35. The Eight Senses of 'In' and Thinking Out

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

The Eight Senses of ‘In’ #

Aristotle and Thomas distinguish eight primary senses of the word ‘in’ (εἶναι ἐν):

1. Spatial location - To be in place (e.g., people in a room)
2. Part in a composed whole - A part contained within a physical whole (e.g., teeth in mouth, as distinct from removable parts like a tooth on the floor)
3. Species in genus - The species contained definitionally within the genus
4. Genus in species - The genus contained within the species (universal in particular) - a different sense than (3)
5. Form in matter - Formal causality; form exists in matter only in potentiality (ἐν δυνάμει)
6. Whole in parts - The composed whole exists in its parts only in potentiality (e.g., a cook’s ability is in the ingredients before cooking)
7. Active ability/power - Having the ability to act on something (e.g., a father’s generative power in relation to a child)
8. End and means - Final causality; means ordered to an end (e.g., “I left my heart in San Francisco”)

The Equivocal Nature of ‘In’ #

The word ‘in’ is equivocal by reason (ἀναφορὰ πρὸς ἕν), not merely equivocal by chance. All eight senses relate back to the first sense (spatial location) as their primary reference point, though not univocally. This demonstrates Charles De Koninck’s principle that “every respectable word in philosophy is equivocal by reason.”

Thinking Out (Intelligere) #

The Latin word intelligere derives from intus legere (to read within). Thinking out is the activity of reason that articulates and unfolds knowledge. Each of the eight senses of ‘in’ corresponds to a different way that reason thinks out knowledge:

• Thinking out a distinction - Distinguishing different aspects or meanings
• Thinking out a division - Distinguishing parts of a composed whole
• Thinking out a definition - Articulating genus and differences
• Thinking out order - Understanding the sequence of things (what comes before/after in knowledge, nature, dignity, etc.)
• Thinking out the whole from parts - Understanding how parts compose a whole (e.g., premises containing a conclusion in potentiality)
• Thinking out conclusions - Understanding how conclusions follow from premises
• Thinking out means to an end - Understanding how means are ordered to an end

Key Arguments #

The Importance of Distinguishing Senses #

• Without distinguishing the different senses of equivocal words, we cannot properly understand philosophical concepts
• Example: If one conflates senses (1) and (2), one might mistakenly think a person is part of a room in the same way teeth are part of a mouth
• The study of equivocal words is not merely linguistic but essential to metaphysics and theology

The Parallel Between Senses of ‘In’ and Kinds of Wholes #

• Composed whole (senses 2, 5, 6) - Parts are actually in the whole; the whole is potentially in the parts
• Universal whole (senses 3, 4) - The genus is actually in the species; the species is potentially in the genus
• Functional whole (sense 1, 7, 8) - Different modes of containment related to place, power, and finality

The Distinction as Prior to Division #

• Thinking out a distinction is more general than thinking out a division
• Not all distinctions are divisions; some distinctions (e.g., between meanings of a word) are not divisions of parts of a whole
• This ordering reflects how reason moves from the more universal to the less universal

Important Definitions #

Equivocal by Reason (ἀναφορὰ πρὸς ἕν) #

A word that has multiple meanings all referring back to one primary meaning through analogy or proportion, rather than through arbitrary accident. Distinguished from a purely equivocal word where meanings have no systematic relation.

Part and Whole #

• Part - That which is contained within or belongs to a whole
• Composed whole - A whole composed of actual parts (e.g., body composed of organs)
• Universal whole - A whole in which a universal (genus) relates to particulars (species) through definition
• Potential whole - A whole that exists only in potentiality in its parts (e.g., the cook’s art in the ingredients)

Active Ability (Potentia Activa) #

The power or capacity to act upon something, distinct from passive potentiality. Example: The father’s generative power in producing offspring.

