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 property 'being on David's right' is not an individua... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Personal Identity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The property 'being on David's right' is not an individual essence of Paul.

    Modality & Possibility
    ?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.An individual essence must be a property Paul could not exist without, and that only Paul could have.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Paul might have existed without having the property of being on David's right.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Charles might have had the property of being on David's right instead of Paul.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.If haecceitism is true, each individual has a primitive thisness that constitutes their essence, irreducible to qualitative properties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Relational properties like 'being on David's right' may be grounded in haecceitistic facts about Paul's de re modal profile.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, dismissing relational properties as non-essential presupposes anti-haecceitism, which is itself a contested metaphysical commitment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Essentialism about origins (Kripke, Salmon) holds that an individual's essential properties include those fixed by their causal-historical origins.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Paul's spatial relation to David is constitutive of the very event that individuates Paul in a world, it may be origin-essential, not merely accidental.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The supporting argument's premise that Paul 'might have existed' without this property assumes modal separability that essentialists about origins explicitly deny.
      ?

      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

    Personal IdentityModality & Possibility

    Related

    An individual essence must be a property Paul could not exist without, and that ...Charles might have had the property of being on David's right instead of Paul.Essentialism about origins (Kripke, Salmon) holds that an individual's essential...If Paul's spatial relation to David is constitutive of the very event that indiv...
    +5 moreShow less
    If haecceitism is true, each individual has a primitive thisness that constitute...Paul might have existed without having the property of being on David's right.Relational properties like 'being on David's right' may be grounded in haecceiti...The supporting argument's premise that Paul 'might have existed' without this pr...Therefore, dismissing relational properties as non-essential presupposes anti-ha...

    Similar

    The rigidified property 'actually being on David's right' is an indivi...92%The property 'actually being on David's right' is a necessary property...88%The rigidified property 'actually being on David's right' is a necessa...85%Paul might have existed without having the property of being on David'...83%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: propositions-singular
    View source passageHide passage
    The second response involves moving from contingent properties like those involved in (2) and (3) to necessary properties, and in particular to what, following Plantinga in (1974), we will call an individual essence, which is a property that, necessarily, if x exists, then it has that property and, necessarily, only x has. The property being on David's right is not an individual essence of Paul, as Paul might have existed without having had it and Charles might have had it instead. But it is eas
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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