[FOM] Question about Congruence
hdeutsch@ilstu.edu
hdeutsch at ilstu.edu
Mon Jan 28 09:05:31 EST 2008
Is the following fact well known? It is of some philosophical
interest, as explained below.
(*) Let R be an equivalence relation defined on a set A and let B be a
set. Then B is closed under R iff each element E of the partition P of
A induced by R is such that if some element of E is in B, then they
all are.
I'm sure there is a significant generalization of this. What is it?
One area of philosophical interest where this might be helpful
concerns the puzzles of coincidence, e.g. the problem of identity
through change. A popular solution is the 4D one, according to which
objects have temporal as well spatial parts. But 4D theorists (e.g.
T. Sider, Four Dimensionalism, Oxford, 2001) have been unable to give
an uncontroversial or decisive answer to the question: "What
conditions must two temporal parts of things meet in order to be
temporal parts of the same object. The fact above gives at least a
logical condition they must meet--not that it answers the more
pressing question, assuming that the relation of being two temporal
parts of the same temporally extended object is an equivalence
relation. But in general, the fact mentioned above gives a general
answer to what has become known as "Wiggins' Challenge"--the challenge
to give some sort of systematic restriction on Leibniz' Law, if one's
theory demands it--as in the cases of Gibbard's theory of contingent
identity or Parsons' theory of indeterminate identity. (See K.
Koslicki, "Almost Indiscernible Objects and the Suspect Strategy," JP,
Feb., 2005 for discussion and references.) Parsons' indeterminate
identity is not transitive, but there may something in the vicinity of
(*) that would be helpful. Thanks, hd
--------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using Illinois State University Webmail.
More information about the FOM
mailing list