Why should we be doing play equity? Why should we be concerned about it? So let me show you why. This is Diego. He's 18 months old in this picture. I won't tell you, but he's 14 now. He's actually my great nephew. So one of the things that I love about the work that I do is that I can be very close to children and learn from them. This is Diego. He's 18 months old at the time. Full control of Spanish, but just learning English. He is a child who can tell you all about Shakespeare, but maybe cannot really say a few words in English. He entered the whole learning process in his own way by play, by being able to tell you the things that he was doing in one language and then eventually he was able to communicate in another language. And I won't tell you the things he did, because some of them may be very funny and not appropriate. On the left, you have Maja, who comes into the center at our program and sits by the fence in Christ because mom is going home. So what happens is that with the help of the adults in the program and the help with the children in the program, she begins to enter play and be able to sort of separate in a very natural way and begin to feel like they belong. So that's why play equity is so important, so that we give children who are second language learners or children who need extra time to connect with other children the opportunity to be able to do that in a way that is supporting of them. So how do we do that? This looks like most of the children in your programs. Correct? Diverse, different, similar in many different ways. So the way we do it is by making sure that we create a place where they feel like they belong. So what does that look like? What does it look to be in a place that I belong? In a place that I belong, I can turn around and be my authentic self. I don't need to pretend to be somebody else. I can be me, because being me is honored, is respected. I can explore my identity. And what you see here in this slide is many ways to explore skin color. And that is such an important part, because we need to understand that skin color is part of who we are, but we also need to know that the color of our skin is part of our identity and it's beautiful. And yet many messages that we get into the society say that difference. It gives power to certain skin colors instead of the skin colors that we all have. So the ability to be able to every day come into the program and be able to explore in different ways the color of my skin, not just one activity once a month, but every day. And having that conversation that says, I belong here. I can explore my own language. Opportunities for children to speak their own home language, not just English. Yes, they will learn English eventually. But in order for them to get there, they first need to be respected in the language that they speak today. And to be honored by that, I am a fully bilingual person. And I can tell you took a lot of work to get there. So it's not something that comes naturally. So when we respect children's first language, we begin to really see that they are capable of more than we think they are. So giving them that opportunity to express themselves in different languages. Be inspired by beauty. That is such a crucial thing in early childhood programs today. And unfortunately, a lot of the times we don't pay enough attention to this. So what you see in this photograph is actually an exploration of mudcloth. How many of you are familiar with mudcloth? So mudcloth is a really wonderful cloth that is made mostly in Ghana, but there's also made in different countries. And what is really important about it is that it has very special messages for people. So being able to find the people that understand and know about what mudcloth is and inspire children to be able to explore it in different ways, it's a wonderful way to bring beauty into early childhood environments. What we did here is we actually add buttons and feathers for them to play with the color and eventually was put around in the environment in different ways that I'll share with you. So be able to wonder, just wonder. Spend time just wondering about what happens in the world. What happens when a tower of blocks falls to be able to get into the deep inquiry that Michelle was talking about so that children have that opportunity to ask questions, that we promote their curiosity, that we bring them further into what they're capable already to do, and we expand on that so that they can be ready for the 22nd century. Building relationships, but relationships that are interdependent. Relationships where they can count on each other because they know that there's trust. So it's beyond just be all friends. The reality is no, we are not all friends. But children do know how to find those friendships that will be meaningful and they will stay with them for the rest of their life. And I don't know if any of you remember any of your kindergarten friends, I'm still very close to them actually. So those long life friendships and connections. Also a place where you can have your culture represented. So think about your spaces in your classroom like we have a common kitchen area, dramatic play space, symbolic play space where children can actually come in and explore who they are. In this case, this program had a large population of Hispanics and Latino families. So it was set up as a way that represented the culture from that particular community. So you can see the beautiful colors of my country, Mexico and how it was all incorporated for children to have there all the time. And children would come into the program and say, I belong here. This is my house, it looks like my house. So you give them that opportunity to make connections while at the same time you're helping children to begin to learn the authentic part of another culture without getting into the tourist approach that was mentioned, more important than anything. In a place that I belong, I can be joyful. And we're losing joy folks, we need to change that. We need to bring play. We need to let children laugh again. We need to give children that opportunity to go out and just be them and enjoy the moment and every moment of the day, not just coming in and sitting down and having a task that they need to achieve. So we need to restore joy. And I'm on a big, big journey for that. So I hope you, by the end of tonight, you'll join me. All right, just ignore the bottles. Okay, they are aesthetic. Anybody recognize them? They're Patron, Tequila. So we're representing culture, but that's not the culture we want to represent with children. I just happen to absolutely love this photograph. It was in one of the early childhood environments that we worked with. The educator there found them and filled them up with water and I just love them, so I took a photo of them. So yeah, they're very cultural, but you don't want to bring Tequila into an early childhood environment. So aesthetics, how do we create a sense where children can actually belong and be part of a community? So that they can be part of a group of people that they can challenge each other, that they can think with each other, that they can reflect with each other. The first thing to think about in your environments is aesthetics. Let's think about what that looks like. How do we make them beautiful? How do we incorporate things that bring that to them? So the first thing is thinking about the community that you live in. Who are the artists in your community that you can bring in into your program? In this case, it's a whole investigation on clay and we brought in a pottery artist to work with the children. So it was not only learning to use the play, but they're also recognizing that there's all this artistic value in the community that I live in. And that promoted a lot of critical thinking for the children. Art is part of the human experience. I don't see how else you can get to the core of who we are as humans, except through the arts. When we can engage children in powerful learning about art, it is we get touching their heart, we're touching their mind. So that would be the one important thing. Art and design, do we know the elements of art? Do we use them as we design our environments? Do we know about color and how color affects children's emotions? So in this case, what you see is a lot of different tiles from around the world. In this case, many from Talavera from Mexico and others from Morocco, because again, you're bringing in the global perspective. So one of the beautiful ways to bring in culture is through the arts. Culture can be seen when we are actually learning the letters. We don't need to do a ditto sheet for children to explore the letters. As a matter of fact, the more they work with the numbers and the letters, the more that they will learn them. So in this case, a combination of the beautiful tree cookies with the letters on them. And we use letters in different languages as well. And the mudcloth, it just made it very inviting for the children to engage with them. And they spend a lot of time with them. Creativity, how do we promote creativity? Music is one of the other ways, the visual arts. The more we do visual arts, the more children will learn about them. So right here what you see is actually a space that was created for music, in this case exploration of flutes. So we use bamboo for the children to use the loose parts to recreate their own flutes as they wanted. We brought in flutes from around the world, but we also brought in books that would make the connection for them. That's another way that you can integrate literacy, but also think about a space like that. You walk in there and you say, oh, I have one of those at home. So you begin to recognize your identity. You begin to see yourself in the space and the environment. Another way that we get to really create equity is through being authentic. So what does that mean? What does authentic mean? It means you can be yourself, children can be themselves, but it also means that whatever you put in the environment is truly authentic. It is not something that you bought out of store to represent a particular culture. It is something that you have actually talked to people in that culture that tell you, yes, this is the way that we do it in my country. But you have taken the time to research it. Even particularly if you don't belong to that culture, always take the time to learn from others, from people in your community, inviting them to let you learn more about who they are. In this case, what you see is a Korean table. Again, remember the Mexican table in one of the early childhood environments? This is another environment. It was Korean because the community was, there were a lot of children that were from Korea. So we invited a friend of ours to actually set it up for us so that we made sure, and it was such a learning experience because one of the things that happened is that we wanted a little stool so that we could put the trays just for decoration. Here we are thinking decoration. And our friend came in and she was so offended because she said we never put food in a stool that people step on. And we went, oh my gosh, those little subtle things that can break that connection. That is why it's so important to really learn from your community, to learn from the people.  Understanding values, understanding history, and understanding traditions. In this photo what you see is a series of tops. How many of you played tops when you were little? Okay, I'm Jewish, so we played cradle. Huge tradition in my family. So again, instead of doing Hanukkah as a celebration of the holiday, one of the ways that you can do it is talk about different traditions that families have. In Michelle's Center of Gravity, they do the Festival of Lights, which is gorgeous because if you think about it, which holiday has lights? Almost all of them, almost all of them. So it's making that connection to children's traditions, to children's history and to children's languages as well and the values. Language, again, supporting children's identities and languages. We have these blocks in every language you can imagine. These are in Swahili. And we put them in the sandbox with Jurassic Sand just because we thought another place where sensory can happen, where children can enjoy it and they're playing again with language. So recognizing that the symbol, the A, may be a different symbol in a different language. So they're making connections that communication happens in different ways, not just in English. So it is also learning to make those global connections that they're gonna need in the 22nd century because we're gonna be communicating around. And even if you don't speak the language, at least you need to know that there's a different language that people speak. Inclusion, make sure that every child in that program can function and feel like they belong. Children with special needs. This is Ricky. And Ricky has cerebral palsy. Ricky's a persona doll. So a persona doll is another way that you can bring in culture, you can bring in disabilities or diverse abilities, you can bring in the presence of children who may not be already represented in the classroom. So in this case, Ricky was very much loved and was carried around. And the children play alongside with Ricky. You don't play with Ricky, but Ricky plays with you. So it's not a doll, it's a real child in the classroom. So here he is working with the Moroccan tiles. Loose parts are dynamics. And I haven't started talking about loose parts. But in order to create an environment that is really, really open to belonging, you need to have a dynamic environment. You need to be flexible. You need to allow for things to happen. You need to know that time needs to be open.  That they have challenges in the outdoors that they can actually confront. Different heights that they can climb on. Culture is dynamic, culture changes every day. That's why loose parts is so incredible when it comes to supporting culture, because they're flexible. The children give the culture to the loose part instead of the other way around.  So that is authentic representation of the food they eat, which goes way beyond the plastic food that we have out there. Or the little child that comes over and says, my baby pooped. And yeah, your baby pooped. No, no, no, my baby really pooped. And you take the towel that she had wrapped around the baby and all these rocks come out. So again, symbolic representation. That allows them to be who they are. It's very dynamic. What is happening? There we go. So it also allows them to support their original thoughts and ideas. In this case, we had that drought in California and the children were really concerned about the water. So what they started doing is they started actually creating Folsom Lake and recreating it in their thinking. So by using the loose parts, you were giving them that opportunity to do that. Adaptable, being able to take materials that children can use in different ways. It is also connecting them to their community. So this is a representation of the McBean factory in Lincoln, California where they do a lot of ceramics. So the children have families in the program that actually work there. So bringing in things that they could use to represent their community was also another important way for them to feel like they belonged. Praxis, using theory to change your practices. Or connecting theory to your practices. Also Praxis happens when you learn about the children, you learn their interests and you support them in the work that they're doing by the materials that you add. So here we have Maya, making posole. So she's taking part of her culture. The teachers know the culture and they give her the opportunity to create what they're wanting to represent. So the teachers understand the importance of giving children the symbolic opportunities to represent their thinking. That's how theory gets connected into the practices that you do. Theory again, how do we use the theories? This is an investigation of homes. How do we leave? A child asked, how do people in different parts of the world live? Do they live in buildings like we do? Do they live in the homes when they're in the suburbs? So it was incorporated into everything. I gotta tell you guys, this is a challenge. Where are you gonna find so many different homes? Bird homes, little bird houses. That's a little trick. Observe, listen to them. Listen to what they're saying. Listen while they are discussing each other. Are they noticing their eyes? Are they noticing their skin color? And then provide them with opportunities to continue to explore them. These are identity dolls so that children can actually change the hair and put hair in different ways. And we've seen some wonderful things for children who have darker skin may put a blonde hair and they said, oh, I don't know if I like that. I like mine better. So it allows for that conversation but it also validates who they are as well. Given the opportunity to explore materials openly in any way that they want, this is part of the Festival of Life. And here we see building with actually their candle holders and he's building them up. So again, playing with the light that was a lot of LED lights going on. So he had that opportunity to do that and combine them. So this is what Michelle was talking about equity which is another thing that if you're thinking about your environments, of course you have to consider equity. Are the environments making sure that every child has access to everything but not just because we give them to them but because we're really recognizing individual children. We know who they are. We know the language they speak. We know their history and we know their values. That's when equity really comes into play. So looking at the children's strengths, what are their strengths? And what you see here is actually investigation for children who are blind. So the letters that you see are corrugated cardboard. So it is helping them go beyond just braille to actually feel the actual letters. And this is in a writing area. So think about how can I add things into my environment that will support every child ability and every child's strengths. Again, their identity, their uniqueness.  When in reality what he's doing is trying to figure out what he feels like to have a bandage around their bodies. Because somebody had broken a leg and he wanted to know more about it. Abilities, do we challenge them? Do we take children to the point where they feel that they can move to the next level? So challenging opportunities like in this case they were trying to stop a ball from rolling. So they came up with a solution. They added another board at the end. Nobody told them to that but the opportunity was there because the materials were there. The loose parts were readily available for them to do that and they had teachers that could stop and think about it and help them. Do we have access? Where we give them the opportunity to reach their full potential. Where they can make mistakes and correct them in play. I think we are asking children to be so perfect in everything they do and to meet every single standard that they are not knowing how to make a mistake and they crumble when they make one. So it is an important thing for them to have as well. Critical reflection, don't you love this? This is another one of the setups for music but in this case it was an exploration of bells and symbols. So planning thoughtful experiences for young children. Intentionality. This is a children's circle nursery school and team Craig hides rocks all over the yard and the children know that they can take two rocks to go home every week but then they have to bury the other ones they find so that the other children can have them and at the end of the year they get a big rock that they take with them. So being really intentional about the way you set up the environment and what you provide young children. Evaluating our own culture. Find spaces for your own culture to be represented. This is my grandma and grandpa and me. That little baby is me. So, and it was me trying to figure out my, the part of Jewishness that I have. So the story there is the giving quilt by Patricia Polacco and my grandmother made not quilts but made table cloths for all of the granddaughters. So they were used in many different ways from the table to when you had a new baby. So very similar to the giving quilt. So find your culture in this process as well because you belong there as much as the children do. And the more you respect your culture the more you will be able to be there. Exploring possibilities of other cultures as well that support the children. In this case Diego was very sad because children kept making fun of him because he was Mexican. They kept asking him if he wore a Mexican sombrero. So the teachers were very sensitive to allow him to bring his grandfather, it is a true story, grandfather that is an artist in Mexico and share the mural that he had just completed. And what the teachers did to support him is brought in tiles so that they could then represent that mural. So you can see part of the mural which was dedicated to women. And that made Diego feel like yay, they care for me now, I belong. I can share who I am. Inform decision making. Think about everything that gets in the way of the decisions that you make or support what you make. Think about history, think about creativity. Think about your biases. Think about responsibility. And this was gathered by our advisory as we were writing the last book. Thank you to Michelle who was always challenging our thinking and after. How would you do white ladies write a book about culture? And it was a great question. So she challenged you today to ask those questions. That was the best question anybody could have asked us. And that led us to get a wonderful group of people together to really challenge our thinking and to share with us how to do what we were doing in the book that we just published. Because it is a challenge. So this is where the loose parts come in. This is Genaro and Ian. And they're actually looking at mirrors that were set up in the environment and they're comparing how many teeth they have. So their hands is going into their mouth, they're laughing at each other, they're counting, you have three, you have four. And in a very wonderful way, they start looking at their eyes, your eyes are black, your eyes are green, your eyes are blue. And they're beginning to find similarities and differences, which is again a wonderful way for them to be connecting. It also allows them to be aware of their own capabilities. And what you're seeing here is actually building towers from around the world. So it started with a simple exploration of a tower in their community and then questions started coming up and more photographs were brought in of towers, the Eiffel Tower, different towers in different countries. So family started bringing in photographs and it just kept growing and growing and the children continue to build. So it's not only about them, it's also about the connections that they're gonna make. I love this photo. This is Marlisa. They were having a new baby in their family and we provided the children, I think there were like three new babies in this program. We gave the children a lot of fabric and they were making all these different revulsals to carry their babies or we brought fabrics from different parts of the country and we gave them photos of how people carry their babies and this is what started happening. So it's building this wonderful empathy and the caring and the nurturing that children need. So yeah, Marlisa is an amazing child. Developed an imaginative play. These wonderful glass beads can become bubbles. They can become food. They can become, I've seen them be everything you can imagine from the red ones are tomatoes and the green ones are spinach. So now you know that the children know they're vegetables. And it also, what is wonderful about loose parts is it allows children to really learn to respect each other because there's no longer any competition. Now there's equity. Children work with each other, they challenge each other and I gotta tell you, every program that we have worked at the behavioral issues have ended or diminished. And you know what's more amazing too? We did a toddler program. The toddlers were scoring higher than the toddler DRDPs. So they had to bring in the preschool DRDP. So that tells you that something here is working because they belong, they're in charge, anxiety has disappeared, that's about equity. It also helps them understand about equality and equity. When children argue, they learn from each other and never be afraid of allowing children to have an argument because it's through those arguments that they will actually engage in deeper thinking. That's what John Piaget, the theories talked about. And the confidence that comes from playing with loose parts. You know, there's no reason why children shouldn't have tools. Real tools. Here you have a girl drilling with adult supervision. So again, the importance of bringing in real tools for children. Washing dolls so that they see that the color of their skin does not change. Collaboration and democracy. This is like a center of gravity. They're grinding spices and he went into their spaghetti. So I invite you to join us in the journey of play equity. I invite you to start thinking about loose parts. Start in the corner. Like Bev Boss, my mentor used to say, one corner, change something in your environment. And maybe that's something that we can talk about for your question and answers. Thank you.


