Re: Entity and Identity
Date: 03 Aug 2009 23:23:08 GMT
Message-ID: <4a77715c$0$9313$703f8584_at_news.kpn.nl>
Brian wrote:
>On Jul 27, 7:24 pm, rp_at_raampje.(none) (Reinier Post) wrote:
>> Brian wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>> >It may be
>> >splitting hairs, but there is a distinct difference between 'identity'
>> >and 'the identity' in that 'identity' is a binary relation between
>> >objects in the universe that denotes /is identical to/, but 'the
>> >identity' of an object is that essential property (unary relation)
>> >which distinguishes it from all other objects (its haecceity) and
>> >which is embodied by an object identifier or by a proper name (in the
>> >logical sense).
>>
>> I think this is utterly mistaken, regardless of whether you're referring
>> to logic or to or OO programming. Identity is never a relationship
>> between objects, but between identifiers that denote (refer to) objects.
>
>I suggest you bone up on Leibniz.
>> And haecceity is not a property.
>
>Yes it is. Is not the sum of all qualitative properties also a
>property?
It depends on what you mean by that. The potential problem is not
in considering a sum of properties as a property, but in the 'all'.
If you define the haeccity of an entity type as the collection of all
qualitative properties we distinguish for that object type, then of course
haeccity can be regarded as a property of such objects. It just becomes
another way of saying that all properties of a relation form a key.
I doubt this is what you mean.
If you define it as all qualitative properties that can conceivably be
distinguish for a particular object type, then you start running into
circles: for every property you consider that adds distinctions between
-- ReinierReceived on Tue Aug 04 2009 - 01:23:08 CEST