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
    The necessary a posteriori status of identity statements ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Different modes of presentation associated with co-referential names can be used to distinguish the propositions expressed by sentences containing those names.

    The necessary a posteriori status of identity statements like 'Hesperus is Phosphorus' is fully explicable by distinguishing epistemic from metaphysical necessity, leaving no explanatory role for Fregean senses.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Metaphysical necessity concerns what's true in all possible worlds; epistemic necessity concerns justification. These are logically distinct.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Identity statements are metaphysically necessary (if x=y, then necessarily x=y), yet epistemically contingent (empirical discovery required).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The distinction fully explains why we can rationally deny 'Hesperus is Phosphorus' before learning it, without contradiction or sense-identity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Fregean senses explain how co-referential names can differ in cognitive significance; the epistemic/metaphysical distinction alone cannot.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If senses are unnecessary, the rationality of withholding judgment on 'Hesperus is Phosphorus' becomes a purely psychological fact, not semantic.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The distinction fails to explain why identity differs from other necessary a posteriori truths like 'water is H2O' in terms of informativeness.
      ?

      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.

    Key Terms

    Fregean senses(philosophy of language/logic)
    A concept from philosopher Gottlob Frege: the meaning or way of understanding something (like how 'the morning star' and 'the evening star' have different senses even though they refer to the same planet, Venus).
    Gottlob Frege(historical philosopher)
    A late 19th and early 20th-century German philosopher and logician who made fundamental contributions to understanding how language and meaning work.
    Hesperus is Phosphorus(the primary example used)
    A famous example in philosophy: Hesperus and Phosphorus are both ancient names for Venus (the planet), and the statement points out that discovering they're the same planet tells us something deep about how names and necessity work.
    Necessary(ontological distinction in Mulla Sadra's metaphysics)
    The principle, God; pure existence without essence, quality or property that undergoes change or motion
    a posteriori(Used to classify the epistemic status of necessary statements post-Kripke)
    Knowable, but not independently of empirical experience
    epistemic necessity(Distinguished from other kinds of necessity in formal epistemology)
    The necessity of things that must be true given what one knows.
    explicable(as used in describing what a theory can or cannot explain)
    Able to be explained or accounted for by a theory or reason.
    identity statements(as used in logic and metaphysics)
    Sentences that claim two things are the same, like 'water is H2O' or 'the morning star is the evening star.'
    metaphysical necessity(Distinguishing types of necessity)
    A property of things that must be the case but not purely by logical form — true in all possible worlds without being logical tautologies

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Different modes of presentation associated with co-referential names can be used...Fregean senses explain how co-referential names can differ in cognitive signific...Identity statements are metaphysically necessary (if x=y, then necessarily x=y),...If senses are unnecessary, the rationality of withholding judgment on 'Hesperus ...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit
    +3 moreShow less
    Metaphysical necessity concerns what's true in all possible worlds; epistemic ne...The distinction fails to explain why identity differs from other necessary a pos...The distinction fully explains why we can rationally deny 'Hesperus is Phosphoru...