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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Carter's argument against the claim that S and S' are identical fails

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Carter (1987) claims in effect that S and S' are not identical
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Carter's argument simply assumes that O and S are the same ship, which is the very point at issue
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Carter's argument presupposes a determinate answer to ship identity before evaluating the competing candidates, committing a petitio principii.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Wiggins (1980) establishes that identity judgments require a sortal concept, and Carter supplies no principled sortal that privileges O over S as the 'same ship' as the original.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without an independent criterion for ship-continuity that doesn't already encode the conclusion, Carter's identification of O with the original ship is question-begging by Chisholm's own standards of circular reasoning.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Relative identity theorists like Geach (1967) show that 'same F' judgments can yield different verdicts for different sortals applied to the same objects, undermining any privileged identity claim Carter asserts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If S and S' satisfy all functional and structural criteria for ship-identity equally well, the burden of proof lies with Carter to supply a non-arbitrary reason to prefer O's identity with the original, which he does not provide.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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