Identity Crisis: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Metaphysics and Epistemology » Identity Crisis » Identity Crisis

Identity Crisis
when is X not X?

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Identity Crisis

Jean Francoise
Protege of Being

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Feb 04, 2009

Total Topics: 3
Total Posts: 63

Posted 11/05/09 - 04:20 AM:	#61
Jehu wrote: The ‘Law of Identity’ (i.e., the first principle of reason) states: that everything is the same with itself, but different from another. From this comes the ‘Principle of the Indiscernibility of Identicals’ which states: that if there is no discernable difference between the two things, then they are not two different things, but one and the same thing. Conversely, if there is any discernable difference between two things, then the two are different things, and not one and the same thing. I'm sorry but what you have quoted here is the "Law of identity of indiscernables", and it is a different law i.e. the controversial direction of the bi-conditional in Liebniz's law: AxAy(AP(Px <--> Py) <--> x=y) And it comes from his definition of what substance is; a peculiar one hinted by Aristotle in the Categories. Liebniz had the peculiar definition of subsatnce i.e. of an x and all its predicates past present and future; that is x is a substance if it has a complete concept, where the compledte concept is a particular predication true for x for all past present and future - this clearly makes the substance's identity depend on its descriptive properties.
Emptiness whispers in riddles.

Laic
Aspirant

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Nov 07, 2009
Location: Northern Ontario

Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 37

Posted 11/07/09 - 10:43 PM:	#62
The fact that you have done anything to change the apple is irrelevant. If you had just left it in one spot it would not be the same a fraction of a second later as it is organic matter and the structure of that would change slightly without any interaction at all. Identity is in constant change as is everything constantly. Nothing can be preserved as identical. Only similar. To which degree of similarity who can decide? The fact is that everything changes and moves on. Always has, always will. What is identity? That's determined by perception of self. The apple does not care how you see it. That is a human concept. How you see the apple is what matters. If you are satisfied moving the apple then whatever means satisfies you in doing so is acceptable. As long as you know what you're looking at that's all that matters and some small changes do not matter to most people. I'm sure no one would notice the fingerprint. My five year old would notice the bruise and refuse to eat it but to a lot of people that would not matter either as long as they were hungry. The placement would not even matter. It is what it is, to who it is that to.
If life is like a box of chocolates than Science and Philosophy are the insert card that let's you know what you're going to get. Read it wisely! ~Me

reincarnated
the moving finger writes

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 30, 2006
Location: on the road to Samarkand

Total Topics: 31
Total Posts: 2126

Posted 11/08/09 - 01:38 AM:	#63
Laic wrote: The fact that you have done anything to change the apple is irrelevant. If you had just left it in one spot it would not be the same a fraction of a second later as it is organic matter and the structure of that would change slightly without any interaction at all. Identity is in constant change as is everything constantly. Nothing can be preserved as identical. Only similar. To which degree of similarity who can decide? The fact is that everything changes and moves on. Always has, always will. What is identity? That's determined by perception of self. The apple does not care how you see it. That is a human concept. How you see the apple is what matters. If you are satisfied moving the apple then whatever means satisfies you in doing so is acceptable. As long as you know what you're looking at that's all that matters and some small changes do not matter to most people. I'm sure no one would notice the fingerprint. My five year old would notice the bruise and refuse to eat it but to a lot of people that would not matter either as long as they were hungry. The placement would not even matter. It is what it is, to who it is that to. I broadly agree with these sentiments. But again, this seems to indicate that identity is subjective, and the concept of rigid designators is false.
crumpled bits of paper, filled with imperfect thoughts... we all talk a different language, talking in defence... and if you don't give up, and don't give in, you may just be ok... (Mike & The Mechanics, "The Living Years")

Wolfman
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Mar 05, 2007
Location: Oakland, CA

Total Topics: 15
Total Posts: 1138

Posted 11/09/09 - 01:23 AM:	#64
reincarnated wrote: I broadly agree with these sentiments. But again, this seems to indicate that identity is subjective, and the concept of rigid designators is false. Kripke might ask you how this poses a problem for certain natural kinds that designate rigidly, e.g., water, H20.
"That which is done out of love is always beyond good and evil" - Nietzsche "Every art and every inquiry, and similarly every action and pursuit, is thought to aim at some good; and for this reason the good has rightly been declared to be that at which all things aim." - Aristotle "It is better to do one's own duty, however defective it may be, than to follow the duty of another, however well one may perform it. He who does his duty as his own nature reveals it, never sins." - Lao Tzu "Experience without theory is blind, but theory without experience is mere intellectual play." - Kant

reincarnated
the moving finger writes

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jan 30, 2006
Location: on the road to Samarkand

Total Topics: 31
Total Posts: 2126

Posted 11/09/09 - 07:03 AM:	#65
Wolfman wrote: Kripke might ask you how this poses a problem for certain natural kinds that designate rigidly, e.g., water, H20. My answer to Kripke would be: When is "water" not "water"? Is salt water also water? How about heavy water, is that also water? How little "water" does there need to be in the thing designated "water" before it is no longer considered "water" (99.9%, 99%, 90%?)? The very questions seem to show there is no rigidity to the term "water".
crumpled bits of paper, filled with imperfect thoughts... we all talk a different language, talking in defence... and if you don't give up, and don't give in, you may just be ok... (Mike & The Mechanics, "The Living Years")

Wolfman
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Mar 05, 2007
Location: Oakland, CA

Total Topics: 15
Total Posts: 1138

Posted 11/09/09 - 10:14 AM:	#66
reincarnated wrote: My answer to Kripke would be: When is "water" not "water"? Is salt water also water? How about heavy water, is that also water? How little "water" does there need to be in the thing designated "water" before it is no longer considered "water" (99.9%, 99%, 90%?)? The very questions seem to show there is no rigidity to the term "water". Kripke would say that water is no longer water when its chemical composition is no longer H2O.
"That which is done out of love is always beyond good and evil" - Nietzsche "Every art and every inquiry, and similarly every action and pursuit, is thought to aim at some good; and for this reason the good has rightly been declared to be that at which all things aim." - Aristotle "It is better to do one's own duty, however defective it may be, than to follow the duty of another, however well one may perform it. He who does his duty as his own nature reveals it, never sins." - Lao Tzu "Experience without theory is blind, but theory without experience is mere intellectual play." - Kant

Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Sorry, you don't have permission to post. Log in, or register if you haven't yet.