Is that a casual matter for you? You mentioned the S word. Is it just casual? What? Sexual relationships. What relationships? No, I've read about them. There's awkwardness, there's avoidance, overcompensation, resistance, stress, a need for approval from the audience and pacifying gestures to calm himself down. If you're seeing this behavior in a person in this position and with this background, even if the answers were nondescript or lacking in detail, most people would reasonably say yes or no or I don't want to talk about it. I'm not comfortable talking about it. Then you're probably seeing evidence that something much more powerful is being hidden about the same subject. Unwilling to answer about surface level stuff means something is very much hidden about the deeper stuff in the same subject matter.


Chapter 1 of On Interpretation What interpretation is, which is here discussed, of the symbols or exponents of the passions by the voice, of nouns and verbs?  Next, what our negation, affirmation, enunciation, and a sentence? Those things, therefore, which are in the voice are symbols of the passions of the soul, and, when written, are symbols of the passions in the voice, and, as there are not the same letters among all men, so neither have all the same voices. Yet those passions of the soul, of which these are primarily the signs, are the same among all, the things also, of which these are the similitudes, are the same. Note these latter, we have spoken in the treatise, quote, of the soul, close quote, for they are parts belonging to another discussion. But as in the soul, there is sometimes a conception, without truth or falsehood, and, at another time, it is such as necessarily to have one of these inherent in it. So also is it with the voice. For falsehood and truth are involved in composition and division. Hence therefore, end verbs of themselves resemble conception, without composition and division, as quotes man, or quotes white, when something is not added. For as yet, it is neither true nor false, an instance of which is that the word, quotes, goat's tag, signifies something indeed, but not yet anything true or false, unless to be, or not to be, is added, either simply or according to time. Chapter 2 of the noun and its case A noun, therefore, is a sound significant, by compact, without time, of which no part is separately significant. Thus in the noun, quotes, fair steed, the, quotes, steed, signifies nothing by itself, as it does in the sentence, quote, fair steed, close quote. Neither does it happen with simple nouns, as it does with composite, for in the former, there is by no means the part significant, but in the latter, a part would be, yet signifies nothing separately, as in the word, quote, pirate boat, close quote, the, quotes, boat, signifies nothing by itself, but it is according to compact, because naturally there is no noun. But when it becomes a symbol, since illiterate sounds also signify something, as the sounds of beasts, of which there is no noun, quote, not man, close quote, however, is not a noun, neither is a name instituted by which we ought to call it, since it is neither a sentence nor a negation, but let it be an indefinite noun, because it exists in respect of everything alike, both of that which is, and of that which is not. Quote of filliness, close quote, indeed, or, quote, to filliness, close quote, and such like words are not nouns, but cases of a noun. But the definition of it that is, of the case is the same as to other things, with the definition of a noun, but it differs in that, with the verb, quotes, is, or, quotes, was, or, quote, will be, close quote, it does not signify what is true or false, but the noun always signifies this, as, quote, filliness is, close quote, or, quote, is not, close quote, for as yet, this neither signifies what is true nor what is false. Chapter 3 of the verb, its case, and of those called verbs, generally. A verb is that which, besides something else, signifies time, of which no part is separately significant, and it is always indicative of those things which are asserted of something else, but I say that it signifies time, besides something else, as for instance, quotes, health, is a noun, but, quote, is well, close quote, is a verb, for it signifies, besides being well, that such is the case now. It is always also significant of things asserted of something else, as of those things which are predicated of a subject, or which are in a subject, nevertheless I do not call, quote, is not well, close quote, and, quote, is not ill, close quote, verbs, for indeed they signify time, besides something else, and are always significant of something, yet a name is not given to this difference, let either be there for an indefinite verb, because it is similarly inherent, both in whatever does, and does not exist. So also, quote, was well, close quote, or, quote, will be well, close quote, are not verbs, but they are cases of a verb, and differ from a verb, because the latter, besides something else, signifies present time, but the others, that which is about the present time. Verbs therefore, so called, by themselves are nouns, and have a certain signification, for the speaker establishes the conception, and the hear acquiesces, but they do not yet signify whether a thing, quotes, is, or, quote, is not, close quote, for neither is, quote, to be, close quote, or, quote, not to be, close quote, a sign of a thing, nor, if you should say merely, quotes being, for that is nothing, they signify, however, besides something else, a certain composition, which, without the composing members, it is impossible to understand. Chapter 4 of the sentence A sentence is voice, significant by compact, of which any part separately possesses signification, as indeed a word, yet not as affirmation, or negation. Now I say, for example, quotes, man, is significant, but does not imply that it, quotes, is, or, quote, is not, close quote. It will, however, be affirmation, or negation, if anything be added to it. Unsyllable in the word, quotes, human, is not, however, significant, neither the, quotes, owse, in, quotes, mouse, but it is now merely sound. Still in compound words, a part is significant, but not by itself, as we have observed. Now every sentence is significant, not as an instrument, but as we have said, by compact. Well not every sentence is annunciative, but that in which truth or falsehood is inherent, which things do not exist in all sentences, as prayer is a sentence, but it is neither true nor false. Let therefore the other sentences be dismissed, their consideration belongs more properly to rhetoric or poetry, but the annunciative sentence to our present theory. Chapter 5 of Annunciation One first annunciative sentence is affirmation, afterwards negation, and all the rest are one by conjunction. It is necessary, however, that every annunciative sentence should be from a verb, or from the case of a verb, for the definition of, quotes, man, unless, quotes, is, or, quotes, was, or, quote, will be, or something of this kind be added, is not yet an annunciative sentence. Why indeed is the sentence, quote, a terrestrial biped animal, one thing, and not many things? For it will not be one, because it is consecutively pronounced. This however belongs to another discussion. One annunciative sentence, moreover, is either that which signifies one thing, or which is one by conjunction, and many such sentences are either those which signify many things, and not one thing, or which are without conjunction. Let therefore a noun, or a verb, be only a word, since we cannot say that he annunciates who thus expresses anything by his voice, whether he is interrogated by anyone or not, but that he speaks from deliberate intention. Now of these annunciations, one is simple, for instance, something of something, or from something, but another is composed of these, as a certain sentence which is already a composite. Simple annunciation, then, is voice-significant about something being inherent, or non-inherent, according as times are divided. Affirmation is the annunciation of something concerning something, but negation is the annunciation of something from something. Since however a man may annunciate what is inherent as though it were not, and what is not as though it were, that which is as if it were, and that which is not as if it were not, and in like manner, about times external to the present, it is possible that whatever anyone affirms may be denied, and that whatever anyone denies may be affirmed. Hence it is evident that to every affirmation there is an opposite negation, and to every negation an opposite affirmation. Let this be contradiction, affirmation and negation being opposites, but I call that opposite which is of the same respecting the same, not equivocally, in such other particulars of the kind as we have concluded against Sophistical importunities. Of things, since some are universal, but others singular, and by universal I mean whatever may naturally be predicated of many things, but by singular that which may not, as quotes, man is universal, but quotes callous, singular, it is necessary to annunciate that something is or is not inherent at one time, in and universal, at another in a singular thing. Now if anyone universally annunciates of an universal that something is or is not inherent, these annunciations will be contrary. I mean universally annunciates of an universal as that, quote, every man is white, close quote, quote, no man is white, close quote. When on the other hand he annunciates of universals, not universally, these are not contraries, though the things signified may sometimes be contrary. But I mean by not universally annunciating of universals, as that, quote, man is white, close quote, quote, man is not white, close quote. For man, being universal, is not employed as an universal in the annunciation, since the word, quotes, every, does not signify the universal, but shows that the subject is universally taken. Now to predicate universally of what is universally predicated is not true. For no affirmation will be true in which the universal is predicated of an universal predicate. As for instance, quote, every man, close quote, is, quote, every animal, close quote. Wherefore, I say affirmation is opposed to negation, contradictorily. The affirmation which signifies universal to that which is not universal, as, quote, every man is white, close quote, quote, not, every man is white, close quote, quote, no man is white, close quote, quote, some man is white, close quote, but, contraryly, is between universal affirmative and universal negative, as, quote, every man is white, Close quote, quote, no man is white, close quote, quote, every man is just, close quote, quote, no man is just, close quote, wherefore it is impossible that these should at one and the same time be true. But the opposites to these may sometimes possibly be co-verified about the same thing, as that, quote, not every man is white, close quote, and, quote, some man is white, close quote. Of such contradictions, then, of universals, as are universally made, one must necessarily be true or false, and also such as are of singulars, as, quote, Socrates is white, close quote, quote, Socrates is not white, close quote, but of such contradictions, as are indeed of universals, yet are not universally made, one is not always true, but the other false. For at one and the same time, we may truly say that, quote, man is white, close quote, and that, quote, man is not white, close quote, and, quote, man is handsome, close quote, and, quote, man is not handsome, close quote, for, if he is deformed, he is not handsome, and if anything is becoming to be, it is not. This however, may at once appear absurd, because the assertion, quote, man is not white, close quote, seems at the same time to signify the same thing as, quote, no man is white, close quote, but it neither necessarily signifies the same thing, nor at the same time. But withstanding, it is evident, that of one affirmation, there is one negation, for it is necessary that the negation should deny the same thing, which the affirmation affirmed, and also from the same, i.e., either from some singular or some universal, universally or not universally. I say, for instance, that, quote, Socrates is white, close quote, quote, Socrates is not white, close quote, if, however, there is something else from the same thing, or the same thing from something else, that enunciation will not be opposite, but different from it, to the one, quote, every man is white, close quote, the other is opposed, quote, not every man is white, close quote, and to the one, quote, a certain man is white, close quote, the other, quote, no man is white, close quote, and to the one, quote, man is white, close quote, the other, quote, man is not white, close quote, that there is then one affirmation, contradictorily opposed to one negation, and what these are, has been shown. Also that there are other contraries, and what they are, and that not every contradiction is true or false, and why, and when it is true or false. Chapter 8 of opposition when there is not one affirmation, nor one negation. The affirmation and negation are one, which indicate one thing of one, either of and universal, being taken universally, or in like manner, if it is not, as, quote, every man is white, quote, not every man is white, close quote, man is white, close quote, man is not white, quote. no man is white, close quote, some man is white, close quote, if not which is white signifies one thing, but if one name be given to two things from which one thing does not arise, there is not one affirmation, nor one negation, as if anyone gave the name, quotes, garment, to a, quotes, horse, and to, quote, a man, close quote, that, quote, the garment is white, close quote, this will not be one affirmation, nor one negation, since it in no respect differs from saying, quotes, man, and, quotes, horse, are, quotes, white, and this is equivalent to, quote, man is white, close quote, and, quote, horses white, close quote. If therefore, these signify many things, and are many, it is evident that the first enunciation either signifies many things or nothing, for, quote, some man is not a horse, close quote, wherefore, neither in these is it necessary that one should be a true, but the other a false contradiction. Chapter 9 of Opposition in Contingent Futures In those things which are, and have been, the affirmation and negation must of necessity be true or false. In universals, as universals, always one true, but the other false, and also in singulars, as we have shown. But in the case of universals, not universally enunciated, there is no such necessity, and concerning these, we have also spoken. But as to singulars and this is not the case. For if every affirmation or negation be true or false, it is also necessary that everything should exist, or should not exist. For if one man says that a thing will be, but another denies the same, one of them must evidently of necessity speak truth. If every affirmation or negation be true or false, for both will not subsist in such things at one and the same time. Thus, if it is true to say that, quote, a thing is white, close quote, or that, quote, it is not white, close quote, it must of necessity be, quote, white, or not, quote, white. And if it is white or not white, it was true to affirm or to deny it. Also, if it is not, it is falsely said to be, and if it is falsely said to be, it is not, so that it is necessary that either the affirmation or the negation should be true or false. Indeed, there is nothing which either is, or is generated fortuitously, nor casually, nor will be, or not be, but all things are from necessity, and not casually. For either he who affirms speaks truth, or he who denies, for in like manner it might either have been or not have been. For that which subsists casually, neither does nor will subsist, more in this way than in that. Moreover, if a thing is now, quote, white, it was true to say before that it will be, quote, white, so that it was always true to say, of anything generated, that it either is, or that it will be. But if it was always true to say that it is, or will be, it is impossible that this is not, nor should be, and whatever must of necessity be, it is impossible that it should not have been generated, and what it is impossible should not have been generated, must of necessity have been generated. Wherefore, all things that will be, it is necessary should be generated, and hence there will be nothing casual, nor fortuitous, for if it were fortuitous, it would not be of necessity. Nor is it possible to say that neither of them is true, as that it will neither be, nor will not be. For in the first place, the affirmation being false, the negation will not be true, and this being false, it results that the affirmation is not true. And besides, if it were true to say that a thing is at the same time, quote, white, and, quote, great, both must of necessity be, but if it shall be tomorrow, it must necessarily be tomorrow. And if it will neither be, nor will not be tomorrow, it will not be a casual thing, for example, a naval engagement, for it would be requisite that the engagement should neither occur nor not occur. These and similar absurdities then will happen, if of every affirmation and negation, whether in respect of universals enunciated universally, or of singulars, it is necessary that one of the opposites be true, and the other false, but that nothing happens casually in those things which subsist, but that all are, and are generated of necessity, so that it will neither be necessary to deliberate, nor to trouble ourselves, as if we shall do this thing. Something definite will occur. But, if we do not, it will not occur. For there is nothing to prevent a person, for ten thousand years, asserting this will happen, and another person denying it, so that of necessity it will have been then true to assert either of them, and it makes no difference whether any persons have uttered a contradiction or not, for it is evident that the things are so, although the one should not have affirmed anything, or the other have denied it, since it is not, because it has been affirmed or denied, that therefore a thing will, or will not be. Neither will it be more so, for ten thousand years, than for any time whatever. Hence, if a thing so subsisted in every time, that one of these is truly asserted of it, it was necessary that this should take place, and each thing generated always so subsisted, as to have been generated from necessity, for when anyone truly said that it will be, it was not possible not to have been generated, and of that which is generated, it was always true to say, that it will be. But, if these things are impossible, for we see that there is a beginning of future things, both from our deliberation and practice, and briefly in things which do not always energize, there is equally a power of being, and of not being, in which both to be and not to be occurs, as well as to have been generated, and not to have been generated, and indeed, we have many things which evidently subsist in this manner. For example, it is possible for this garment to have been cut in pieces, and it may not be cut in pieces, but be worn out beforehand. So also it is possible that it may not be cut in pieces, for it would not have been worn out before, unless it had been possible, that it might not be cut in pieces, and so also in respect of other productions, which are spoken of according to a power of this kind. Then it is evident that all things neither are nor are generated of necessity, but that something subsists casually, and that their affirmation is not more true than their negation, and that there are others in which one of these subsists more frequently, and for the most part, yet so that either might possibly have occurred, but the other not. Wherefore, being must of necessity be when it is, and not being, not be, when it is not. But it is not necessary that every being should be, nor that non-being should not be, since it is not the same thing for every being to be from necessity, when it is, and simply to be from necessity, and in like manner, as to non-being. There is the same reasoning also in the case of contradiction. To be or not to be is necessary for everything, also that it shall, or shall not be. Yet it is not requisite to speak of each separately, but I say, for instance, that it is necessary for a naval action to occur or not occur tomorrow. Yet it is not necessary that there should be a naval action tomorrow, nor that there should not be. It is necessary, however, that it should either be or not be. Wherefore, since assertions and things are similarly true, it is evident that things which so subsist, as that whatever have happened, the contraries also were possible. It is necessary that contradiction should subsist in the same manner, which happens to those things which are not always, or which not always are not. For of these, one part of the contradiction must necessarily be true or false, not indeed this or that, but just as it may happen, and one must be the rather true, yet not already true nor false, so that it is evidently not necessary that of every affirmation and negation of opposites one should be true, but the other false, for it does not happen in the same manner with things which are not, but which either may or may not be, as with things which are, but it happens as we have said. Chapter 10 of Opposition with the Addition of the Copula Since affirmation signifies something of something, and this is either a noun or