[B]: "Horse" is how the shape is named; "white" is how the color is named. That which names color does not name shape. Thus I say: "a white horse is not a horse".
读书笔记
是否公开
6
-
曰:有白馬,不可謂無馬也。不可謂無馬者,非馬也?有白馬為有馬,白之,非馬何也?
读书笔记
是否公开
6
-
[A]: Having a white horse cannot be said to be having no horses. Is not that which cannot be said to be having no horses a horse? Having a white horse is having a horse; how can a white one not be a horse?
[B]: Requesting a horse, a brown or a black horse may arrive; requesting a white horse, a brown or a black horse will not arrive. By making a white horse the same as a horse, what is requested [in these two cases] is the same. If what is requested is the same, then a white horse is no different to a horse; if what is requested is no different, then how is it that in one case brown and black horses are acceptable, and in the other they are not? Acceptable and unacceptable are clearly in opposition to each other. Thus brown and black horses are also one in that one can reply that there is a horse, yet one cannot reply that there is a white horse. It is clear indeed that a white horse is not a horse. 1. 馬 : Originally read: "者". 從《百子全書》本改。
读书笔记
是否公开
8
-
曰:以馬之有色為非馬,天下非有無色之馬也。天下無馬可乎?
读书笔记
是否公开
8
-
[A]: If a horse with color is not a horse, then since there are no colorless horses in the world, can it be that there are no horses in the world?
[B]: A horse necessarily has color; thus there are white horses. If one makes horses have no color, then there are merely horses - how can one pick out a white horse? Thus that which is white is not a horse. A white horse is horse and white, horse and white horse. Thus I say: "a white horse is not a horse".
读书笔记
是否公开
10
-
曰:馬未與白為馬,白未與馬為白。合馬與白,復名白馬。是相與以不相與為名,未可。故曰:白馬非馬未可。
读书笔记
是否公开
10
-
[A]: A horse not yet with white is a horse, and white not yet with a horse is white. Combining horse with white, it is together named a "white horse". This is to use an uncombined name for a combined thing, and is inadmissible. Thus I say: "a white horse is not a horse" is inadmissible.
读书笔记
是否公开
11
-
曰:以「有白馬為有馬」,謂有白馬為有黃馬,可乎?
读书笔记
是否公开
11
-
[B]: Taking their being white horses as there being horses, as calling there being white horses there being brown horses - is this admissible?
[B]: Taking their being horses as different to there being brown horses, is to take brown horses as different to horses. Taking brown horses to be different to horses, is to take it that brown horses are not horses. To take brown horses as not horses, and yet take white horses as being horses, is to have the flying in a pond and the inner and outer coffins in different places: a contradictory claim and misuse of statements as there is under heaven!
[A]: Having white horses cannot be called having no horses, this is what is meant by the separation of white. Not separating it, having white horses cannot be said to be having horses. Thus the reason why it is taken as having horses, is merely that "horses" are taken as "having horses", and "having white horses" is not "having horses". Thus on your taking it as having horses, one cannot call a horse a horse.1. 不 : Another version reads: "是". 《百子全書》本「不」作「是」。
[B]: White does not fix what is white, this can be put aside. "White horse" speaks of white fixing what is white. That which fixes what is white is not white. "Horse" does not pick or exclude color, thus a brown or black horse can be brought. "White horse" does pick or exclude color; brown and black horses are excluded by color, thus only a white horse can be brought. That which does not exclude is not that which does exclude. Thus I say: "a white horse is not a horse".