Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Essentialism about origins (Kripke, Salmon) holds that an individual's essential properties include those fixed by their causal-historical origins.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Origin essentialism implies counterintuitively that swapped embryos or infants raised by wrong parents cease to be the same individual.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Many essential properties (rationality, consciousness) are intrinsic and causally independent of how an object came to exist.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The causal-historical chain is too long and complex to determine which origin facts are truly essential versus merely accidental.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Our intuitions strongly resist cases where an object's origin changes but we call it the same thing (e.g., a painting by Vermeer vs. a forgery).
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Causal-historical facts are objective and determinate, providing a non-arbitrary basis for identity across possible worlds.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Origins explain why individuals have their distinctive properties better than non-historical essences do.
?
How convincing is this?
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.