The variability of PRICES as we discussed But are the laws correct? For Aristotle, their power lay in their intuitive truth, their accord with our common sense. Yet Aristotle himself does not view statements as either true or false. In the Metaphysics, a few pages before announcing the Law of the Excluded Middle, he says, "The more and the less are still present in the nature of things" and adds that one who thinks 4 equals 5 is more correct than the one who thinks 4 equals 1,000." In De Interpretatione, he uses the terms truer and falser. Even for him, truth has degrees. In fact, Aristotle provides a wealth of arguments against his own axioms. The most famous involves ships clashing at sea. In Chapter 9 of De Interpretatione, he ponders the statement: There will be a sea battle tomorrow. True? Not true? A determinist would argue that, at this instant, it must be either true or false. Events are preordained, by divine hand or physical law. If we knew enough about celestial will or the sequence of causes, we could tell right now whether it were true or false. We don't, but it doesn't matter. At this moment, the statement is either true or false. A nondeterminist would demur. Events are not preordained, so at this moment it may be impossible for us to know the answer, even with total knowledge. God may reconsider or random acts may jostle causality. The answer may simply not exist yet. If so, the statement is currently neither true not false, but inderterminate. De Interpretatione is a dense, muddled work, and the crucial Chapter 9 is so opaque that scholars still contest its meaning. However, it appears to set forth these arguments, half-heartedly reject determinism, and conclude that "There will be a sea battle tomorrow" has an intermediate truth-value. A gap opens at the hairline. The Law of the Excluded Middle ebbs away. This question exerted great historical influence. In the Middle Ages, both Christian and Muslim thinkers tended to acc