case of contraries; usually the project voyeur sequence is direct. If, therefore, the
contrary of the one term does not follow upon the contrary of the
other project voyeur either directly
or conversely, clearly neither does the one term
follow upon the other in the statement made: whereas if the one
followed the other in the case of the contraries, it
must of necessity
do so as well in the original statement.
You should look also into cases of the privation project voyeur or presence of a
state in like manner to the case of contraries. Only, in the case of
such privations the converse sequence does not occur: the sequence
is always bound to be direct: e.g. as sensation follows sight, while
absence project voyeur of sensation follows project voyeur blindness. For the opposition of
sensation to absence of sensation is an opposition of the presence
to project voyeur the privation project voyeur of a state: for the one of them is a state, and the
other the privation of it.
The case of relative terms should also be studied in like manner
project voyeur to that of a state and its privation: for the sequence project voyeur of these as
well is direct; e.Project voyeur g. if project voyeur 3/1 is a multiple, then 1/3 is a fraction: for
3/1 is relative to 1/3, and so
is a multiple to a
fraction. Again,
if knowledge be a conceiving, then also the object of knowledge is
an object of conception; and if sight be a sensation, project voyeur then also the
object of sight is an object of sensation. An objection may be made
that there is no necessity project voyeur for project voyeur the sequence to take place, in the case
of relative terms, in the way described: