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
    By ND (the necessity of distinctness/identity principle),... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Personal Identity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Principle (2) gives the wrong result about sandal identity

    By ND (the necessity of distinctness/identity principle), it follows that A, A', B, and B' are all distinct

    Modality & PossibilityPersonal Identity
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

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

    Topics

    Personal IdentityModality & Possibility

    Related

    Exchanging the parts of A and B amounts to nothing more than dismantling and rea...If sandals A and B are exactly similar, with A new and B worn, and B's worn stra...If the parts of A and B are simply exchanged, principle (2) dictates that the sa...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Personal Identity
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Principle (2) gives the wrong result about sandal identity
    +1 moreShow less
    The intuition that A and A' are the same sandal is very strong

    Similar

    Consciousness is distinct from all reflected points of identity83%By the Necessity of Distinctness (ND), if two objects are distinct at ...82%By the Necessity of Distinctness (ND), if two things are distinct in s...82%Appearances and things in themselves are distinct82%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: identity-relative
    View source passageHide passage
    The problem with (2) is this. Pick a simple sort of objects, say, shoes, or better, sandals. Suppose \(A\) and \(B\) are two exactly similar sandals, one of which \((A)\) is brand new and the other \((B)\) is worn out. Each consists of a top strap and a sole, nothing more. If \(B\)’s worn strap is replaced by \(A\)’s new one, (2) dictates that the resulting sandal is \(B\) “refurbished.” In fact, if the parts of \(A\) and \(B\) are simply exchanged, (2) dictates that that the sandal with the new

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective