Identity, Leibniz's Law and Non-transitive Reasoning

Abstract

Arguments based on Leibniz's Law seem to show that there is no room for either indefinite or contingent identity. The arguments seem to prove too much, but their conclusion is hard to resist if we want to keep Leibniz's Law. We present a novel approach to this issue, based on an appropriate modification of the notion of logical consequence.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Notes

  1. 1.

    In general, it might be risky to apply conditional proof after the rule of necessitation. In the present case, however, there is no problem since necessitation is applied to something that can be derived independently of the premises discharged in the application of conditional proof.

  2. 2.

    Schechter (2011) calls a logic ‘weakly classical’ if it preserves all classically valid inferences (though not, perhaps, all classically valid metainferences). Our approach to truth and vagueness weakly classical in this sense although, strictly speaking, it yields classical logic for the classical vocabulary and an extension of classical logic for languages enjoying transparent truth or similarity predicates. See Ripley (2012) for proof-theoretic results on the theory of transparent truth.

  3. 3.

    In our 2012b paper, it is shown how to define analogues of the non-transitive ST logic for possible world semantics. We shall make some simplifying assumptions below, like that all atomic formulas are of the form x = y. We leave the study of more general options for future research.

  4. 4.

    “Although it is better to be methodical in our investigations and to consider the economics of research, yet there is no positive sin against logic in trying any theory which may come into our heads, so long as it is adopted in such a sense as to permit the investigation to go on unimpeded and undiscouraged. On the other hand, to set up a philosophy which barricades the road of further advance toward the truth is the one unpardonable offence in reasoning, as it is also the one to which metaphysicians have in all ages shown themselves the most addicted” (Peirce 1931, I. 3. §4).

References

  1. Bader R (2012) The Non-Transitivity of the Contingent and Occasional Identity Relations. Philosophical Studies 157: 141–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Cobreros P, Egré P, Ripley D, van Rooij R (2012a) Tolerant, Classical, Strict. Journal of Philosophical Logic 41: 347–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cobreros P, Egré P, Ripley D, van Rooij R (2012b) Tolerance and Mixed Consequence in the s'valuationist setting. Studia Logica 100: 855–877.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cobreros P, Egré P, Ripley D, van Rooij R (2013a) Reaching Transparent Truth. Mind (forthcoming).

  5. Cobreros P, Egré P, Ripley D, van Rooij R (2013b) Priest's Motorbike and Tolerant Identity. In: Ciuni R, Wansing H, Willkommen C (eds), Proceedings of Trends in Logic XI, Springer (forthcoming).

  6. Cobreros P, Egré P, Ripley D, van Rooij R (2013c) Vagueness, Truth and Permissive Consequence. In: Achourioti T, Galinon H, Fujimoto K, Martínez-Fernández J (eds) Volume on Truth in the Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science series of Springer (forthcoming).

  7. Cobreros P, Egré P, Ripley D, van Rooij R (2013d) How many degrees of truth do we need for vague predicates? (manuscript).

  8. Evans G (1978) Can There Be Vague Objects? Analysis 38: 208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Frege, G (1879). Begriffsschrift: Eine Der Arithmetische Nachgebildete Formelsprache des Reinen Denkens. Halle.

  10. Frege G (1892) Über Sinn und Bedeutung, Zeitschrift für Philosophie und philosophische Kritik, NF 100, S. 25–50.

  11. Gibbard A (1975) Contingent Identity. Journal of Philosophical Logic 4: 187–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hughes G E, Cresswell M J (1996) A New Introduction to Modal Logic. Routledge, New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  13. Lewis D (1988) Vague Identity: Evans Misunderstood. Analysis 48: 128–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Magidor O. (2011) Arguments by Leibniz's Law. Philosophy Compass 6: 180–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Parsons T, Woodruff P (1995) Worldly indeterminacy of identity. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 95: 171–191.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Peirce CS (1932) The Collected Papers Vol. I: Principles of Philosophy. Belknap Press, Cambridge Mass.

  17. Priest G (2008) An Introduction to Non-Classical Logic, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  18. Priest G (2010) Non-transitive identity. In: Dietz R, Moruzzi S (eds) Cuts and Clouds. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Quine WVO (1960) Word and Object. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

  20. Récanati F (2000) Opacity and the attitudes. In A. Orenstein and P. Kotatko, Knowledge, Language and Logic: Questions for Quine, Kluwer Academic Publishers (Ed.), 367–406.

  21. Ripley D (2012) Conservatively Extending Classical Logic with Transparent Truth. The Review of Symbolic Logic 5: 354–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ripley D (2013) Paradoxes and Failures of Cut. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 91 :139–164.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Schlechter J (2011) Weakly Classical Theories of Identity. The Review of Symbolic Logic 4: 607–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Segerberg K (1971) An Essay in Classical Modal Logic. Uppsala,Filosofiska Föreningen Och Filosofiska Institutionen Vid Uppsala Universitet.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Wiggins D (1980) Sameness and Substance. Blackwell, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Williams R (2007) Multiple Actualities and Ontically Vague Identity. The Philosophical Quarterly 58: 134–154.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Williams R (2008) Ontic Vagueness and Metaphysical Indeterminacy. Philosophy Compass 3: 763–788.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Williamson T (1996) The Necessity and Determinacy of Distinctness. In: Lovibond S, Williams S (eds) Essays for David Wiggins: Identity, Truth and Value. Blackwell, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013)/ERC grant agreement n° 229 441-CCC and from the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad, Government of Spain project “Borderlineness and Tolerance” ref. FFI2010-16984.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Pablo Cobreros or Paul Egré or David Ripley or Robert van Rooij.

About this article

Cite this article

Cobreros, P., Egré, P., Ripley, D. et al. Identity, Leibniz's Law and Non-transitive Reasoning. Int Ontology Metaphysics 14, 253–264 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12133-013-0125-2

Download citation

Keywords

  • Identity
  • Contingent identity
  • Indefinite identity
  • Leibniz's Law
  • Logical consequence
  • Nontransitive reasoning