Therefore the identity either fails or remains metaphysically unintelligible in a way that heat-kinetic energy identities do not, meaning the explanatory gap re-emerges at the modal level.

?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.

Heat-kinetic energy identities(used as a comparison for what a successful identity relationship looks like): The scientific discovery that heat is actually just the movement of molecules—a clear example of two different descriptions referring to the same physical thing.
Identity(Adams treats identity statements as a variety of atomic formula rather than a logical truth exempt from existence presuppositions): A relation between an object and itself, expressed as an atomic formula (a=a), subject to the same existence-entailment conditions as other atomic predicates under GSA
Metaphysically Unintelligible(describing whether a claim makes sense): Something that cannot be understood or explained because it doesn't fit with how we think reality actually works.
Modal level(referring to the level at which logical and metaphysical possibilities are examined): When discussing what's possible, impossible, necessary, or contingent—basically the realm of 'could be,' 'must be,' versus 'just happens to be.'

Based on where you are in your exploration