[
1008a]
[1]
Therefore if the latter negation is true, the negation of "trireme"
will also be true; and if this is true, the affirmation will be true
too.
And not only does this follow
for those who hold this theory, but also that it is not necessary
either to affirm or to deny a statement.For if it is true that X is both man and
not-man, clearly he will be neither man nor not-man; for to the two
statements there correspond two negations, and if the former is taken
as a single statement compounded out of two, the latter is also a
single statement and opposite to it.
Again, either
this applies to all terms, and the same thing is both white and
not-white, and existent and non-existent, and similarly with all other
assertions and negations; or it does not apply to all, but only to
some and not to others.And if it does not apply to all, the exceptions will be
admitted
1; but if it does apply to
all, again either (a) the negation will be true wherever the
affirmation is true, and the affirmation will be true wherever the
negation is true, or (d) the negation will be true wherever the
assertion is true, but the assertion will not always be true where the
negation is true. And in
the latter case there will be something which definitely is not, and
this will be a certain belief; and if that it is not is certain and
knowable, the opposite assertion will be still more knowable. But if
what is denied can be equally truly asserted, it must be either true
or false to state the predicates separately and say, e.g.,
[20]
that a thing is white, and again
that it is not-white.And
if it is not-true to state them separately, our opponent does not say
what he professes to say, and nothing exists; and how can that which
does not exist speak or walk?
2 And again all things will be one, as we
said before,
3
and the same thing will be "man" and "God" and "trireme" and the
negations of these terms.For if it is equally possible to assert or deny anything of
anything, one thing will not differ from another; for if anything does
differ, it will be true and unique. And similarly even if it is
possible to make a true statement while separating the predicates,
what we have stated follows. Moreover it follows that all statements
would be true and all false; and that our opponent himself admits that
what he says is false. Besides, it is obvious that discussion with him
is pointless, because he makes no real statement.For he says neither "yes" nor "no," but
"yes and no"; and again he denies both of these and says "neither yes
nor no"; otherwise there would be already some definite
statement.
Again, if when the
assertion is true the negation is false, and when the latter is true
the affirmation is false, it will be impossible to assert and deny
with truth the same thing at the same time.