Geach and Relative Identity

Review of Metaphysics 22 (3):547-555 (1969)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Since Geach did not give any account of what is to be considered the same form of relative identity, I assumed that 'x is the same A as y' expresses the same form of relative identity as 'x is the same B as y' if and only if 'A' means the same as 'B'. If this is an incorrect assumption, then I must ask what is the criterion of identity for forms of relative identity?

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,203

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Geach and Relative Identity.P. T. Geach - 1969 - Review of Metaphysics 22 (3):547-555.
Geach and Relative Identity [with Rejoinder and Reply].Fred Feldman & P. T. Geach - 1968 - Review of Metaphysics 22 (3):547 - 561.
In defence of relative identity.Eddy M. Zemach - 1974 - Philosophical Studies 26 (3-4):207 - 218.
Relative identity and Leibniz's law.Leslie Stevenson - 1972 - Philosophical Quarterly 22 (87):155-158.
Locke and Relative Identity.Vere Chappell - 1989 - History of Philosophy Quarterly 6 (1):69 - 83.
Cardinality and Identity.Massimiliano Carrara & Elisabetta Sacchi - 2007 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 36 (5):539-556.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-03-18

Downloads
37 (#640,129)

6 months
4 (#864,415)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

A Problem about Identity.J. J. MacIntosh - 1974 - Dialogue 13 (3):455-474.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references