کلیات خمس

Porphyry's work titled Isagoge is commonly seen as an analysis of Aristotle's Categories, focusing on universal concepts, with the five predicables considered as different types of universals. Often, the same view is ascribed to Aristotle, but in fact, it is an approach arising from a confusion between universal and whole, as well as a confusion between particular and part by Porphyry in the Isagoge. In Categories, Aristotle does not refer to "whole" and "part" as synonyms for "universal" and "particular. Porphyry, however, in some cases distorting this distinction, uses “whole” and “part” to mean “universal” and “particular”. Moreover, they disagree on the essence of the five predicables and their relation to the universal. Aristotle views genes and species as universals and their connection to individuals as universal to particular, but he distinguishes them from the concept of universal and does not believe every universal is a genes or species. Porphyry, on the other hand, reduces genes and species to mere universal conceptions and consider them as synonyms for universal. It appears that there are two approachs in the philosophical tradition that started with Porphyry. These approachs were perpetuated and broadened by later thinkers. Initially, he altered the understanding of whole and part to universal and particular. Furthermore, he reduced genes and species to mere universal.

It is a universal and partial of the issues discussed in philosophy and logic. Whereas, in order to avoid intermingle the issues of each science, their boundaries are Located through their subjects; The question arises why in both the sciences of logic and philosophy, both universal and partial are discussed? The present article seeks to find the distinguishing feature of this discussion in this scientific field. By studying the historical course and using the analytical method, it is concluded that from the beginning of the formation of this discussion in Aristotle's system of thought, there is no significant difference between his metaphysics and logic. Muslim philosophers, including Ibn Sina, although at first acting in the method of Aristotle as a commentator, later considered some issues, such as the categories in which the Five Universals as an entry of categories, to be outside the scope of the science of logic. On the other hand, the discussion of the Five Universals is one of the inevitable issues in logic due to the need for it in the subject of notions and definitions. There are also differences of opinion among philosophers regarding the source of division of the five generalities, which indicates the intermingle of the issues in philosophy and logic. Some views, in distinguishing this discussion in the two mentioned areas, have proposed different considerations and modes, and some have relegated the ontological discussion of generalities to philosophy and the study of its rules to the field of logic.

Avicenna in al-Isharat says that the “best property” is that which: (1) include all individuals of the subject; (2) is absolute (nafsi) and not relative (nisbi); (3) is inseparable not separable. Again، he believes that “the most useful property for definition” is that which belongs to the subject self-evidently – in addition to satisfying the three above-mentioned cases. The property، on Tusi’s opinion، can be considered from two viewpoints: (1) in itself; (2) due to its being settled in the definition. The best property، from the first viewpoint، is that which satisfies the first three conditions، and from the second viewpoint، is that which satisfies all of the four. It seems that Tusi interprets Avicenna’s text appropriate to Topics (Dialectic)، whereas we can propose a better interpretation by means of a systematical analysis on the basis of the bipartite logic as follows: The property is one of the Quinque Voces (Five Universals)، which all have a preparing function; and every preparing factor in the bipartite logic is a preparation either to definition or to reasoning. So، in the bipartite logic، if the property is a preparation to definition، it should satisfy all of the four conditions; and if it is a preparation to reasoning، it should satisfy the first three conditions. The aim of the present article is to analyze this topic in Avicenna''s logical heritage.

To analyze the dialectical reasoning, in Topics, Aristotle reduces any dialectical proposition to a subject which is ‘species’ and a predicate which is either ‘definition’, ‘genus’, (‘difference’,) ‘property’, or ‘accident’, and then he says that the ten categories provide the matters of these predicables. Porphyry in Isagoge substitutes the ‘species’ for the ‘definition’ and exhibites these five universal predicates as the necessary or useful introduction to the Aristotelian doctrines of categories, definition, devision, and proof. Farabi combines Aristotelian Predicables with Porphyrian Five Universals and make a new catalogue of universals. He also explains that the five universals are final elements of all definitions and reasonings in all sciences. Ibn Sina in the logic of al-Shifa’ which is the best representative of the nine-part logicography in Islamic world, applies the five universals in the same function as Porphory does in Isagoge; but in the logic of al-Isharat which is the first compelet representative of his bipartite logicography, he applies them only as an introduction to the theory of definition