An idea is forming in my mind about all this. I could be completely wrong on everything I’m about to say; but it seems as if all these different Categories are simply describing, and classifying, what is already naturally apparent to us. A relative seems to be subverted without a subject. A quality, or position, seem to be subverted when improperly attributed to a subject in question. A species that generates from a genus, could be subverted by the genus ceasing to exist.
I went back and reviewed chapter 7, concerning the category relative, and re-read Aristotle’s words, “Such things, however, are among the number of relative, such as habit, disposition, sense, science, position.” As I worked yesterday, I thought about each kind of relative, and tried to form my own ideas with any subject. E.g. I thought about how, reciprocation between the disposition, ‘illness’, and the subject, ‘cancer patient’, is true, and obviously reciprocates: if the disposition remains with the subject and does not change. The moment it changes, like if the patient miraculously recovers from the sickness, now the reciprocation no longer holds between the subject, and the disposition; thus, they are literally no longer relative to each other.
So, it seems that relative, being naturally simultaneous, is not the cause of anything, but simply an instantaneous state between a subject, and another category; of which a third-party person reasoning, and observing, can either affirm to be true, or false. Before, I was treating relative as if it were a kind of category that identifies a single idea on its own; however, it seems that relative is concerned with two ideas: namely, a subject, and a habit, disposition, sense, science, and position.
EAR