more on this theme | more from this text
Full Idea
Arguments for statue being the clay are: that the clay is intrinsically like the statue, that the clay has the same atoms as the statue', that objects don't have modal properties such as being necessarily F, and the reference of 'property' changes.
Gist of Idea
Clay is intrinsically and atomically the same as statue (and that lacks 'modal properties')
Source
Lynne Rudder Baker (Why Constitution is not Identity [1997], II)
Book Ref
-: 'Journal of Philosophy' [-], p.603
A Reaction
[my summary of the arguments she identifies - see text for details] Rudder Baker attempts to refute all four of these arguments, in defence of constitution as different from identity.
| 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] |
| 16081 | The constitution view gives a unified account of the relation of persons/bodies, statues/bronze etc [Rudder Baker] |
| 16080 | Is it possible for two things that are identical to become two separate things? [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] |