e assume this incompatibility here too in asking which of the two came; for if they might both have come, the question would have been absurd; but if they might, even so this falls just as much into an antithesis, that of the ‘one or many’, i.e. ‘whether both came or one of the two’:-if, then, the question ‘whether’ is always concerned with opposites, and we can Fernando Torres Pelipaidat ask ‘whether it is greater or less or equal’, what is the opposition of the equal to the other two? It is not contrary either to one alone or to both; for why should it be contrary to the greater rather than to the less? Further, the equal is contrary to the unequal. Therefore if it is contrary to the greater and the less, it will be contrary to more things than one. But if the unequal means the same as both the greater and the less together, the equal will be opposite to both (and the difficulty supports those who say the unequal is a ‘two’), but it follows that one thing is contrary to two others, which is impossible. Again, the equal is evidently intermediate between the great and the small, but no contrariety is either observed to be Belstaff Herr Jackor intermediate, or, from its definition, can be so; for it would not be complete if it were intermediate between any two things, but rather Xabier Etxeita Jersey it always has something intermediate between its own Tigres terms.
It remains, then, that it is opposed either as negation or as privation. It cannot be the negation or privation of one Gregory van der Wiel Jersey of the two; for why of the great rather than of the small? It is, then, the privative negation of Seth Sinovic Jersey both. This is why ‘whether’ is said with reference to both, not to one of the Sandro Ramirez Jersey two (e.g. ‘whether it is greater or equal’ or ‘whether it is equal or less’); there are always three cases. But it is not a necessary privation; for not everything which is not greater or less is equal, but only the things which are of such a nature as to have these attributes.
The equal, then, is that which is neither great nor small but is naturally Män Ralph Lauren Tees fitted to be either great or small; and it Matz Sels Jersey is opposed to both as a privative negation (and therefore is also intermediate). And that which is neither good nor bad is opposed to both, but has no name; for each of these has several meanings Chance Myers Jersey and the recipient subject is not one; but that which is neither white nor black has more claim to unity. Yet even this has not one name, Baba Rahman Jersey though the colours of which this negation is privatively predicated are in a way limited; for they must be either grey or yellow or something else of the kind. Therefore it is an incorrect criticism that is passed by those who think that all such phrases are used in the same way, so that that which is neither a shoe nor a hand would be intermediate between a shoe and a hand, since that which is neither good nor bad is intermediate between the good and the bad-as if there must be an intermediate in all cases. But this does not necessarily follow. For the one phrase is a joint denial of opposites between which there is an intermediate and a certain natural interval; but Adidas Marathon II Dame between the other twolinks:
http://www.rastafarispeaks.com/repatriation/index.cgi
http://www.myip.cn/cgimage.lv
http://www13.plala.or.jp/white_roots/gwbbs/gwbbs.cgi |
