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
    Sets are generally understood as having their members ess... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Personal Identity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Social groups cannot be identified with sets of people in the mathematical sense

    Sets are generally understood as having their members essentially (i.e., a set cannot gain or lose members)

    Modality & PossibilityPersonal Identity
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Personal IdentityModality & Possibility

    Connections

    1 topic

    Social Contract2 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Personal Identity
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Social groups can persist through changes in membershipSocial groups cannot be identified with sets of people in the mathematical sense

    Similar

    The existence of a set necessitates the existence of any of its member...81%If Basic Law V holds, there must exist a set R of all sets that are no...81%A set cannot exist without its members existing.81%Socrates is essentially human, but not essentially 'human and a member...81%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: social-ontology
    View source passageHide passage
    What are social groups? One debate in the literature concerns the kind of entities that social groups are: collections, classes, sets, fusions, structures, or some other kind of entity. It may seem natural to think of a group as a set of people in the mathematical sense. However, groups can persist through changes in membership, while sets are generally understood as having their members essentially (see Sharvy 1968, Ruben 1985, Uzquiano 2004, Sheehy 2006). Effingham (2010) proposes an account t

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective