In the former case, we are discussing modes of predication: in the latter case, modes of being. But the important thing is that the mode of being determines the mode of predication/' for the only reason why the term "canine" is predicated in the predicable of difference is because the canine mode of being is what differentiates one type of animal being from another. In other words, our descriptions of things refer to the things as they are, and have truth value only insofar as they describe things as they are. Evidently this same truth holds for the predicable of genus just as it holds for all predicables. Now in what follows I do not use any special expression to distinguish 1 ". • • modus praedicandi proportionatur ipsis rebus de quibus fit praedicatio." St. Thomas, 1 Sent., d. i9, q. 4, a. ~. ad 1: cf. also V Metaphya., lect., 9, n. 890. 848 344 MICHAEL P. SLATTERY between these two usages of the terms "difference" and " genus." I leave it to the context to make clear to the reader which particular usage is in operation at a given moment. Perhaps the simplest thing to do will be to begin with some grammatical or linguistic remarks, and then to work up ·from them to the more technical aspects of our inquiry, namely, the logical and metaphysical ones. When we say that a dog is a canine animal, we use the term "canine" as an adjective qualifying the noun" animal." Now, from a grammatical point of view, adjectives are dependent upon their nouns, and serve to qualify them, or to " modify " them, as it is sometimes said. Nouns, on the other hand, are grammatically independent of their qualifying adjectives. Grammatically, generic terms are nouns, whereas differential terms (terms, namely, which indicate the difference) are adjectives . And the parallelism between grammar and logic seems to be such that the genus, indicated by the grammatically independent noun, is taken to be ontologically independent. This is especially true in the case of the category of substance which, being the category of what is primarily being, is therefore the category where the genus and the difference are primarily to be found.2 On the other hand, the difference, indicated by the grammatically dependent and modifying adjective, is taken as indicating a special quality or modification of the ontologically independent generic being. Now there is no lack of authorities for the view that the difference does tot signify the essence of the thing, namely, what is basic and independent in the thing. Aristotle's authority is enough here, since if he asserted this view, there will be a whole host of his followers who will repeat him. He says that "... a thing's differentia never signifies its essence, but rather some quality, as do 'walking ·• and 'biped' ... ," 3 and that "... the differentia is always a quality of the genus." 4 Now there would be no difficulties in this view about the • Cf. Metaphysics Z, c. 1, 1028a 80-86, c. 4, 1080a 18...

pdf

Share