anonymous, i.e. indefinite, but what is in affirmation must be one and of one thing, all affirmation and negation will be either from a noun and a verb, or from an indefinite noun and verb. But what a noun is, and what the anonymous has been shown before, for I do not reckon, quote, not man, close quote, a noun, but an indefinite noun, for an indefinite noun signifies, in a certain respect, one thing, just as quote is not well, close quote, is not a verb, but an indefinite verb. Still, without a verb, there is neither an affirmation nor negation, for quotes is, or quote will be, close quote, or quotes was, or quote is going to be, close quote, and so forth are verbs, from what has been already laid down, since in addition to something else they signify time. Hence the first affirmation and negation will be, quote man is, close quote, quote man is not, close quote, afterwards, quote non man is, close quote, quote non man is not, close quote, again, quote every man is, close quote, quote every man is not, close quote, quote every non man is, close quote, quote every non man is not, close quote, quote, and the same reasoning holds in times beyond the present. But when quote is, is additionally predicated as the third thing, then the oppositions are enunciated doubly. I say for instance, quote a man is just close quote. Here the word quote is, I say is placed as a third thing, whether noun or verb, in the affirmation, so that on this account there will be four, of which two will subsist with respect to affirmation and negation, according to the order of consequence, as privations, but two will not. But I say that the word quote is will be added to quote's just, or to quote not just close quote, so that also negation is added, wherefore there will be four. We shall understand, however, what is said from the underwritten examples, quote a man is just close quote, the negation of this is quote a man is not just close quote, quote he is not a just man close quote, the negation of this is quote he is not not a just man close quote, for here the word quote is, and quote is not close quote, will be added to the quote's just, and the quote not just close quote, wherefore these things, as we have shown in the analytics, are thus arranged. The same thing will happen if the affirmation be of a noun taken universally, as for instance, quote every man is just close quote, of this the negation is quote not every man is just close quote, quote every man is not just close quote. Except that it does not similarly happen that those which are diametrically opposed are co-verified. Sometimes, however, this does happen, these two, therefore, are opposed to each other, but the other two are opposed in respect to quote's non-man, as to a certain added subject, as quote non-man is just close quote, quote non-man is just close quote, quote non-man is not just close quote, quote the non-just is not man close quote, quote the not non-just is not man close quote. There are not, however, more oppositions than these, but these without those will be by themselves, as using the noun quotes non-man. In those, however, wherein quotes is, is not adapted as in quote he enjoys health, close quote, and quote he walks, close quote. Here it produces the same when thus placed, as if quotes is were added as quote every man enjoys health, close quote, quote every man does not enjoy health, close quote, quote every non-man enjoys health, close quote, quote every non-man does not enjoy health, close quote, for it must not be said, quote not every man, close quote, but the negation, quotes not, must be added to quotes man, for quotes every does not signify universal, but that the thing is taken universally. This is, however, evident from quote a man enjoys health, close quote, quote a man does not enjoy health, close quote, quote non-man is well, close quote, quote non-man is not well, close quote. These differ from those, in not being universally taken, hence quotes every or quote no one, close quote, signifies nothing else, then that affirmation or negation is of a noun universally assumed, wherefore it is necessary to add other things of the same kind. But because the contrary negation to this, quote every animal is just, close quote, is that which signifies that quote no animal is just, close quote, it is evident that these will never be either true at the same time, nor in respect to the same subject, but the opposites to these will sometimes be so, as quote not every animal is just, close quote, and quote some animal is just, close quote, but these follow the one, quote no man is just, close quote, follows, quote every man is not just, close quote, but the opposite, some man is just, close quote, follows, quote not every man is not just, close quote, for it is necessary that some man should be just. In the case also of Singulars, it is evident that if a man being questioned denies truly, he asserts also truly, as, quote is Socrates wise, no, close quote, Socrates therefore is not a wise man, but in the case of universals, what is similarly asserted is not true, but the negation is true, as, quote is every man wise, no, close quote, every man therefore is not wise, for this is false, but this, quote not every man then is wise, close quote, is true, and this is opposite, but that is contrary. Opposites however, as to indefinite nouns and verbs as, quote non man, close quote, and quote non just, close quote, may seem to be negations without a noun and verb, but they are not so, for the negation must always of necessity be either true or false, but he who says, quotes non man, does not speak more truly or falsely, but rather less than he who says, quotes man, except something be added. Still the assertion, quote every non man is just, close quote, does not signify the same as anyone of those propositions, nor the opposite to this, namely, quote not every non man is just, close quote, but the assertion, quote everyone not just is not a man, close quote, means the same with, quote no one is just, who is not a man, close quote. Nouns and verbs indeed, when transposed, have the same signification as, quote he is a white man, close quote, quote he is a man white, close quote, for unless it be so, there will be many negations of the same thing, but it has been shown that there is one of one, of this, quote he is a white man, close quote, there is the negation, quote he is not a white man, close quote, and of the other, quote he is a man white, close quote, except this be the same with, quote he is a white man, close quote, the negation will either be, quote he is not, not a man white, close quote, or, quote he is not a man white, close quote, but the one is a negation of this, quote he is not a man white, close quote, and the other of this, quote he is a white man, close quote, so that there will be two negations of one affirmation, where for it is evident that when a noun and verb are transposed, the same affirmation and negation result. End of chapter 10. Chapter 11 of On Interpretation. This is a LibriVox recording. All LibriVox recordings are in the public domain. For more information or to volunteer, please visit LibriVox.org. Recording by Jeffrey Edwards. On Interpretation by Aristotle, translated by Octavius Freer Owen. Chapter 11 of The Composition and Division of Propositions. To affirm and deny one thing of many, or many of one, is not one affirmation, nor one negation, except that is some one thing which is manifested from the many. I mean by one, not if one name be given too many things, nor if one thing result from them as, quotes, man, is perhaps, quotes, animal, and, quotes, biped, and, quotes, mild. Yet one thing results from these, but from, quotes, white, and, quotes, man, and, quote, to walk, close quote, one thing does not result, so that neither if a person affirm one certain thing of these is it one affirmation, but there is one articulate sound indeed, yet many affirmations, nor if you affirmed these things of one would there be one affirmation, but in like manner many. If then, dialectic interrogation be the seeking of an answer, either of a proposition, or of either part of a contradiction, but a proposition is a part of one contradiction, there would not be one answer to these, for neither is there one interrogation, not even if it be true. We have, however, spoken of these in the topics. At the same time it is evident that what is it is not a dialectic interrogation, for a choice should be given from the interrogation to enunciate this or that part of the contradiction, but the interrogator must besides define whether this particular thing or not this be a man. As, however, there are some things predicated as composites, so that there is one whole predicable of those which are predicated separately, but others are not so, what is the difference? For in respect of, quotes, man, we may truly and separately predicate, quotes animal, and quotes biped, and these as one thing, also quotes man, and quotes white, and these as one thing, but not if he is, quote, a shoemaker, close quote, and quote, a good man, close quote, is he therefore also a good shoemaker? For if, because each of these is true, both conjointly should be of necessity true, many absurdities would follow, for, quotes man, and quotes white, are truly predicated of a man, so that the whole together may be, again if the thing, quote, is white, close quote, the whole conjointly, quote, is white, close quote, where for it will be, quote, a man white, white, close quote, even to infinity, again, quote, a musician, white walking, close quote, and these frequently involved to infinity. Once more, if, quotes, socrates, is, quotes, socrates, and, quotes, man, quotes, socrates, is also, quote, socrates, man, close quote, and, if he is, quotes, man, and, quotes, biped, he is also, quote, man, biped, close quote, where for it is evident, if a man says conjunctions are simply produced, the result will be that he will utter many absurdities. Let us now show how they are to be placed. Of things predicated, and of those of which it happens to be predicated, whatever are accidentally enunciated, either in respect of the same, or the one of the other, these will not be one, as, quote, man is white, close quote, and, quote, a musician, close quote, but, quotes, whiteness, and, quotes, music, are not one thing, for both are accidents to the same thing. Neither if it be true to call what is white musical, yet at the same time will, quotes, musical, quotes, white, be one thing, for what is, quotes, white, is, quotes, musical, per accidents, so that, quote, white musical, close quote, will not be one thing, where for, neither is a man said to be, quote, a good shoemaker, close quote, singly, but also, quote, a biped animal, close quote, because these are not predicated of him per accidents. Moreover, neither are such