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
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Type-identity with a physical particular requires sharing... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Standard Linguistic Entities (SLEs) cannot be identified with physical (acoustic) spatio-temporal phenomena

    Type-identity with a physical particular requires sharing all essential physical properties, which no abstract linguistic type can do with any single acoustic event.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Abstract types are repeatable across multiple instances; physical particulars are singular and unrepeatable, making identity impossible.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Essential physical properties include spatiotemporal location; linguistic types lack determinate location, unlike acoustic events.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Identity requires the indiscernibility of identicals; types and particulars differ in modality—types are necessarily abstract, events contingently physical.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Identity might hold between abstract and physical if types are constituted by particulars rather than wholly distinct entities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Essential properties are relative to our categorization; physical properties may not be essential to what makes something a linguistic type.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim assumes property-sharing is necessary for identity, but relational or functional identity doesn't require shared intrinsic properties.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Perception1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    Abstract types are repeatable across multiple instances; physical particulars ar...Essential physical properties include spatiotemporal location; linguistic types ...Essential properties are relative to our categorization; physical properties may...Identity might hold between abstract and physical if types are constituted by pa...
    +3 moreShow less
    Identity requires the indiscernibility of identicals; types and particulars diff...Standard Linguistic Entities (SLEs) cannot be identified with physical (acoustic...The claim assumes property-sharing is necessary for identity, but relational or ...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)