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 The appearance of contradiction in relative identity cases thus reflects equivocation in the application of predicates across sortals, not a genuine violation of substitutivity.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If identity itself is genuinely relative, then 'equivocation' merely relabels the problem rather than solving it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Sortal-indexed identity (A=B as statue, A≠B as clay) seems to violate the transitivity of identity, a logical bedrock principle.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Claiming predicates change meaning across sortals requires independent evidence, not just post-hoc rescue of contradictions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Sortals like 'statue' and 'clay' classify objects by different persistence conditions, so 'same' means different things under each.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The puzzle (same object, different identity across sortals) dissolves if we recognize predicates implicitly carry their sortal context.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Logic's substitutivity principle applies only within consistent identity criteria, not across fundamentally different classification schemes.
      ?

      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.