things which are inherent in another to be added, hence, neither is, quotes, whiteness, to be predicated repeatedly, nor is, quote, a man, close quote, quote, a man animal, close quote, nor a man, quotes, biped, since, both animal and biped are inherent in man. Still, it is true to assert it singly of someone, as that, quote, a certain man is a man, close quote, or that, quote, a certain white man is a white man, close quote, but this is not the case always, but when some opposition is in the adjunct, which a contradiction follows, it is not true, but false, as to call a dead man a man, but when such is not inherent, it is true, or when something contradictory is inherent, it is always not true, but when it is not inherent, it is not always true, as, quote, Homer is something, quote, a poet, close quote, for instance, quotes is, he therefore, or quotes is, he not, for quotes is, is predicated of Homer accidentally, since quotes is, is predicated of Homer because he is a poet, but not per se, or essentially, therefore, in whatever categories, contrariety is not inherent, if definitions are asserted instead of nouns, and are essentially predicated, and not accidentally, of these a particular thing may be truly and singly asserted, but non-being, because it is a matter of opinion, cannot truly be called a certain thing, for the opinion of it is, not that it is, but that it is not. Chapter 12 On modal proposition These things, then, being determined, let us consider how the affirmations and negations of the possible and impossible to be subsist with reference to each other, also of the contingent and the non-contingent, and of the impossible and necessary, since this has some doubtful points, for if among the complex, those contradictions are mutually opposed, which are arranged according to the verb, quote to be, close quote, and quote not to be, close quote, as for instance, the negation, quote to be a man, close quote, is, quote not to be a man, close quote, not this, quote to be not a man, close quote, and the negation of quote to be a white man, close quote, is, quote not to be a white man, close quote, and not this, quote to be not a white man, close quote, since if affirmation or negation be true of everything, it will be true to say, quote that would is not a white man, close quote, if this be so, in those things to which the verb, quote to be, close quote, is not added, that which is asserted, instead of the verb, quote to be, close quote, will produce the same thing. For example, the negation of, quote a man walks, close quote, will not be, quote non-man walks, close quote, but, quote a man does not walk, close quote, for there is no difference in saying that, quote a man walks, close quote, or that, quote a man is walking, close quote, so that if this is everywhere the case, the negation of, quote it is possible to be, close quote, will be, quote it is possible not to be, close quote, and not, quote it is not possible to be, close quote, but it appears that it is possible for the same thing both to be and not to be, for everything which may possibly be cut, or may possibly walk, may also possibly not be cut, and not walk, and the reason is that everything which is thus possible does not always energize, so that negation will also belong to it, for that which is capable of walking may not walk, and the visible may not be seen. Still, however, it is impossible that opposite affirmations and negations should be true of the same thing, where for the negation of, quote it is possible to be, close quote, is not, quote it is possible not to be, close quote. Now it results from this, that we either at the same time affirm and deny the same thing of the same, or that the affirmations and negations are not made according to the additions, quote to be, close quote, or, quote not to be, close quote. If therefore, that be impossible, this will be to be taken, where for the negation of, quote it is possible to be, close quote, is, quote it is not possible to be, close quote, but not it is possible not to be. Now there is the same reasoning also about the being contingent, for the negation of this is not to be contingent, and in like manner as to the rest, for example the necessary and impossible, since as in those it happens that, quote to be, close quote, and quote not to be, close quote, are additions, but quotes whiteness and quotes man are subjects, so here quote to be, close quote, and quote not to be, close quote, become as subjects, but quote to be possible, close quote, and quote to be contingent, close quote, are additions which determine the true and false in the annunciations, quote to be possible, close quote, and quote to be not possible, close quote. Similarly as in those, quote to be, close quote, and quote not to be, close quote. But of, quote it is possible not to be, close quote, the negation is not, quote it is not possible to be, close quote, but quote it is not possible not to be." and of · It is possible to be · The negation is not · It is possible not to be . it is not possible to be ·. whereever · It is possible to be . it is possible to not to be . will appear to follow each other for it is the same thing · to be possible to be close quote, and quote not to be close quote. Since such things are not contradictory of each other, namely, quote it is possible to be close quote, and quote it is possible not to be close quote, but quote it is possible to be close quote, and quote it is not possible to be close quote, are never true of the same thing at the same time, for they are opposed, neither at least are, quote it is possible not to be close quote, and quote it is not possible not to be close quote, ever true at the same time of the same thing. Likewise of, quote it is necessary to be close quote, the negation is not, quote it is necessary not to be close quote, but this, quote it is not necessary to be And of, quote, it is necessary not to be, close, quote. The negation is this, quote, it is not necessary not to be, close, quote. Again of, quote, it is impossible to be, close, quote. The negation is not, quote, it is impossible not to be, close, quote. But, quote, it is not impossible to be, close, quote. end of, quote, it is impossible not to be, close quote, the negation is, quote, it is not impossible not to be, close quote. In fact, universally, as we have said, quote to be, close quote, and quote not to be, close quote, we must necessarily regard as subjects, but those things which produce affirmation and negation, we must connect with, quote to be, close quote, and quote not to be, close quote. We ought also to consider these as opposite affirmations and negations, possible, impossible, contingent, non-contingent, impossible, not impossible, necessary, not necessary, true, not true. Chapter 13 of the sequences of modal propositions. The consequences are rightly placed thus, quote, it happens to be, close quote, follows, quote, it is possible to be, close quote, and this reciprocates with that also, quote, it is not impossible to be, close quote, and, quote, it is not necessary to be, close quote, but, quote, it is not necessary not to be, close quote, and, quote, it is not impossible not to be close quote, follow, quote, it is possible not to be close quote, and, quote, it may happen not to be close quote, and, quote, it is necessary not to be close quote, and, quote, it is impossible not to be close quote, follow, quote, it is not possible to be close quote, and, quote, It does not happen to be, close quote, but, quote, it is necessary to be, close quote, and also, quote, it is impossible not to be, close quote, follow, quote, it is not possible not to be, close quote, and, quote, it is not contingent not to be, close quote. What we say, however, may be seen from the following description. 1. It is possible to be. It may happen to be. It is not impossible to be. It is not necessary to be. 2. It is possible not to be. It may happen not to be. It is not impossible not to be. It is not necessary not to be. 3. It is not possible to be. be. It may not happen to be. It is impossible to be. It is necessary not to be. 4. It is not possible not to be. It may happen not to be. It is impossible not to be. It is necessary to be. Therefore, the impossible and the not impossible follow contradictorily the contingent, and the possible and the non-contingent, and the not possible, and vice versa. For the negation of the impossible, namely, quote, it is not impossible to be, close quote, follows, quote, it is possible to be, close quote. But affirmation follows negation for, quote, it is impossible to be, close quote, follows, quote, it is not possible to be, close quote. Since, quote, Quote, it is impossible to be, is affirmation, but it is not impossible to be, is negation. Let us next see how it is with necessary matter. Now it is evident that it does not subsist thus, but contraries follow, and contradictory are placed separately. For it is not necessary to be, is not the negation of, it is necessary not to be, close quote. Since both may possibly be true of the same thing, as that which necessarily is not, denot of necessity be. But the reason why the necessary follows not, in like manner other propositions, is that the impossible being enunciated contrarily to the necessary signifies the same thing. Or what it is impossible should exist, must not of necessity be, but not be, and what is impossible should not be. This must of necessity be, so that if these similarly follow the possible, and the not possible, these do so in a contrary mode, since the necessary and the impossible do not signify the same thing, but as we have said, vice versa. Or is it impossible that the contradictory of the necessary should be thus disposed? For what, quote, is necessary to be, close quote, is, quote, possible to be, close quote. Since if not, negation would follow, as it is necessary, either to affirm or deny, so that if it is not possible to be, it is impossible to be. Therefore it would be impossible for that to be, which necessarily is, which is absurd. But the enunciation, quote, it is not impossible to be, close quote, follows the other, quote, it is possible to be, close quote, which again is followed by, quote, it is not necessary to be, close quote. Since it happens that what necessarily exists does not necessarily exist, which is absurd. But again, neither does, quote, it is necessary to be, close quote, follow, quote, it is possible to be, close quote. Nor does the proposition, quote, it is necessary not to be, close quote. For to that, both may occur, but whichever of these is true, those will be no longer true. Or at one and the same time, it is possible to be, and not to be. But if it is necessary, either to be, or not to be, both will not be possible. It remains therefore that, quote, it is not necessary not to