Chapter 9 of De Interpretatione is considered as one of the most controversial texts not only in the corpus aristotelicum, but also in philosophy in general. In that chapter Aristotle describes a supposedly logical argument involving the semantic principle according to which every declarative statement is true or false, known as the principle of bivalence after Łukasiewicz. Unwilling to accept the disastrous consequences ̶ related to the doctrines of determinism and fatalism ̶ imposed by such an argument on the realm of metaphysics and of morals, Aristotle rejects it. That problem was known by tradition as the problem of future contingents . Given the succinct style of Aristotle s text, there is still a lot of speculation about: (i) what was the strategy used by Aristotle in his response, (ii) what was the argument to which he addressed in that chapter, and (iii) what kind of problem the chapter was all about. This study deals with issues related to (i) and (iii). As for (iii), it will be argued that despite its metaphysical implications, chapter 9 is concerned with a problem of logical and semantic nature. Therefore, those allegations according to which that chapter would be a foreign body to De Interpretatione seem to be unfounded. As for (i), among the different interpretations of Aristotle s solution, there are two that stand out: one of those, considered the oldest or traditional interpretation, advocates that Aristotle s response consisted in restricting the validity of the principle of bivalence, while the other, considered the second oldest interpretation , advocates that Aristotle would have kept the unrestricted validity of bivalence by means of a qualification of that principle. After discussing the main aspects and difficulties of those two interpretations, and analyzing its paradigmatic cases, we present our proposed solution to the problem of Chapter 9 of De Interpretatione. Our proposal is based on a non-truth-functional approach of disjunction in order to preserve the unrestricted validity of the principle of excluded middle. We may consider our proposal as a way to make real what Quine considered to be Aristotle s fantasy .