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
    If identity is always sortal-relative, the inference from... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→If object 'a' falls under sortal G and a = b, then object 'b' also falls under sortal G and is the same G as a

    If identity is always sortal-relative, the inference from bare 'a = b' to shared sortal G commits a category error by presupposing absolute identity.

    ?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 statements like 'a = b' lack determinate meaning without specifying which sortal (person, object, mass) governs the identity criterion.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Absolute identity presumes a view-from-nowhere independent of conceptual schemes, but all identity is mediated through sortally-specific criteria.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Inferring 'a and b share sortal G' from bare 'a = b' assumes the identity relation itself is sortal-neutral, contradicting sortal-relativity thesis.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Bare identity 'a = b' can be true in any sortal-relative framework if a and b pick out the same entity; sortal-relativity applies to identity criteria, not truth.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Logical identity (Leibniz's law) is distinct from metaphysical identity criteria; deriving sortal conclusions commits equivocation, not category error.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Sortal-relative identity allows that 'a = b' is determinately true within established contexts without requiring appeal to absolute identity.
      ?

      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

    Absolute identity presumes a view-from-nowhere independent of conceptual schemes...Bare identity 'a = b' can be true in any sortal-relative framework if a and b pi...Identity statements like 'a = b' lack determinate meaning without specifying whi...If object 'a' falls under sortal G and a = b, then object 'b' also falls under s...
    +3 moreShow less
    Inferring 'a and b share sortal G' from bare 'a = b' assumes the identity relati...Logical identity (Leibniz's law) is distinct from metaphysical identity criteria...Sortal-relative identity allows that 'a = b' is determinately true within establ...

    Details

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