be, close quote, follows, quote, it is possible to be, close quote. For this is also true in respect of what is necessary to be. Since this becomes the contradiction of that proposition which follows, vis, quote, it is not possible to be, close quote, as, quote, it is impossible to be, close quote. And, quote, it is necessary not to be, close quote, follow that, of which the negation is, quote, it is not necessary not to be, close quote. Wherefore, these contradictions follow according to the above mentioned mode, and nothing absurd results, when they are thus disposed. Still, it may be doubted whether, quote, it is possible to be, close quote, follows, quote, it is necessary to be, close quote. For if it does not follow, the contradiction will be consequent, namely, quote, it is not possible to be, close quote. And if a man should deny this to be a contradiction, it will be necessary to call, quote, it is possible not to be, close quote, a contradiction, both which are false in respect of necessary matter. Nay, on the contrary, it appears to be possible that the same thing should, quote, be cut, close quote, and, quote, not be cut, close quote, should, quote, be, and, quote, not be, close quote, so that what necessarily, quote, is, may happen, quote, not to be, close quote, which is false. Nevertheless, it is evident that not everything which can, quote, be, and can, quote, walk is capable also of the opposites, for in some cases this is not true. In the first place, in those things which are potent irrationally, as fire is calorific, and has irrational power. Rational powers then are those of many things, and of the contraries, but not all irrational powers, for as we have said, fire cannot heat, and not heat, nor such other things as always energize. Yet even some irrational powers can at the same time receive opposites, but this has been stated by us, because not every power is susceptible of contraries, not even such as are predicated according to the same species. Moreover some powers are equivocal, for the possible is not predicated simply, but one thing is called so, because it is true, as being in an energy, as it is possible for a man to walk, because he walks, and in short, a thing is possible to be, because that is already in energy, which is said to be possible. On the other hand, another thing is said to be possible, because it may be in energy, and it is possible to walk, because a man may walk. Now this power exists in movable natures only, but that in immovable. But with respect to both, it is true to say, that it is not impossible to walk, and that a man is now walking, and energizing, and has the power to walk, hence it is not true to predicate that which is thus possible, in respect of necessary matter, simply, but the other is true. Wherefore, since the universal follows the particular, to be able to be, but not all ability, follows that which is of necessity, and indeed the necessary and the non-necessary may perhaps be the principle of the existence, or of the non-existence of all things, and we should consider other things as consequent upon these. Hence from what we have stated, it is clear that whatever exists of necessity is in energy, so that if eternal natures are prior in existence, energy also is prior to power, and some things, as the first substances, are energies without power, but others with power, namely those which are prior by nature, but posterior in time. Lastly, there are some which are never energies, but are capacities only. Chapter 14 of Contrary Propositions But whether is affirmation contrary to negation, or affirmation to affirmation, and is the sentence which says, quote, every man is just close, quote, contrary to the one, quote, no man is just, close, quote, or the sentence, quote, every man is just, close, quote, to, quote, every man is unjust, close, quote, as, quote, Calius is just, close, quote, quote, Calius is not just, close, quote, quote, Calius is unjust, close, quote. Which of these are contraries? For if things in the voice follow those which exist in the intellect, but there the opinion of a contrary is contrary, as for instance that, quote, every man is just, close, quote, is contrary to, quote, every man is unjust, close, quote, it is necessary that affirmations also in the voice should subsist in the same manner. But if there, the opinion of a contrary be not contrary, neither will affirmation be contrary to affirmation, but the before named negation. Hence it must be considered what false opinion is contrary to the true opinion, whether that of negation, or that which opines it to be the contrary. I mean in this way, there is a certain true opinion of good, that it is good, but another false opinion, that it is not good, lastly a third, that it is evil. Which of these therefore is contrary to the true opinion? And if there is one, according to which is it contrary? If then a man should fancy contrary opinions to be defined by this, that they are of contraries, it would be erroneous, for of good that it is good, and of evil that it is evil, there is perhaps the same opinion. And it is true, whether there be many opinions or one. But these are contraries, yet not from their being of contraries, are they contraries, but rather from their subsisting in a contrary manner. If then there is an opinion of good, that it is good, but another that it is not good, and there is also something else, which is neither inherent, nor can be in good, we cannot admit any contrary of the rest. Neither such opinions as imagine the non-inherent to be inherent, nor the inherent to be non-inherent, for both are infinite, both as many as imagine the non-inherent to be inherent, and the inherent to be non-inherent. But in those things in which there is deception, therein we admit contraries, and these are from which there are generations, generations however, are from opposites, wherefore deceptions also. If then, good is good and not evil, and the one is essential, but the other accidental, for it is accidental to it not to be evil, and of everything the opinion is more true and false which is essential. If the true be assumed, the opinion that good is not good is false, in respect of that which is essentially inherent. But the opinion that it is evil is false, of that which is from accident, so that the opinion of the negation of good would be more false than the opinion of the contrary. He is however especially deceived about everything who holds a contrary opinion, for contraries belong to things which are the most diverse about the same thing. If then, one of these is contrary, but the opinion of the negation is more contrary, it is evident that this itself will be truly contrary. But the opinion that the good is evil is complex, for it is necessary perhaps that the same man should suppose good not good. Once more, if it is requisite for the like to occur in other things, it may seem to have been well said in this case also. For the opposition of negation is either everywhere or nowhere. But whatever things have no contraries, of these the opposite to the true opinion is false, as he is mistaken who fancies, quote, a man, close quote, quote, not a man, close quote. If then these negations are contrary, the other opinions also of negation are. Besides, it is the same as to the opinion of good that it is good, and of what is not good that it is not good, and also the opinion of good that it is not good, and of what is not good that it is good. To the opinion then of the not good that it is not good which is true, what will be the contrary? Certainly not that which says that it is evil, since it may at one and the same time be true, but truth is never contrary to truth. For whatever is not good is evil, so that it will happen that these opinions shall be at one and the same time true. Nor again will that opinion that it is not evil be the contrary, for that is also true, and these may exist at the same time. Wherefore, the opinion of what is not good that it is good remains as a contrary to the opinion of what is not good that it is not good, and this will be false, so that the opinion of good that it is not good will be the contrary to that of what is good that it is good. That there will be no difference though we should propose universal affirmation is evident, for universal negation will be the contrary, as for instance to the opinion which supposes everything good to be good, that nothing of good things is good will be the contrary opinion. For the opinion of good that it is good, if good be universal, is the same with that which opines that whatever is good is good, and this differs in no respect from the opinion that everything which is good is good, and the like takes place as to that which is not good, so that if this be the case in opinion, and affirmations and negations in the voice are symbols of conceptions in the soul, it is clear that the universal negation which is about the same thing is contrary to affirmation, for instance to quote everything good is good close quote, or that quote every man is good close quote, the negation is contrary that quote nothing or no man is good close quote, but this that quote not everything or not every man close quote is good is opposed contradictorily, it is however evident that true opinion can neither possibly be contrary to true opinion, nor true negation to true negation, for those are contraries which subsist about opposites, but about the same things the same may be verified, but contraries cannot possibly be inherent in the same thing at one and the same time, end of on interpretation by Aristotle translated by Octavius Freer Owen, recording in memory of Mitchell Edwards


Don't go postal over mail-in voting a look into voting by mail with yours truly be a silo First of all who am I I am a 13 year old girl in two years ago I was the youngest speaker at hope and a lot has happened since then I spoke three times at Defcon I spoke in the roots asylum the biohacking village and the voting village I also gave a talk on election security in Romania at Defcamp Spreading the word about election security worldwide My election hacking from the roots asylum was highlighted at a congressional hearing on election security And I'm the founder and CEO of girls hack Our motto is teaching girls skills of hacking so that they can change the future I provide online and physical lessons to any girl who wants to start her journey in cyber security Speaking of my startups I also started secure open vote I am building my own end-to-end election system this year at Defcon I have my reporting system running in the voting village so you can try to change the vote count So let's jump in Due to COVID-19 this year's 2020 election is going to be one of the hardest in history More people than ever are switching to mail in voting instead of voting in person To give you an idea of how many people voted in the 2016 elections by mail 25% voted by mail So let's clarify how voting by mail works dispel some rumors and go over the pros and cons With a quote from a high-level politician There is no way Zero that mail-in ballots will be anything less than Substantially fraudulent mail boxes will be robbed Ballots will be forged and even illegally printed out and fraudulently signed Whoa, there is a lot to unpack there First of all, he said that mail boxes will be robbed First of all, this is a federal crime punishable by up to five years in jail In a quarter of a million dollars in fines Stealing mail from someone's house to get their ballot would be difficult You would have to know when the ballot was mailed out and everyone is home these days anyway The postal mail boxes are emptied daily So unless you are going to go out in broad daylight pick the lock to a mailbox And steal a bunch of mail-in ballots pretty sure mail boxes are safe If you did manage to get away with it It is likely that the few ballots that you got will not tip the election In may 2020 a big donor to the trump campaign was appointed as postmaster general Since then people have noticed that the mail has slowed significantly Mail and packages have been returned He has shut down the mail sorting machines forcing mail to be sorted by hand Taking the postal service back to the 1950s Even one of my girls who hack Soldering kits has come back to me. See five percent of all system Your best bet is to drop your votes are kept at secure locations such as police stations or municipal buildings The boxes are empty daily and have security cameras on them Additional security features such as unique keyed locks or tamper evidence seals are also used I know what you're thinking, but be a in your other election talk You said tamper evidence seals can be undetectably opened and manipulated Okay, you do that go to the police station with your lock picks and your acetone and open the ballot box Let me know how that works out for you The penalty for mail ballot fraud is up to five years in prison And ten thousand dollars in fines for each act of fraud That is in addition to state penalties If the postal system and the ballot boxes Still scare you you can always drop off your ballot off by hand to the county clerks or election board office You may be saying that people are just going to print out their own ballots But the ballots themselves are very difficult to forge They use many security features including special papers with UV sensitive markings and water marks You can't just run to staples and buy this stuff If you have ever held a piece of fake money, you know how it feels different than the real thing When the election officials are opening the ballots the one that bob printed out on his inkjet At home will definitely stick out Some ballots use color shift ink or magnetic printing ink This ink is extremely difficult to source and is delivered by armored truck It's also worth noting that you need an actual printing press to use these in Bob won't just be loading that into his inkjet Many ballots have micro printed unique security codes or bar codes This prevents duplicates and allows voters to track their ballot as it travels through the system Another thing that this high official said is they will forge signatures But the voter signature is verified with their past signatures Some states provide extra training for their election workers to spot forgeries If an inconsistency is found it is reported to the state prosecutor's office But you can vote twice once by mail and once in person. That's a big cup of nope Mail-in ballots are due before the election This gives election officials time to check the voter off the roll as Voted if the voter goes and tries to vote in person the state prosecutor's office is notified Occasionally people have received two ballots in the mail with their name on it No, this does not mean you can vote twice, but how does this happen? Okay, how many of you have ever merged two databases? Well, the computer sees these two names as unique Marge Bouvier the name she used when she first registered to vote at age 18 And Marge Bouvier Simpson the name she took after she got married to the handsome Homer Simpson And what is in the dmv system? Well, when this state merged The dmv database with the voter registration database Marge showed up twice The good news is humans check these names and signatures on the ballot to catch these kinds of errors If you ever receive two ballots simply call the election office and they can correct the error Now that we've debunked some myths, let's talk about how voting by mail works Every state is in charge of its own elections. So it differs slightly from state to state Some states allow you to vote by mail without a specific reason Others require a valid reason to vote by mail A few do not consider COVID to be a valid reason But this is changing day by day. So check vote.org to see what your state is doing The first step is to register to vote 39 states and the district of columbia allow their citizens to register online Every state has a printable registration form. So you can print it out and either mail it in or deliver it in person Make sure that you register by the deadline If it is getting close bring that registration forum to the clerks office or election office in person If you have not registered to vote do it after this talk. I'm serious It takes only two minutes literally two minutes And it's very important because every vote I made this really big so you can take a screenshot go to register dot vote dot org to register Vote dot org has tons of great voter resources Including checking if you are registered how to get a mail-in ballot election reminders Make sure you're eligible to vote by mail Currently five states have an all mail-in ballot election 28 states and the district of columbia have a no excuse absentee voting Which means you can just vote by mail without having to give a specific reason In 17 states you need a valid reason. This differs from state to state Some reasons include old age being affirmed or out of state To see if you are eligible to vote by mail go to vote.org For your state and see if you are eligible Here is a map and again things are constantly changing So check online at vote.org to see where your state fits in you have to request an absentee ballot If you have not done this do it now After my talk go and request your absentee ballot This will give them time to add you on the list and mail out your ballot Guess what you can do this app? Vote.org Receive your ballot sit down and fill it out Right away. Don't put it in a pile of bills and junk mail. You are ignoring Sit down and just fill it out One of the great things with mail-in ballots is you can research the candidates Get your oscent on and find out what each candidate is all about Who knows perhaps that school board member actually owns a chocolate factory This is a valid reason for many to vote by mail and should be considered valid by all states If a voter is immune compromised or lives with someone who is not allowing them to vote by mail Is a form of voter suppression Also brings the risk of covid to the election Workers many of which are elderly retirees Putting their lives in danger just so you can vote in person The poll workers also have to clean the machines between each vote Slowing the process and lengthening the poll lines Also forces people to go to extremes to protect themselves This lady had to wear a trash bag Now that's one fashion statement that should never be made In many states processing of mail-in ballots can begin as soon as they are received Other states do this anywhere from one month to the day of the election By permitting election officials to do a lot of the work ahead of time The counting process on election day will be quicker It's important to note that if ballots are counted ahead of time Their results are not released before election day Regardless of how they are counted. This is a great opportunity to perform a risk limiting audit And every state should do this You have everything you need handmarked paper ballots and people to count them But mail-in voting has tons of fraud Between 2000 and 2014 over a billion mail-in ballots were cast And a professor at Laos school of law Found only 31 cases of fraud There are many benefits to mail-in voting Voter turnout is 10 higher and it does not seem to be one party or another It reduces some voter suppression like poll intimidation Or people who have to travel a great distance to vote and have no transportation Or people who have to work on election day Which should be a national holiday, by the way It also protects from attacks by foreign actors Kind of hard to hack a piece of paper, isn't it, Putin? One of the biggest benefits is it speeds up the election process No long lines at polls or people not being able to vote Because of crashing e-poll books or slow election machines The two most important things are It's a handmarked paper ballot and it allows for better informed voting No more just randomly picking school board members Remember this guy? The high-ranking government official from earlier voted by mail in 2017, 18, and 20 I guess the system is good enough for him So why shouldn't it be good enough for us? And remember get involved become a poll worker See how the system works firsthand and give those older tirees a break Especially during COVID You could actually save a life by becoming a poll worker Don't want to go outside and see people? I don't blame you Not a problem You can lend your cyber security knowledge and skills to those who need it most by becoming a cyber surge volunteer This can be done by remote can do this by contacting this email or going to this site Most important thing you can do is vote Register to vote at vote.org and be counted Thank you for listening to my talk and don't forget to vote bsab for president in 2044 This message paid for by bsi lab for president 2044


How did Yastus come about? What were you doing prior? And what what drove you in that direction to be an entrepreneur? Oh I always wanted to do something Entrepreneurial it's just I kept coming across good things in the throughout my career in the government And then I said, you know what it's time just to make it happen No matter how no matter how well things are going, you know, I might make you know less money Initially, but it's just time to do it because I saw a real gap in the small to medium size business market for cybersecurity because companies are in in that range are preoccupied rightfully so with their product services and growth. So I thought if I could come up with some ways to Do help them do cybersecurity effectively even when they don't have the biggest budget that that was a specialty