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
    On a Barnes-Williams ontic vagueness account, the world i... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→There can be no vague or indeterminate identity between distinct objects (in the sense that vaguely identical objects must be absolutely distinct).

    On a Barnes-Williams ontic vagueness account, the world itself can be unsettled, so Leibniz's Law governs only determinate property-possession, not indeterminate cases.

    ?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.Ontic vagueness posits that reality itself contains indeterminacy, not merely epistemic limitations or linguistic imprecision about determinate facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If two objects differ only in indeterminate respects, applying Leibniz's Law would paradoxically require them to be identical despite real ontological differences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Restricting Leibniz's Law to determinate properties preserves classical logic's validity while accommodating genuinely unsettled metaphysical states.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Restricting Leibniz's Law undermines its status as a fundamental logical principle governing identity; selective application suggests ad hoc theoretical maneuvering.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Ontic vagueness itself is metaphysically obscure—it's unclear how indeterminacy could exist 'in reality' rather than in our descriptions or knowledge of reality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If identity is determinate while properties can be indeterminate, we face the difficult question of what determines identity facts if not complete property possession.
      ?

      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

    2 topics

    Modality & Possibility1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    If identity is determinate while properties can be indeterminate, we face the di...If two objects differ only in indeterminate respects, applying Leibniz's Law wou...Ontic vagueness itself is metaphysically obscure—it's unclear how indeterminacy ...Ontic vagueness posits that reality itself contains indeterminacy, not merely ep...
    +3 moreShow less
    Restricting Leibniz's Law to determinate properties preserves classical logic's ...Restricting Leibniz's Law undermines its status as a fundamental logical princip...There can be no vague or indeterminate identity between distinct objects (in the...

    Details

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