Bumped by Community user
5 edited tags
| link
4 formatting and grammar
source | link

Why do we need Aristotle's theory of predication?

My question is about Aristotle's theory of predication. Why do we need it at all? 

I know it's intuitive to pick up something and say something about it like "S is P", but doesn't this lead us to infinite regress? Why don't we simply stop at the first something and say "S is S" and comprehend it? Why did Aristotle take predication or subject and predicate as self-evident and intuitive? What argument did he make that everything is a subject and a predicate?

Thanks in advance.

Aristotle's theory of predication

My question is about Aristotle's theory of predication. Why do we need it all? I know it's intuitive to pick up something and say something about it like "S is P", but doesn't this lead us to infinite regress? Why don't we simply stop at the first something and say "S is S" and comprehend it? Why did Aristotle take predication or subject and predicate as self-evident and intuitive? What argument did he make that everything is a subject and a predicate?

Thanks in advance.

Why do we need Aristotle's theory of predication?

My question is about Aristotle's theory of predication. Why do we need it at all? 

I know it's intuitive to pick up something and say something about it like "S is P", but doesn't this lead us to infinite regress? Why don't we simply stop at the first something and say "S is S" and comprehend it? Why did Aristotle take predication or subject and predicate as self-evident and intuitive? What argument did he make that everything is a subject and a predicate?

Thanks in advance.

3 added 10 characters in body
source | link

myMy question is about Aristotle's theory of predication, why. Why do we need it all, i? I know itsit's intuitive to pick up something and say something about it like "S is P", but doesn't this lead us to infinite regress, why? Why don't we simply stop at the first something and say "S is S" and comprehend it, why? Why did Aristotle tooktake predication or subject and predicate as self evident-evident and intuitive, what? What argument did he mademake that everything is a subject and a predicate  ?

thanksThanks in advance.

my question is about Aristotle's theory of predication, why do we need it all, i know its intuitive to pick up something and say something about it like "S is P" but doesn't this lead us to infinite regress, why don't we simply stop at the first something and say "S is S" and comprehend it, why Aristotle took predication or subject and predicate as self evident and intuitive, what argument he made that everything is a subject and a predicate  ?

thanks in advance

My question is about Aristotle's theory of predication. Why do we need it all? I know it's intuitive to pick up something and say something about it like "S is P", but doesn't this lead us to infinite regress? Why don't we simply stop at the first something and say "S is S" and comprehend it? Why did Aristotle take predication or subject and predicate as self-evident and intuitive? What argument did he make that everything is a subject and a predicate?

Thanks in advance.

2 typo
| link
1
source | link