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
    The formal proof that there is no such thing as relative ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Consciousness & Mind
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The formal proof that there is no such thing as relative identity requires that there are no ad hoc sortals.

    Consciousness & Mind
    ?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.If ad hoc sortals were permitted, any putative contradiction generated by relative identity could be avoided by deeming one sortal a phase sortal and the other an ultimate sortal.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If no contradiction can ever arise under a proof strategy, that proof has no force.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A proof against relative identity works by showing that allowing relative identity leads to contradiction (a is G, a = b, and b is not G).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Geach's relative identity thesis does not require avoiding contradiction but rather rejects the unrestricted use of Leibniz's Law across sortal kinds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A proof that assumes absolute identity as its logical framework cannot refute relative identity without begging the question against Geach's foundational challenge.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The 'ad hoc sortal' objection presupposes that sortals must be antecedently fixed, but Wiggins's sortal essentialism shows sortals are grounded in natural kinds, not logical convenience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Dummett and Stevenson's work on criteria of identity shows that different sortals can legitimately supply different identity conditions without any being ad hoc.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If sortal-relative identity conditions are semantically primitive and language-entry governed, the demand for a sortal-neutral proof of identity is itself philosophically unmotivated.
      ?

      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

    Consciousness & Mind

    Related

    A proof against relative identity works by showing that allowing relative identi...A proof that assumes absolute identity as its logical framework cannot refute re...Dummett and Stevenson's work on criteria of identity shows that different sortal...Geach's relative identity thesis does not require avoiding contradiction but rat...
    +4 moreShow less
    If ad hoc sortals were permitted, any putative contradiction generated by relati...If no contradiction can ever arise under a proof strategy, that proof has no for...If sortal-relative identity conditions are semantically primitive and language-e...The 'ad hoc sortal' objection presupposes that sortals must be antecedently fixe...

    Similar

    A proof against relative identity works by showing that allowing relat...81%If ad hoc sortals were permitted, any putative contradiction generated...79%If relative identity were allowed, one could reach a situation where a...76%The contradiction used to refute relative identity dissolves if one so...75%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: substance
    View source passageHide passage
    More importantly, that there are no ad hoc sortals is essential to the significance of the formal proof that there is no such thing as relative identity. In logic and in the application of Leibniz’s Law, ‘a is F’ is normally equivalent to ‘a was, is or will be F’, otherwise the Law would not apply to such accidental properties as ‘is brown’. This is also the way phase sortals work: a human being is, was, or will be a baby. The argument against relative identity works by arguing that, if one allo
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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