Abstract

That the distinction is over-simple becomes apparent when attention is called to a fundamental difficulty attending any view that being is a single property, common to all the things which are. If being is one property among others, then the question must be raised as to the status of those other properties, insofar as they are or have natures of their own, distinct from being. Simply to have or to be a nature, a requirement for any property, is already to be in some sense or other; yet each property must be in whatever sense this is for it, to contrast with the property of being. If the property of being can be contrasted with other properties, then both sides of the contrast must be in a more inclusive sense.