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
    Geach's relative identity thesis does not require avoidin... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The formal proof that there is no such thing as relative identity requires that there are no ad hoc sortals.

    Geach's relative identity thesis does not require avoiding contradiction but rather rejects the unrestricted use of Leibniz's Law across sortal kinds.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Identity claims like 'the statue is the clay' are true under sortal 'physical object' but false under 'lump of clay,' showing identity is sortal-relative.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Leibniz's Law assumes absolute identity: if x=y, all properties match. But sortal-relative identity permits x=y under one sortal while x≠y under another.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Restricting Leibniz's Law to same-sortal comparisons avoids contradiction without denying the legitimacy of cross-sortal identity judgments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If x is identical to y under sortal F but not under sortal G, then x and y really differ in some property, making the identity claims genuinely contradictory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Restricting Leibniz's Law merely postpones the problem—we must still explain why 'same object, different sortals' doesn't constitute real difference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Standard identity is transitive and unrestricted by design. Sortal-indexed identity ('identical-as-F') is a different relation, not true identity itself.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Consciousness & Mind1 linked

    Related

    Identity claims like 'the statue is the clay' are true under sortal 'physical ob...If x is identical to y under sortal F but not under sortal G, then x and y reall...Leibniz's Law assumes absolute identity: if x=y, all properties match. But sorta...Restricting Leibniz's Law merely postpones the problem—we must still explain why...
    +3 moreShow less
    Restricting Leibniz's Law to same-sortal comparisons avoids contradiction withou...Standard identity is transitive and unrestricted by design. Sortal-indexed ident...The formal proof that there is no such thing as relative identity requires that ...

    Details

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