One quality may be the contrary of another; thus justice is the contrary of injustice, whiteness of blackness, and so on.The things, also, which are said to be such and such in virtue of these qualities, may be contrary the one to the other; for that which is unjust is contrary to that which is just, that which is white to that which is black.This, however, is not always the case.Red, yellow, and such colours, though qualities, have no contraries.
If one of two contraries is a quality, the other will also be a quality.This will be evident from particular instances, if we apply the names used to denote the other categories; for instance, granted that justice is the contrary of injustice and justice is a quality, injustice will also be a quality: neither quantity, nor relation, nor place, nor indeed any other category but that of quality, will be applicable properly to injustice.So it is with all other contraries falling under the category of quality.
Qualities admit of variation of degree.Whiteness is predicated of one thing in a greater or less degree than of another.This is also the case with reference to justice.Moreover, one and the same thing may exhibit a quality in a greater degree than it did before: if a thing is white, it may become whiter.
Though this is generally the case, there are exceptions.For if we should say that justice admitted of variation of degree, difficulties might ensue, and this is true with regard to all those qualities which are dispositions.There are some, indeed, who dispute the possibility of variation here.They maintain that justice and health cannot very well admit of variation of degree themselves, but that people vary in the degree in which they possess these qualities, and that this is the case with grammatical learning and all those qualities which are classed as dispositions.However that may be, it is an incontrovertible fact that thethings which in virtue of these qualities are said to be what they are vary in the degree in which they possess them; for one man is said to be better versed in grammar, or more healthy or just, than another, and so on.
The qualities expressed by the terms 'triangular' and 'quadrangular' do not appear to admit of variation of degree, nor indeed do any that have to do with figure.For those things to which the definition of the triangle or circle is applicable are all equally triangular or circular.Those, on the other hand, to which the same definition is not applicable, cannot be said to differ from one another in degree; the square is no more a circle than the rectangle, for to neither is the definition of the circle appropriate.In short, if the definition of the term proposed is not applicable to both objects, they cannot be compared.Thus it is not all qualities which admit of variation of degree.
Whereas none of the characteristics I have mentioned are peculiar to quality, the fact that likeness and unlikeness can be predicated with reference to quality only, gives to that category its distinctive feature.One thing is like another only with reference to that in virtue of which it is such and such; thus this forms the peculiar mark of quality.
We must not be disturbed because it may be argued that, though proposing to discuss the category of quality, we have included in it many relative terms.We did say that habits and dispositions were relative.In practically all such cases the genus is relative, the individual not.Thus knowledge, as a genus, is explained by reference to something else, for we mean a knowledge of something.But particular branches of knowledge are not thus explained.The knowledge of grammar is not relative to anything external, nor is the knowledge of music, but these, if relative at all, are relative only in virtue of their genera; thus grammar is said be the knowledge of something, not the grammar of something; similarly music is the knowledge of something, not the music of something.
Thus individual branches of knowledge are not relative.And it is because we possess these individual branches of knowledge that we are said to be such and such.It is these that we actually possess: we are called experts because we possess knowledge in some particular branch.Those particular branches, therefore, of knowledge, in virtue of which we aresometimes said to be such and such, are themselves qualities, and are not relative.Further, if anything should happen to fall within both the category of quality and that of relation, there would be nothing extraordinary in classing it under both these heads.
