Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Therefore, 'c' can be a rigid designator even if its referent undergoes sortal change over time within the actual world.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Sortal properties determine identity conditions; changing sortal kind means changing what makes the object the same object over time.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If 'c' rigidly designates across sortal change, we lose explanatory power for why different sortals have different persistence conditions.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Actual sortal change (organism to corpse) intuitively breaks identity in ways possible sortal variation doesn't, so rigid designation seems implausible.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Rigid designation tracks historical-causal chains to objects, not their intrinsic properties, so sortal changes don't break reference.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
A ship retains identity through gradual plank replacement; similarly, 'c' can rigidly designate an entity across sortal transformations.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Modal intuitions support this: we say 'this statue could have been bronze' even if it's currently marble, suggesting rigid reference across possibilities.
?
How convincing is this?
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.