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
    We must either deny that the many Dalmatian-parts are Dal... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Personal Identity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    We must either deny that the many Dalmatian-parts are Dalmatians, or deny that the Dalmatians are many

    Modality & PossibilityPersonal Identity
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Oscar sheds continuously but gradually, so within Oscar's compass at any time there are many Dalmatian-parts that will become definitely Dalmatians at varying future times
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.It is arbitrary to count a part a split second away from being definitely a Dalmatian as a Dalmatian while denying that status to one a day away
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.By Unger's problem of the many, all such parts have equal claim to Dalmatian-hood
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Constitution theorists (Wiggins, Johnston) distinguish the Dalmatian as a sortal-relative continuant from the dog-parts that merely constitute it at a time.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Because 'Dalmatian' is a phase-sortal tied to a biological life, only the organism whose career the sortal tracks counts as the Dalmatian, not its mereological parts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The problem of the many thus dissolves: there is one Dalmatian and many non-identical constituting aggregates, rejecting the premise that parts have equal sortal claim.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Lewis's dominant-kinds solution holds that among the many candidates, only the one best satisfying the dominant sortal 'Dalmatian' determinately instantiates the kind.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Shedding fur creates margin cases for the aggregates but not for Oscar, since biological organism-kinds are graded by overall functional and genetic integration, not boundary sharpness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The dilemma's forced choice collapses once we accept that vague boundaries generate vague many-membership, not numerically many equal Dalmatians.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    Personal IdentityModality & Possibility

    Related

    Because 'Dalmatian' is a phase-sortal tied to a biological life, only the organi...By Unger's problem of the many, all such parts have equal claim to Dalmatian-hoo...Constitution theorists (Wiggins, Johnston) distinguish the Dalmatian as a sortal...It is arbitrary to count a part a split second away from being definitely a Dalm...
    +5 moreShow less
    Lewis's dominant-kinds solution holds that among the many candidates, only the o...Oscar sheds continuously but gradually, so within Oscar's compass at any time th...Shedding fur creates margin cases for the aggregates but not for Oscar, since bi...The dilemma's forced choice collapses once we accept that vague boundaries gener...The problem of the many thus dissolves: there is one Dalmatian and many non-iden...

    Similar

    The Form F is many (having many parts)85%Anything that has many parts is ipso facto many80%By Unger's problem of the many, all such parts have equal claim to Dal...79%If the one is and is many, then Purity-F is false79%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: identity-relative
    View source passageHide passage
    (This paradox is also known as the paradox of 1001 cats; Geach 1980, Lewis 1993): Focus on Oscar and Oscar− at t — before Oscar loses his tail. Is Oscar− a dog? When Oscar loses his tail the resulting creature is certainly a dog. Why then should we deny that Oscar− is a dog? We saw above that one possible response to Chrysippus’ paradox was to claim that Oscar− does not exist at \(t'\). But even if we adopt this view, how does it follow that Oscar−, existing as it does at \(t\), is not a dog? Ye
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit