more from this thinker     |     more from this text

Single Idea 17554

[filed under theme 9. Objects / F. Identity among Objects / 7. Indiscernible Objects ]

Full Idea

There are never two beings in nature that are perfectly alike, two beings in which it is not possible to discover an internal difference, that is, one founded on an intrinsic denomination.

Gist of Idea

There must be some internal difference between any two beings in nature

Source

Gottfried Leibniz (Monadology [1716], §09)

Book Ref

Leibniz,Gottfried: 'Philosophical Essays', ed/tr. Arlew,R /Garber,D [Hackett 1989], p.214

A Reaction

From this it follows that if two things really are indiscernible, then we must say that they are one thing. He says monads all differ from one another. People certainly do. Leibniz must say this of electrons. How can he know this?

The 38 ideas with the same theme [objects between which no differences are detectable]:

489 Each thing must be in some way unique [Diogenes of Apollonia]
13788 If we made a perfect duplicate of Cratylus, there would be two Cratyluses [Plato]
17175 There cannot be two substances with the same attributes [Spinoza]
17554 There must be some internal difference between any two beings in nature [Leibniz]
5055 No two things are totally identical [Leibniz]
13178 Things in different locations are different because they 'express' those locations [Leibniz]
19412 If two bodies only seem to differ in their position, those different environments will matter [Leibniz]
19411 In nature there aren't even two identical straight lines, so no two bodies are alike [Leibniz]
16504 Two eggs can't be identical, because the same truths can't apply to both of them [Leibniz]
7576 The Identity of Indiscernibles is true of concepts with identical properties, but not of particulars [Kant, by Jolley]
14509 If we ignore differences between water drops, we still distinguish them by their location [Kant]
12033 An object is identical with itself, and no different indiscernible object can share that [Russell/Whitehead, by Adams,RM]
11849 It at least makes sense to say two objects have all their properties in common [Wittgenstein on Russell]
14107 Terms are identical if they belong to all the same classes [Russell]
11095 We should just identify any items which are indiscernible within a given discourse [Quine]
10195 If the universe just held two indiscernibles spheres, that refutes the Identity of Indiscernibles [Black]
5477 One thing can look like something else, without being the something else [Ellis]
12034 If the universe was cyclical, totally indiscernible events might occur from time to time [Adams,RM]
14510 Two events might be indiscernible yet distinct, if there was a universe cyclical in time [Adams,RM]
16455 Black's two globes might be one globe in highly curved space [Adams,RM]
12130 a and b share all properties; so they share being-identical-with-a; so a = b [Brody]
16453 The bundle theory makes the identity of indiscernibles a necessity, since the thing is the properties [Stalnaker]
16505 By the principle of Indiscernibility, a symmetrical object could only be half of itself! [Wiggins]
7566 The Identity of Indiscernibles is really the same as the verification principle [Jolley]
4033 Two pure spheres in non-absolute space are identical but indiscernible [Campbell,K]
3145 The Indiscernibility of Identicals is a truism; but the Identity of Indiscernibles depends on possible identical worlds [Rey]
13379 If two objects are indiscernible across spacetime, how could we decide whether or not they are the same? [Jubien]
13730 The Indiscernibility of Identicals has been a big problem for modal logic [Fitting/Mendelsohn]
4203 Identity of Indiscernibles (same properties, same thing) ) is not Leibniz's Law (same thing, same properties) [Lowe]
13702 The identity of indiscernibles is necessarily true, if being a member of some set counts as a property [Sider]
4476 Most philosophers think that the identity of indiscernibles is false [Moreland]
10198 If only two indiscernible electrons exist, future differences must still be possible [Zimmerman,DW]
10199 Discernible differences at different times may just be in counterparts [Zimmerman,DW]
5746 The Identity of Indiscernibles is contentious for qualities, and trivial for non-qualities [Melia]
4639 Leibniz's Law is about the properties of objects; the Identity of Indiscernibles is about perception of objects [Baggini /Fosl]
7927 At different times Leibniz articulated three different versions of his so-called Law [Macdonald,C]
7928 The Identity of Indiscernibles is false, because it is not necessarily true [Macdonald,C]
18764 The notion of 'property' is unclear for a logical version of the Identity of Indiscernibles [Anderson,CA]