The Incorrect Applications of Primitive and Common Predications



The distinction between Primitive Predication and Common Predication is applied to solve some problems in Islamic philosophy, some of which are incorrect in our point of view. Some of the problems contain paradoxes and some others include independent philosophical discussions: 1. stating about absolute non-existents, 2. problems of subjective existence, 3. Liar Paradox and Russell’s paradox, 4. the paradox of “referring by quotation marks” and the paradox of horse, 5. why “complete definition” is not regarded as one of “the five universals,” 6. why quantified propositions need the existence of their subjects, and 7. a proof of the nobility of existence by dint of the kinds of predication. In this paper, by resorting to Faramarz Qaramleki’s analysis of Primitive Predication and Common Predication, I show that the seven applications are all involved by some fallacies.