# Identity (Leibniz's Law)

1. Philosophy Forum
2. » Metaphysics
3. » Identity (Leibniz's Law)

Mon 6 Jul, 2009 07:30 am
If x has but a single property that is not also a property of y, then x = y. The problem is, the entity that is me, has different properties to the entity that I was when I first started typing this post. How many me(s) existed in between those two points in time? For, time does not work in intevals it flows at an infinate rate, or so it seems. So no matter how little time has passed between two points, where there an infinate amount of me(s)? Should "Me" be defined as a entity even, but rather a set of multiple entities?

LWSleeth

Mon 6 Jul, 2009 02:59 pm
@dawoel,
dawoel;75308 wrote:
If x has but a single property that is not also a property of y, then x = y. The problem is, the entity that is me, has different properties to the entity that I was when I first started typing this post. How many me(s) existed in between those two points in time? For, time does not work in intevals it flows at an infinate rate, or so it seems. So no matter how little time has passed between two points, where there an infinate amount of me(s)? Should "Me" be defined as a entity even, but rather a set of multiple entities?

[SIZE="3"]One way to resolve this is to see the spot one occupies (as a conscious entity) always gives one the uniqueness of that perspective since no two entities can reside in the same point at that same time. That guarantees both the constancy of a "spot," and that you will individuate as no other entity possibly can.[/SIZE]

kennethamy

Mon 6 Jul, 2009 04:23 pm
@dawoel,
dawoel;75308 wrote:
If x has but a single property that is not also a property of y, then x = y. The problem is, the entity that is me, has different properties to the entity that I was when I first started typing this post. How many me(s) existed in between those two points in time? For, time does not work in intevals it flows at an infinate rate, or so it seems. So no matter how little time has passed between two points, where there an infinate amount of me(s)? Should "Me" be defined as a entity even, but rather a set of multiple entities?

That is not true. You and the person who later typed the post, have exactly the same properties. You typed the post at T1, and the person who who is identical with you also typed the post at T1. It is true of A that he typed the post at T1, and it is true of B at T2 that he typed the same post at T1. No problem. We merely have to index for time, the typing.

1. Philosophy Forum
2. » Metaphysics
3. » Identity (Leibniz's Law)