Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Weakly Classical Theories of Identity.Joshua Schechter - 2011 - Review of Symbolic Logic 4 (4):607-644.
    There are well-known quasi-formal arguments that identity is a "strict" relation in at least the following three senses: (1) There is a single identity relation and a single distinctness relation; (2) There are no contingent cases of identity or distinctness; and (3) There are no vague or indeterminate cases of identity or distinctness. However, the situation is less clear cut than it at first may appear. There is a natural formal theory of identity that is very close to the standard (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Identity, Leibniz’s Law and Non-Transitive Reasoning.Pablo Cobreros, Paul Egré, David Ripley & Robert van Rooij - 2013 - Metaphysica 14 (2):253-264.
    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.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Identity, Leibniz's Law and Non-transitive Reasoning.Pablo Cobreros, Paul Egré, David Ripley & Robert Rooij - 2013 - Metaphysica 14 (2):253-264.
    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.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Another Model of the Open Future.Daniel Rubio - forthcoming - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion.
    In his work on the open future, Patrick Todd outlines three models of how to deal with future contingents. These models must answer two questions: one metaphysical, about what facts there are in the world; one semantic, about how to deal with sentences involving ‘will.’ Model 1 has a privileged timeline. Model 2 has an actual future timeline but leaves it indeterminate which timeline that is. Model 3 has no future timeline. All three give will-sentences a modal treatement, as a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation