Essential Primary Predication and Technical Common Predication Devoted to Subject and Proposition
Essential primary and technical common predications have two meanings equivocally: (1) as a qualification of the subject, (2) as a qualification of the proposition. The meaning which has been proposed by Mullā Ṣadrā is the second one and the first meaning, with this title, has gained its common use...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | fas |
| Published: |
University of Isfahan
2011-09-01
|
| Series: | Metaphysics |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://uijs.ui.ac.ir/mph/browse.php?a_code=A-10-1-30&slc_lang=en&sid=1 |
| Summary: | Essential primary and technical common predications have two meanings equivocally: (1) as a qualification of the subject, (2) as a qualification of the proposition. The meaning which has been proposed by Mullā Ṣadrā is the second one and the first meaning, with this title, has gained its common use only after him. To avoid confusing them, one must use each of them in its proper place in every single proposition. The first meaning must be asserted immediately after the subject, since it concerns the concept-referent distinction in the subject. However, the second one must be asserted at the end of the proposition, since both subject and predicate are important in its realization. It shows either they are conceptually the same (conceptual unity) or subject is among the referents of the predicate (extension inclusion).
To avoid the contradiction, these two meanings must be mentioned in one proposition simultaneously. For instance, it can be rightly said: “the particular with primary predication is universal with common predication” which means “the concept of the particular is among the referents of universal” or it can be rightly said: “the particular with primary predication is the particular with primary predication” which means “the concept of particular is the same as the particular conceptually”. By distinction between these two kinds of predication, Mullā Ṣadrā tries to solve some contradictory (paradoxical) instances and his commentators say explicitly that he has added a unity to the eight unities concerning the conditions of occurrence of a contradiction. However, the unity that can be added to the eight conditions is not only the second meaning of these predications, but both of them. Now, according to the two predications concerning the subject and also proposition (as a whole), as well as the quality of the propositions, i.e. affirmation and negation, we come across eight forms of propositions which two by two are contradictory. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2008-8086 2476-3276 |