more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
I argue that a lump of clay borrows the property of being a statue from the statue. The lump is a statue because, and only because, there is something that the lump constitutes that is a statue.
Gist of Idea
The clay is not a statue - it borrows that property from the statue it constitutes
Source
Lynne Rudder Baker (Why Constitution is not Identity [1997], n9)
Book Ref
-: 'Journal of Philosophy' [-], p.602
A Reaction
It is skating on very thin metaphysical ice to introduce the concept of 'borrowing' a property. I've spent the last ten minutes trying to 'borrow' some properties, but without luck.
16076 | Constitution is not identity, as consideration of essential predicates shows [Rudder Baker] |
16078 | Clay is intrinsically and atomically the same as statue (and that lacks 'modal properties') [Rudder Baker] |
16080 | Is it possible for two things that are identical to become two separate things? [Rudder Baker] |
16081 | The constitution view gives a unified account of the relation of persons/bodies, statues/bronze etc [Rudder Baker] |
16077 | The clay is not a statue - it borrows that property from the statue it constitutes [Rudder Baker] |
16082 | Statues essentially have relational properties lacked by lumps [Rudder Baker] |