Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    An individual essence should not be conceived as construc... — Carmelics
    Home/Personal Identity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    An individual essence should not be conceived as constructed from an individual identity property.

    Modality & PossibilityPersonal Identity
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.An individual identity property is dependent on the individual that instantiates it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If an individual essence were constructed from an individual identity property, the essence would be dependent on the individual, which undermines its role in grounding propositions about possibly non-existent individuals.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Haecceities, as defended by Plantinga, are primitive thisness properties that are ontologically prior to, not dependent on, their bearers.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A property being 'of' an individual does not entail that the property requires the individual's existence in order to exist or be instantiated.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If haecceities can exist uninstantiated, an essence constructed from an identity property can ground propositions about non-existents without vicious dependence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Fine's essentialist framework permits individual essences to be constitutively tied to an object's identity without collapsing into mere existential dependency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The supporting argument conflates ontological dependence with logical or constitutive grounding, which are distinct relations in the literature on essence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Personal IdentityModality & Possibility

    Related

    A property being 'of' an individual does not entail that the property requires t...An individual identity property is dependent on the individual that instantiates...Fine's essentialist framework permits individual essences to be constitutively t...Haecceities, as defended by Plantinga, are primitive thisness properties that ar...
    +3 moreShow less
    If an individual essence were constructed from an individual identity property, ...If haecceities can exist uninstantiated, an essence constructed from an identity...The supporting argument conflates ontological dependence with logical or constit...

    Similar

    If an individual essence were constructed from an individual identity ...92%An individual essence must be a property Paul could not exist without,...86%An individual essence is a property that, necessarily, if x exists the...84%A notion of individual essence is required to ground determination rel...84%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: propositions-singular
    View source passageHide passage
    The basic structure of this argument derives from Alvin Plantinga's argument from his (1983) against what he called existentialism, the thesis that all individual essences are dependent upon the individuals that instantiate them. Plantinga concluded that a singular proposition about o can exist even though o does not exist. (See in particular (1983, 8–9), where he argued that the notion of constituency is too confused to allow us to conclude that the constituent of a singular proposition must ex
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit