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
    Oscar and Oscar− are distinct logical objects at t' — Carmelics
    Home/Personal Identity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Oscar and Oscar− are distinct logical objects at t'

    Modality & PossibilityPersonal Identity
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.At t, Oscar and Oscar− are distinct logical objects
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.By the Necessity of Distinctness (ND), if two objects are distinct at one time, they are distinct at all times at which they exist
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Both Oscar and Oscar− survive the loss of the tail and exist at t'
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The Necessity of Distinctness presupposes that identity is determinate, but vague objects can make identity indeterminate rather than strictly false.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Oscar− is a vague object whose boundaries are indeterminate, its distinctness from Oscar at t is itself indeterminate, not a settled logical fact.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Indeterminate identity propagates through time, so ND cannot yield a determinate verdict of distinctness at t' from an indeterminate basis at t.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.On four-dimensionalist ontology, Oscar and Oscar− are distinct temporal worms that share all their temporal parts prior to t', making them identical at t' as a matter of mereological convergence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Oscar and Oscar− are wholly co-located four-dimensional entities at t', the claim of distinctness collapses into a violation of the Indiscernibility of Identicals, not a vindication of it.
      ?

      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 IdentityModality & Possibility

    Related

    At t, Oscar and Oscar− are distinct logical objectsBoth Oscar and Oscar− survive the loss of the tail and exist at t'By the Necessity of Distinctness (ND), if two objects are distinct at one time, ...If Oscar and Oscar− are wholly co-located four-dimensional entities at t', the c...
    +4 moreShow less
    If Oscar− is a vague object whose boundaries are indeterminate, its distinctness...Indeterminate identity propagates through time, so ND cannot yield a determinate...On four-dimensionalist ontology, Oscar and Oscar− are distinct temporal worms th...The Necessity of Distinctness presupposes that identity is determinate, but vagu...

    Similar

    At t, Oscar and Oscar− are distinct logical objects98%Although Oscar and Oscar− are distinct logical objects at t', they are...92%Oscar and Oscar− are distinct at t82%Oscar and Oscar− are distinct at t'81%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: identity-relative
    View source passageHide passage
    Oscar and Oscar− both survive Oscar’s loss of a tail. At both \(t\) and \(t'\) Oscar and Oscar− are the same dog, but at \(t\), Oscar and Oscar− are distinct logical objects. This implies (by ND) that Oscar and Oscar− are distinct logical objects even at \(t'\) Hence, we must allow that distinct logical objects may occupy the same space at the same time. This is not a problem, however. For although Oscar and Oscar− are distinct logical objects at \(t'\), they are physically coincident.
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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