Examples & Illustrations #

Physical Parts vs. Adjacent Objects #

Berquist distinguishes between true parts and objects merely in proximity:

• True part: Teeth in mouth (naturally part of the mouth, not removable without injury)
• False part: A tooth on the floor after being knocked out (no longer a part of the mouth, just in place within it)
• This distinction clarifies sense (2) - part in a composed whole - versus sense (1) - being in place

Children in Parents #

In the wedding book example, young children appear at the end despite being born after the wedding:

• The children were ‘in’ the bride and groom, but not as parts
• This illustrates sense (6): the whole (children as the fruit of the union) was in the parts (parents) only in potentiality
• Parallels the logical example: a conclusion is in the premises in potentiality, not as an actual part

The Syllogism Example #

Premises:

• Every mother is a woman
• No man is a woman

Conclusion:

• No man is a mother

The conclusion was not one of the premises, yet it was contained in them. This illustrates sense (6) - the whole (conclusion) in the parts (premises) in potentiality.

The Cook and Ingredients #

A cook who has mixed all ingredients together can be said to be “in” all the ingredients, but only in ability (ἐν δυνάμει). Once the dish is cooked, the cook is not physically present in the food, yet the cook’s art was there in potentiality (sense 5 or 6).

Definition and Understanding #

• Understanding what an even number is: A number divisible into two equal parts
• Understanding what an odd number is: A number not divisible into two equal parts
• Understanding what a perfect number is: A number equal to the sum of all its divisors (e.g., 6 = 1 + 2 + 3; 28 = 1 + 2 + 4 + 7 + 14)

The progression from simple definitions to perfect numbers shows how reason thinks out increasingly complex wholes from parts through definition.

The Telescope and Microscope #

These instruments are not themselves the act of seeing, but rather “that by which” we see:

• A telescope enables seeing distant objects (Saturn’s rings)
• A microscope enables seeing small objects (cells)
• Similarly, a definition is “that by which” we understand what something is, not the understanding itself

This parallels the relationship between potentiality and actuality in sense (5) and (6).

Sex and Nature #

Berquist raises a contemporary example: A person born female who identifies as male and seeks a hysterectomy. The newspaper reports this as “he is suing them for refusing to do a hysterectomy on him.”

• The problem: This sentence confuses nature (men do not have uteri) with choice (one’s self-perception)
• This illustrates how failing to distinguish natural from chosen aspects leads to conceptual confusion
• Relates to the multiple senses of ‘in’ - if one conflates senses, one makes similar errors in reasoning

Notable Quotes #

“Every respectable word in philosophy is equivocal by reason.” — Charles De Koninck (cited by Berquist)

This principle underlies the importance of carefully analyzing words like ‘in’ that appear throughout philosophy and theology.

“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet.” — Shakespeare (quoted by Berquist)

Berquist uses this to illustrate that the name (word) is like a place where multiple things can be contained - the name ‘rose’ can refer to the flower, the person, etc. The same name is equivocal, containing multiple meanings.

Questions Addressed #

How can we distinguish different meanings of ‘in’? #

By recognizing that ‘in’ is not univocal but equivocal by reason. All eight senses relate back to the primary sense of spatial location, but each represents a genuinely different mode of containment or relation.

Why is understanding equivocal words important for philosophy? #

Without distinguishing the different senses of a word, we cannot properly understand philosophical arguments or theological doctrines. Conflating senses leads to confusion and invalid reasoning.

How does thinking out correspond to the senses of ‘in’? #

Each sense of ‘in’ has a corresponding way that reason articulates knowledge. Understanding these correspondences shows how reason naturally unfolds knowledge from confusion to distinction, from parts to wholes, from definitions to applications.

What is the relationship between a definition and understanding? #

A definition is that by which (illud quo) we understand what something is. It is not identical to understanding but enables understanding. This relationship parallels the relationship between form and matter (sense 5) and between whole and parts in potentiality (sense 6).

How do premises contain a conclusion? #

The conclusion is in the premises only in potentiality (sense 6), not as an actual part. The reasoning process actualizes what was potential, making explicit what was implicit in the premises.