{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026119402985074626, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014179104477611941, 'mean_word_length': 4.907488986784141, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Differentia and the Per Se Accident in Aristotle

When Aristotle distinguishes between definition and demonstration in the Posterior Analytics, he holds that one distinction between them concerns predication. In a demonstration a predicate is shown to belong or not to belong to a subject, while in a definition the definition's elements, the genus and differentia, are not combined through the predicative relation: for example, the genus animal is not predicated of its differentia biped, nor is biped predicated of animal (Post. Ana. II 90b 34—37). This prohibition against predication is also found in the Topics and Metaphysics (Top. VI 144a 31-b3, Met. III 998 b 22—27). Nevertheless, there is considerable evidence that Aristotle also thought of the relationship between the definition's genus and differentia äs predicative in nature. Specifically, he seems to regard the differentia äs a per se accidental predicate of its genus. In this paper I shall defend this Interpretation. I shall proceed by presenting first a brief account of the per se accident; then, in light of this account I shall argue that the differentia is a type of per se accident; finally, I shall take up a discussion of some important questions concerning the prohibition against predication and the differentia äs a per se accident. The Per Se Accident: