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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Ontic vagueness requires that objects themselves have indeterminate identity conditions, but Evans (1978) demonstrated this generates contradictions via Leibniz's Law.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Evans conflates metaphysical indeterminacy with epistemic indeterminacy; vague objects can have determinate identity facts we simply cannot access.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Leibniz's Law assumes classical identity conditions; under fuzzy logic or supervaluationism, indeterminate identity needn't violate it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Many natural objects (heaps, organisms, persons) exhibit borderline identity cases suggesting vagueness is intrinsic, not merely linguistic artifact.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Evans's argument shows that if object a is indeterminately identical to b, then a has a property (indeterminate identity) that b lacks, violating Leibniz's Law.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Ontic vagueness requires rejecting classical logic's bivalence, making indeterminate identity conditions metaphysically incoherent without logical revision.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Identity must be determinate because it grounds all other properties; vague identity undermines the foundation of any coherent ontology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.