Authors/Ockham/Summa Logicae/Book III-3/Chapter 21

Latin	English
CAP. 21. DE PROPRIO QUOD COMPONITUR EX GENERE ET DIFFERENTIIS ACCIDENTALIBUS.	Chapter 21. On the property that is composed of genus and accidental differences.
Circa proprium quod componitur ex genere et differentiis accidentalibus, de quo principaliter tractat Philosophus V Topicorum, est sciendum quod tale proprium destruitur si non detur per notiora.	Concerning the property that is composed of the genus and accidental differences, of which the Philosopher deals chiefly in the Topics V.
Secundo, destruitur si non detur per notiora inesse suo subiecto.	Secondly, it is destroyed if it is not given to its subject by means of better known things.
Et ratio istius est quia tale proprium datur causa innotescendi, quod non potest fieri nisi per notius et per illud quod est magis notum inesse suo subiecto. Item, destruitur si subiectum vel tota oratio vel aliquod nomen in oratione sit multiplex, quia quocumque istorum dato, non est proprium illius.	And the reason for this is that such a property is given for the sake of becoming known, which can only be done through better known things and through that which is better known to be present in its subject. Again, it is destroyed if the subject or the whole statement or some term in the speech is multiple, because whatever of these is given, it is not a property of that one.
Item, destruitur si habeat aliquam superfluitatem.	Likewise, it is destroyed if it has any excess.
Item, destruitur si in proprio ponatur aliquid quod est commune omnibus, quia nihil debet poni in proprio nisi quod separat suum subiectum ab aliquo. Item, destruitur si eiusdem ponantur plura propria. Istud est intelligendum de descriptione quae indicat sufficienter omnes proprietates incomplexas de suo subiecto, quia de propriis complexis non est verum quin eiusdem possint esse plura propria etiam non ordinata, quamvis frequenter propria eiusdem habeant aliquem ordinem et diversa diversum ordinem, sicut proprietates creaturae rationalis sunt `posse mereri' et `posse demereri'.	Likewise, it is destroyed if something is put in the property which is common to all things, because nothing should be put in the property except that which separates its subject from something. Likewise, it is destroyed if several properties of the same thing are posited. This is to be understood from a description which indicates sufficiently all the uncomplex properties of its subject, because it is not true of property complexes that there can be several properties of the same thing, even if they are not ordered, although frequently the properties of the same thing have some order and others a different order, just as the properties of a rational creature are 'able to earn' and 'able to lose'.
Et ista habent ordinem aliquo modo in perfectione, pro tanto quia `posse mereri' importat aliquem actum qui est perfectior quam sit ille actus qui importatur per `posse demereri'. Similiter `esse susceptibile disciplinae' et `esse susceptibile actus liberi' habent ordinem, quia unum importat rem priorem naturaliter re importata per aliud.	And these things have an order in some way in perfection, for the reason that 'to be able to earn' implies some act which is more perfect than that act which is implied by 'to be able to lose'. Similarly, 'being susceptible of discipline' and 'being susceptible of free action' have an order, because the one implies the former thing which is naturally implied by the other.
ƿ Item, destruitur proprium si aliquod contentum sub subiecto ponitur in proprio.	Likewise, the property is destroyed if any content under the subject is placed in the property.
Item, destruitur si oppositum ipsius subiecti vel aliquid simul natura cum illo sive posterius eo ponitur in proprio. Item, destruitur si definitio ponitur in proprio. Item, si genus non ponatur in proprio. Item, si differentia essentialis ponitur in proprio. Item, si subiectum sumatur cum suo accidente. Item, si non determinetur qualiter sit proprium illius, utrum scilicet competat ei primo vel non primo. Item, si idem ponatur proprium sui ipsius. Item, in homogeneis, si non competat tam toti quam parti et e converso. Item, si contrarium non est proprium contrarii. Item, si e diverso divisum non habet aliquod proprium e diverso divisum. Item, si casus non est proprium casus vel coniugatum non est proprium coniugati. Ista et multa alia possunt elici ex V Topicorum, quae ideo breviter et sine exemplis pertransivi, quia ista non sunt in scientiis specialibus multum usitata; et quae de ipsis theologiae et aliis scientiis speculabilibus sunt necessaria, per dicta prius et dicenda patere possunt.	Likewise, it is destroyed if the opposite of the subject itself, or something that is at the same time in nature with it or after it, is placed in the property. Likewise, it is destroyed if the definition is placed in the property. Also, if the genus is not placed in the property. Likewise, if the essential difference is placed in the property. Likewise, if the subject is taken with its accident. Likewise, if it is not determined how it is a property of it, namely, whether it belongs to it first or not first. Likewise, if the same thing is assumed to be the property of itself. Likewise, in homogeneous cases, if it does not apply both to the whole and to the part, and vice versa. Again, if the opposite is not the property of the opposite. Likewise, if it is divided from something different, it does not have some property divided from something different. Likewise, if the accident is not a property of the accident or the conjugate is not a property of the conjugate. These and many other things can be gleaned from the Topics V, which I have therefore passed through briefly and without examples, because these are not much used in the special sciences; and what is necessary for the speculations of theology and other sciences themselves can be made clear by what has been said before and what remains to be said.