b) Four Meanings of Being in Aristotle. The Exclusion of the ὃν ὡς ἀληθές in Metaphysics Ε 4
First a general preview of the substantive problem. We have learnt that the leading problem of ancient metaphysics, as formulated by Aristotle, is τί τὸ ὄν. What is inquired into is the ὂν ᾗ ὄν. Now Aristotle repeatedly emphasizes, especially wherever he is introducing a fundamental problem of metaphysics, that τὸ ὃν λέγεται πολλαχώς, i.e. that 'being is said in many ways'. Now πολλαχώς is itself ambiguous. On the one hand it signifies the diverse meanings of being, but it also refers to a diversity within one of these meanings, i.e. within the categories. The ὄν of the κατηγορίαι is itself multiple, such that one can again inquire into a πρώτως ὄν, i.e. a primary being.
Beings as such are addressed in various ways, or, more clearly, we understand being in various ways.12 Aristotle identifies four ways, which do not immediately coincide with the fourfold structure of being given above. The four modes in which we understand that which is, ὄν, and accordingly also that which is not, μὴ ὄν, are as follows.
1. τὸ ὄν κατὰ τὰ σχήματα τῶν κατηγοριῶν (τῆς κατηγορίας) - ὄν καθ᾽ αὐτό, beings as they show themselves in the categories. For example: 'this chalk is white', this chalk, this present thing here: category of the τόδε τι. Being white, i.e. to be of a certain quality: ποιόν. The chalk lies here on the lectern: ποῦ, place.
2. τὸ ὄν κατὰ συμβεβηκός, beings in respect of their contingency, their so-and-so-being, the being of beings which just happen to be such-and-such at a particular time, e.g. being-red, being-white.
3. τὸ ὄν κατὰ δύναμιν καί ἐνέργειαν, beings in respect of their being-possible and being-actual.
4. τὸ ὄν ὡς ἀληθὲς καὶ ψεῦδος, beings in respect of being-true and being-false.
The inquiry into the ὂν ᾗ ὄν must already be clear about the various meanings of the ὄν. Such clarity was originally lacking. Only slowly was this clarity attained, and even Aristotle is content just to factually distinguish these four meanings. No explanation is given as to why just these. and these alone. are distinguished, nor does Aristotle explain the principles for distinguishing them. At this point, what is important for us is that being-true is explicitly identified as one of these four meanings. Now
12