61. The Eight Senses of 'In' and Equivocation by Reason

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

Equivocation by Reason vs. Arbitrary Equivocation #

• The word ‘in’ (and similar universal terms) is equivocal ‘by reason,’ meaning its multiple meanings are connected and ordered, not arbitrary
• These meanings follow from a primary sense and relate to each other through proportion and analogy
• This contrasts with terms equivocal by chance, which have no systematic connection between meanings

The Eight Senses of ‘In’ (Ordered) #

Senses 1-2: Spatial and Composed Whole

• In place: “You are in the room” (primary, most sensible sense)
• Part in composed whole: “My teeth are in my mouth” (more mental/intellectual than sense 1)
• Both involve actual containment; genus and species compose definitions like parts compose wholes

Senses 3-4: Definitional (Genus and Species)

• Genus in species (definition): “Quadrilateral is in the definition of square”
  • The genus is a defining part of the species
  • The definition is a composed whole of genus and differences
• Species in genus (universal whole): “Dog is in the genus animal”
  • Species is said of the genus but is not a defining part
  • The genus is a universal whole, not a composed whole
  • KEY DISTINCTION: Dog does not define animal; animal defines dog

Sense 5: Form in Matter (Ability)

• Example: equilateral and isosceles are in triangle only in ability, not in act
• Form exists in matter only in potentiality before actualization
• Proportional to composed whole as form is to matter
• The example of clay molded into different shapes: only the matter changes, not the genus (shape)

Sense 6: Whole in Parts (Proportional)

• The whole is in its parts as form is in matter
• Whole:parts :: form:matter

Sense 7: In Active Power

• Example: “We are in God’s hands” or “fallen in love”
• Something is in the active ability or control of an agent
• Contrasts with passive ability (senses 1-5)

Sense 8: In the End or Good (Purpose/Intention)

• Example: “My heart is in this work” or Augustine’s “ubi amat quam ubi animat” (the soul is more where it loves than where it animates)
• Relates to what the soul intends or pursues as an end
• Uses the Latin word ubi (where)

The Problem of Mixing Senses #

Confusing different senses of ‘in’ creates logical absurdities:

• Shape changing: When clay changes from sphere to cube, we say “the shape changed,” but really the matter changed. We falsely imagine the genus as if it were matter.
• Mood changing: When someone goes from sad to joyful, we say “his mood changed,” but the person changed from one species to another—not the genus itself.
• Color changing: When someone blushes, we say “the color changed,” but the face that was white is now red—it’s the subject that changed.
• Daily speech: “The weather has changed” similarly confuses the genus changing with the subject changing.

The Distinction Between Universal Whole and Composed Whole #

• Composed whole: Parts are put together to form a whole (e.g., definition composed of genus and differences)

  • Animal is composed of dog, cat, horse? No—this creates an absurdity
  • The definition of square (equilateral, right-angled, quadrilateral) is a composed whole

• Universal whole: A universal is said of its parts but not composed of them

  • Dog is in animal (universal) not as a part, but as a particular instance
  • Animal is said of dog, cat, horse, but is not composed of them
  • If animal were composed of dog, cat, horse, then “a dog is an animal” would mean “a dog is something composed of dog, cat, horse”—absurd

• The universal whole is said of its parts rather than contained in them

Key Arguments #

Defending the Axiom “Nothing is in Itself” #

• The problem: Without distinguishing senses of ‘in,’ one could argue:

  • Species is in genus (sense 4)
  • Genus is in species (sense 3)
  • Therefore, species is in species
  • Therefore, something is in itself—contradicting the axiom

• The resolution: These two senses are fundamentally different:

  • “Species in genus” uses ‘in’ to mean the species is said of the genus (sense 4)
  • “Genus in species” uses ‘in’ to mean the genus is a defining part (sense 3)
  • Therefore, one cannot transitively conclude that species is in itself

• This is similar to: “If I am in a box and the box is in a room, I am in a room”—valid transitivity

  • But when ‘in’ shifts meaning, transitivity fails

The Whole and Part Distinction Applied to Logic #

• The student objection: “A whole is more than one of its parts. Animal is a part of what man is. Therefore, a part can contain more than the whole.”

• Berquist’s response:

  • When we say “man is a part of animal,” we mean animal is a universal whole said of man
  • When we say “animal is a part of man,” we mean the definition is a composed whole
  • These use ‘part’ in two different senses
  • Therefore, no contradiction to the axiom

Why Aristotle and Thomas Understood These Distinctions #

• Only Aristotle and Thomas could order these eight senses because:
  • Form and matter are in the sensible world (observable)
  • These senses of ‘in’ are more in the mind
  • Yet the ordering shows sense 5 (form in matter in ability) is in the middle
  • This suggests sense 5 is like a part in whole but only in ability—exactly where it should be

Important Definitions #

Equivocal by Reason (aequivocum secundum rationem) #

• A word with multiple meanings that are connected through a primary meaning
• The meanings follow a rational order and relate through proportion
• Contrasts with equivocal by chance where meanings have no systematic connection

Universal Whole (totum universale) #

• A universal that is said of many but is not composed of them
• Example: “animal” is said of every dog, cat, horse
• Said of (not composed of) its particulars

Composed Whole (totum compositum) #

• A whole assembled from parts that are put together
• Example: Definition composed of genus and differences
• Example: The word “cat” is composed of c-a-t

Ability (potentia in Latin, δύναμις in Greek) #

• Potentiality or potential being
• Contrasts with act (actus, ἐνέργεια)
• Example: Equilateral and isosceles are in triangle in ability but not in act

Active Power (potentia activa) #

• The ability of an agent to act or control
• Example: “We are in God’s hands” (God’s active power)
• Contrasts with passive ability (sense 5)

Examples & Illustrations #

The Clay and Shape Problem #

• Clay is molded from a sphere into a cube
• Common speech: “The shape changed”
• Reality: The matter (clay) changed accidentally, not substantially
• The clay that was a sphere is now a cube—not the genus “shape” that changed from one species to another
• This shows how we confuse the genus with matter due to habits of speech

The Blush Example #

• When someone blushes, we say “the color of his face changed”
• Reality: The face that was white is now red
• Not: The genus “color” changed from one species (white) to another species (red)
• Two different colors are different to begin with; but the face is now different than before

The Mood Example #

• Someone changes from sad to joyful; we say “his mood changed”
• Reality: The person changed from one state to another
• Not: The genus “mood” changed from one species to another
• The individual changed, not the genus

The Weather Expression #

• We say “the weather has changed” (good to bad, bad to good)
• Similar confusion: the weather was good and now is bad
• Not: The genus “weather” changed species

Love as Falling into Active Power #

• “I have fallen in love” = fallen into the power of love (sense 7)
• Love is controlling the person’s movements
• Example from Two Gentlemen of Verona: Proteus is in love and acts foolishly because he is in the power of love

Augustine on the Soul’s Location #

• “Ubi amat quam ubi animat” (the soul is more where it loves than where it animates)
• When the soul loves God, it seems more in God than in the body
• Example: St. Paul brought to the third heaven did not know if his body was there; his soul seemed more present to God
• Uses the word ubi (where) but in sense 8, not sense 1 (physical location)

“My Heart is in This Work” #

• Expression of sense 8: the good or end one pursues
• Contrasts with “my heart’s not in it” = you don’t really like or love this
• The opposite: “I left my heart in San Francisco” (C.S. Lewis reference)

C.S. Lewis on Time #

• “What do you mean you’ve got time?”
• Reality: “Time has you” (sense 7—active power)
• You are more in time than time is in you
• Humans are servants to time; time controls human activity

Notable Quotes #

“Is a man wise if he understands the words he uses? No. But is he wise if he doesn’t understand the words he uses? No, he is not wise.” — Berquist, on the necessity of understanding equivocal terms for wisdom

“The soul is more where it loves than where it animates.” (Ubi amat quam ubi animat) — Augustine, on sense 8 of ‘in’

“Time has you.” — C.S. Lewis, on the active power of time over human life

“Nothing is in itself.” — Fundamental axiom discussed throughout the lecture

“You’re not the class, and you’re not the class, right? But together, you compose the class. But universal would be like student.” — Berquist, distinguishing class (composed whole) from universal whole

Questions Addressed #

How Can Species Be in Genus and Genus Be in Species Without Violating “Nothing is in Itself”? #

• The apparent problem: If A is in B and B is in A, then A is in itself
• The resolution: The two instances of ‘in’ have different meanings
  • Species in genus (sense 4): the species is said of the genus
  • Genus in species (sense 3): the genus is a defining part of the species
  • One cannot transitively move from said-of to part-of without changing the meaning
• Implication: Proper understanding of equivocal terms protects axioms from sophistical refutation

How Do We Reconcile Common Speech with Philosophical Truth? #

• Common speech confuses the subject with the genus:
  • “The shape changed” → Really, the matter changed
  • “His mood changed” → Really, he changed
  • “The color changed” → Really, the face changed
• Why this happens: We tend to fall back on earlier, more familiar senses of words
• Philosophical task: Distinguish what is truly changing (the subject/individual) from what only appears to change (the genus/accident)

How Is the Modern Substitution of “Class” for “Universal” a Philosophical Error? #

• Modern logic: Uses “class” instead of “universal”
• The problem: Class is a composed whole; universal is a universal whole
• The confusion: Class is not said of its members (you are not “the class”); universal is said of all its instances
• Example: “Student” is a universal said of each student; “my philosophy class” is a composed whole of which students are parts
• Root cause: Failure to distinguish universal whole from composed whole

Why Could Only Thomas (After Aristotle) Order These Eight Senses Correctly? #

• Form and matter exist in the sensible world; senses 3-4 are more mental
• Yet sense 5 (form in matter in ability) bridges them
• Form in matter in ability is like a part in whole but only potentially
• Thomas understood this relationship well enough to place it in the middle of the ordering
• Most philosophers cannot see this middle ground and either collapse everything into physical containment or deny universals altogether

Philosophical Principles Established #

1. Understanding words is necessary (though not sufficient) for wisdom

   • Not understanding equivocal terms makes one unwise
   • Understanding them is foundational for all higher knowledge

2. Equivocal terms appear everywhere in philosophy

   • Especially in axioms and universal concepts
   • In wisdom, the most universal words are most important

3. Failure to distinguish senses of equivocal terms leads to fallacy

   • Specifically, the fallacy of equivocation
   • Can appear to contradict fundamental axioms
   • Can make one think sophistic objections are valid

4. The ordering of senses reflects ontological/epistemological relationships

   • Senses 1-2 are most obvious and sensible
   • Senses 3-4 are more intellectual
   • Sense 5 bridges the sensible and intellectual
   • Senses 7-8 move into active power and intention