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
    Geach's argument from language relativity does not establ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Personal Identity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Geach's argument from language relativity does not establish that Relative Identity (RI) is true of identity as formalized in FOL=

    Personal IdentityPhilosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Geach's linguistic examples (e.g., 'same river') presuppose sortal-relative criteria, which are semantic facts about count nouns, not metaphysical facts about identity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Wiggins's sortal dependency thesis shows that sortals govern individuation conditions without thereby making identity itself relative to a sortal predicate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A semantic thesis about how we pick out objects under descriptions is logically independent of a metaphysical thesis that identity itself is a relation holding only relative to a sortal.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Quine's criterion of ontological commitment requires that FOL= identity statements quantify over determinate objects prior to any sortal classification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If identity were genuinely sortal-relative as Geach claims, referential success in first-order languages would be systematically undermined, producing radical indeterminacy Geach himself does not endorse.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, Geach's argument, even if sound regarding linguistic practice, cannot extend to undermine the absolute identity relation formalized in FOL= without collapsing into Quinean inscrutability of reference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The argument relies on the identity of indiscernibles (indiscernibility implies identity)
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The identity of indiscernibles is not valid in FOL= even when treated as a proper theory
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Language relativity does not imply that the distinctness of distinct objects cannot go unnoticed
      ?

      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

    Personal IdentityPhilosophy of Language

    Related

    A semantic thesis about how we pick out objects under descriptions is logically ...Geach's linguistic examples (e.g., 'same river') presuppose sortal-relative crit...If identity were genuinely sortal-relative as Geach claims, referential success ...Language relativity does not imply that the distinctness of distinct objects can...
    +5 moreShow less
    Quine's criterion of ontological commitment requires that FOL= identity statemen...The argument relies on the identity of indiscernibles (indiscernibility implies ...The identity of indiscernibles is not valid in FOL= even when treated as a prope...Therefore, Geach's argument, even if sound regarding linguistic practice, cannot...Wiggins's sortal dependency thesis shows that sortals govern individuation condi...

    Similar

    Language relativity is not a form of relative identity.80%If identity is necessary, a theory committed to Hesperus is automatica...78%Lange's argument is undermined by its reliance on a problematic notion...77%The identity of any phenomenon is neither singular nor plural in reali...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: identity-relative
    View source passageHide passage
    Is Geach’s argument at least an argument that identity is relative? Does language relativity support the conclusion that RI is true even of identity as formalized in FOL\(^=\)? The general idea appears to be that language relativity suggests that we take identity to be indiscernibility, and conclude that objects identical relative to one ideology \(F\) may be different relative to another ideology \(G\), and that this confirms RI. Notice first of all that this argument relies on the identity of
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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