Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Topoi Library ((TOPI,volume 4))

Abstract

Identity is an equivalence relation, a congruence relation, and a fully determinate relation. Moreover, where identity is concerned, there can be no almosts and no near misses. Identity seems unique.1 But that is not enough to show that identity and its peculiarities cannot be accounted for somehow in other terms. It does not show there can be no reduction of sameness to other properties and relations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. I make this claim in Chapter Six of Sameness and Substance Renewed (Wiggins [2001]). Several extended passages of the present article appear in another form in Sameness and Substance Renewed. They appear here by kind permission of Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  2. As is well known, Saul Kripke has spoken out eloquently against rulings of this kind. See Kripke [ 1980 ]. If his efforts had eradicated completely the underlying philosophical conceptions that have seemed to sustain such a ruling, then I should not have begun my speech here.

    Google Scholar 

  3. See John Wallace [1964]. See pp. 80ff. John Wallace’s original sentence was “in every forest there grows more than one tree”. Timothy Williamson points out to me that the sentence it would be better for Wallace to consider is “In every forest there grow many trees”. Unlike “more than one”, “many” does not reimport identity. Then (Williamson suggests), in order to make Wallace’s point properly secure, let the quantificational language be treated as possessing a “many” quantifier as primitive. The philosophical significance of Quine’s elimination recipe ought not to depend on the question whether “many” is admissible as a logical constant.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wiggins, D. (2002). Identity and Supervenience. In: Bottani, A., Carrara, M., Giaretta, P. (eds) Individuals, Essence and Identity. Topoi Library, vol 4. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1866-0_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-1866-0_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-5988-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-1866-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics