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
    Every individuable object falls under just one ultimate s... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Consciousness & Mind
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Every individuable object falls under just one ultimate sortal

    Consciousness & Mind
    ?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.Every ultimate sortal has its own principle of individuation
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If an object fell under more than one ultimate sortal, there could be a time at which the object satisfied the criteria for one sortal and not for the other
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Identity cannot hold under one form of identification but not another
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A single entity can simultaneously instantiate distinct sortal kinds without contradiction, as Locke's same-day identity of a man and a person demonstrates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Locke's distinction between man and person shows one substance can fall under two ultimate sortals with different persistence conditions at the same time.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If two sortals yield divergent but non-contradictory identity conditions, no logical bar prevents their co-instantiation in one individual.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Wiggins's own sortal relativity thesis permits objects to satisfy multiple phase sortals AND a substance sortal, leaving the uniqueness of the ultimate sortal empirically underdetermined.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Where biological and psychological sortal criteria persistently converge on the same re-identification, positing a single ultimate sortal is a metaphysical postulate, not a logical necessity.
      ?

      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

    Consciousness & Mind

    Related

    A single entity can simultaneously instantiate distinct sortal kinds without con...Every ultimate sortal has its own principle of individuationIdentity cannot hold under one form of identification but not anotherIf an object fell under more than one ultimate sortal, there could be a time at ...
    +4 moreShow less
    If two sortals yield divergent but non-contradictory identity conditions, no log...Locke's distinction between man and person shows one substance can fall under tw...Where biological and psychological sortal criteria persistently converge on the ...Wiggins's own sortal relativity thesis permits objects to satisfy multiple phase...

    Similar

    Every ultimate sortal has its own principle of individuation85%If an object fell under more than one ultimate sortal, there could be ...80%The intelligible object must be immaterial and universal.76%What is indivisible cannot be dissolved75%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: substance
    View source passageHide passage
    The conclusion is striking because it is a denial that a and b might be identical under one form of identification, but not under another. In fact it implies that every individuable object falls under just one ultimate sortal. (Wiggins admits this in 2001: 67 n.7. What is meant by ultimate sortal will emerge below.) For every ultimate sortal has its own principle of individuation, and if an object fell under more than one, there could be a time at which it satisfied the criteria for one and not
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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