more on this theme     |     more from this thinker


Single Idea 14484

[filed under theme 9. Objects / B. Unity of Objects / 3. Unity Problems / e. Vague objects ]

Full Idea

We cannot accept the existence of vague objects, according to Evans's argument that there cannot be indeterminacy of identity. ...From the assumption that it is indeterminate whether a = b, we conclude, determinately, that it's not the case that a = b.

Gist of Idea

If a=b is indeterminate, then a=/=b, and so there cannot be indeterminate identity

Source

report of Gareth Evans (Can there be Vague Objects? [1978]) by Amie L. Thomasson - Ordinary Objects 05.6

Book Ref

Thomasson,Amie L.: 'Ordinary Objects' [OUP 2010], p.107


A Reaction

I think we should keep intrinsic identity separate from identity between entities. A cloud can be clearly identified, while being a bit fuzzy. It is only when you ask whether we saw the same cloud that Evans's argument seems relevant.


The 6 ideas from 'Can there be Vague Objects?'

Evans argues (falsely!) that a contradiction follows from treating objects as vague [Evans, by Lowe]
Is it coherent that reality is vague, identities can be vague, and objects can have fuzzy boundaries? [Evans]
Evans assumes there can be vague identity statements, and that his proof cannot be right [Evans, by Lewis]
There clearly are vague identity statements, and Evans's argument has a false conclusion [Evans, by Lewis]
If a=b is indeterminate, then a=/=b, and so there cannot be indeterminate identity [Evans, by Thomasson]
There can't be vague identity; a and b must differ, since a, unlike b, is only vaguely the same as b [Evans, by PG]