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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that The rigidified property 'actually being on David's right' is an individual essence of Paul.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Individual essences must ground cross-world identity independently of any contingent relational facts about the actual world.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The rigidified property 'actually being on David's right' is parasitic on a contingent spatial relation that could have failed to obtain.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A property that depends on contingent actuality for its application cannot serve as the metaphysical basis for necessary identity across worlds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kripke's framework distinguishes genuine essential properties from mere logical rigidification of accidental properties via the actuality operator.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Rigidifying a contingent property using 'actually' produces a rigid designator of a property-extension, not an intrinsic essential property of the individual.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Haecceitism, not rigidified relational properties, is the proper theoretical vehicle for individual essences, as argued by Adams and Chisholm.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.An individual essence is a property that, necessarily, if x exists then x has that property, and necessarily only x has that property.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Paul is the only person to have the contingent property of being on David's right in the actual world, then the rigidified version of that property belongs necessarily and exclusively to Paul.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The rigidified property 'actually being on David's right' is a necessary property of Paul.
      ?

      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.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42