Aristotle's conception and implementation of the method of homonymy is complex in the sense that it has distinguishable aspects, or phases, that are put to different uses across his works. In Top. Alpha 15, Aristotle employs what I have considered a negative phase of homonymy, that based on the method of asking “how many ways” something is used (to posachōs) that is introduced in Top. Alpha 13 (105a23–24). Using this analytical tool in Top. Alpha 15, Aristotle proceeds to show us how to discern a lack of synonymy among the common terms, or predicates, that are typically used in dialectical argumentation. There is a second use, as well, one resulting in a positive, synthetic end that emerges from the philosophical discussions in Meta. Gamma 2 and Zeta 1 where Aristotle outlines the possibility of a science that investigates being qua being, a subject area that lacks the requisite kath' hen unity. Taken together, we may conceive of these two as different, but complementary, phases of a single procedure. As such, we may trace the line of development of the method of homonymy from that which marks off synonymous from non-synonymous instances (cf. Cat. 1) to a complex, multi-stepped procedure making its appearance in Meta. Gamma 2, where it signals a means for determining whether the apparently heterogeneous kind, being, may, after all, comprise a subject matter for scientific investigation.

In addition, I have presented a parallel discussion concerning the ancestry of Aristotle's theory of homonymy.