Daily Awesome: Take that Hamlet
I’m slowly working through Aristotle and came across this passage, which amazingly isn’t unlike all the other passages:
However, it is not ‘necessary to be’ nor yet ‘necessary not to be’ that follows from ‘possible to be’. For with this both may happen, but whichever of the others is true these will no longer be true; for it is at the same time possible to be and not to be, but if it is necessary to be or not to be it will not be possible for both. It remains, therefore, for ‘not necessary not to be’ to follow from ‘possible to be’; for this is true of ‘necessary to be’ also. Moreover, this proves to be contradictory to what follows from ‘not possible to be’, since from that follow ‘impossible to be’ and ‘necessary not to be’. So these contradictories, too, follow in the way stated, and nothing impossible results when they are so placed.
– Aristotle, De Interpretatione
Jeez, and I thought I was pedantic! But who am I to argue with the guy who invented logic? I might if I knew what he was talking about half the time.