The original claim therefore conflates knowledge of a particular individual with knowledge of its kind, dissolving rather than preserving the personal identity of the cognitive object.

?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.

Conflates(in argumentation and logic): Treats two different things as if they're the same thing, or mixes them up in a way that causes confusion.
cognitive object(The thing being studied or discussed in this philosophical argument.): Something that we know about or think about—any subject of knowledge or thought.
dissolving rather than preserving(Describes what the flawed claim does to personal identity.): Destroying or losing something instead of keeping it intact—here, the statement says the claim erases the distinctness of something instead of maintaining it.
knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.): Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.

Based on where you are in your exploration