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
    Therefore C and D must be identical, contradicting the hy... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Personal Identity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Any theory allowing distinct necessarily equivalent propositions is untenable.

    Therefore C and D must be identical, contradicting the hypothesis that they are distinct.

    Modality & PossibilityPersonal Identity
    ?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.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Personal IdentityModality & Possibility

    Connections

    2 topics

    Philosophy of Language5 linked

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Personal Identity
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Truth & Knowledge
    2 linked

    Related

    Any theory allowing distinct necessarily equivalent propositions is untenable.If 'not-C' equals 'not-D', then 'not-not-C' and 'not-not-D' are the same proposi...If C and D are distinct, necessarily equivalent propositions, then 'not-C' and '...The truth conditions of 'not-A' are exhausted by: 'not-A' is true when A is fals...
    +1 moreShow less
    The truth conditions of 'not-not-A' just are the truth conditions of A.

    Similar

    Therefore Rab and Rba would be identical, which contradicts their dist...95%Carter's argument against the claim that S and S' are identical fails91%A theory cannot coherently entail both that A is identical with B and ...88%Carter (1987) claims in effect that S and S' are not identical87%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: hyperintensionality
    View source passageHide passage
    The objection, presented in Cresswell (2002) against structured propositions and suggested by Stalnaker (1996) against impossible worlds, can be illustrated by focusing on the meaning of negation. Given a statement \(A\), what truth-conditions can we offer for \({\sim}A\)? Plausibly, the truth conditions can be exhausted by specifying that \({\sim}A\) is true when \(A\) is false, and not otherwise. Since this exhausts the meaning of “\({\sim}\)”, it is tempting to identify the proposition \({\si

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective