-
Question Twenty-Five
- The Catholic University of America Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
208 [QUESTION TWENTY-FIVE Whether the Genus of Relation is One Genus] Indeed, such things are said to another.1 irst, it is asked whether the genus of relation is one genus. 1. It seems that it is not: One univocal genus is not common to being and non-being; but some relations are beings, and some are nonbeings ; therefore, etc. Proof of the second part of the minor: there is a contradiction between being and non-being, which is an intermediate relation, which seems to be a non-being.––First, since nothing is an intermediate between contradictory , and such a relation is an intermediate between contradictory , therefore it is not something.—Second, since that opposition can be in a nonbeing as in a subject, but an accident that is in a non-being as a subject cannot be a being. 2. It will be said2 to this second proof that this opposition is only in a being as in a subject, according to what seems to be held by the Commentator on Bk. VI of the Metaphysics.3 3. Against this : A relative of equivalence equally denominates each extreme in comparison to the other. That is manifested in proposition, since it is equally true to say 1. Categories, Ch. 7 (6a 36–37). 2. Cf. Petrus de Alvernia, Praedic. q. 46 (CIMAGL 55, p. 65). 3. Averroës, Metaphysics, Bk. VI, com. 8 (ed. Iuntina, VIII f. 72ra). QUESTION 25 209 “non-being is opposed to being” as “being is opposed to nonbeing ”; therefore, such a relation can equally be in each extreme as in a subject. 4. , to the principal , nothing is univocal to a being of reason and to a being of nature, but certain relations are beings of nature, as paternity and filiation, which would exist the intellect did not exist; certain others, however, are beings of reason. 5. This is proved: first, since a relation does not have a truer being than the subject upon which it is based; and many relations are based upon things of reason, as the relation of genus to species and others of this kind; therefore, relations of this kind are only beings of reason. 6. secondly, since every relation requires two extremes; therefore, that relation, whose extremes are not two except according to reason, is only a being of reason. Such a relation is identity according to what is said in Bk. V of the Metaphysics, in the chapter “On the Same”:4 in that relation the intellect “uses one as two .” 7. Third, to the principal : According to Aristotle,5 “those things whose being is to have themselves to another are relations .” That is in all which are essentially (per se) to another in the first mode; therefore, through the nature of something univocal to them. That is not except the most general of relation. Therefore, the most general of relation is “that its very being is (hoc ipsum quod est)” to have itself to another; nor is it to something prior or posterior, since “relatives6 are simultaneous by nature”; nor is it to equal, since in this way there would be two most general . Also, that what is most general has itself to another is evident from its very name. For it is said by Aristotle “to something”; and it cannot be conceded “to something” and not be towards another, unless a contradictory can be said of a contradictory . 8. Fourth, to the principal : there are only two 4. Metaphysics, Bk. V, Ch. 9 (1018a 7–10). 5. Categories, Ch. 7 (8a 32–33). 6. Categories, Ch. 7 (7b 15). [44.200.65.174] Project MUSE (2024-03-29 15:08 GMT) 210 JOHN DUNS SCOTUS primary species of any one genus; but there are not only two primary species of the most general of relation; therefore , the most general of relation is not one. Proof of the minor: since if there were , they would be A and B. Then either A refers to itself and B to itself, and then both are relatives of equivalence; then also all inferiors , and so relatives of supposition and of imposition,7 would be in another most general genus. Or, A is referred to B, and vice versa; and if this is the case, then their species would refer to each other. Since, according to Aristotle in Bk. IV of the Topics:8 “If genus is to genus, species is also to species.” And similarly in Bk. II :9 “if...