>Ian Goddard wrote:
>> Since the popular definition of identity is
>> atomist and states "A=A," which is to say
>> that the identity of A is exclusive to A,
>> that A is what it is due exclusively to A,
>
>Rubbish. The statement "Ian=Ian" is not a denial that other entities
>had causal influence on Ian's nature.
IAN: The statement A=A tells us nothing.
It is meaningless, it is no more meaning-
ful than saying "A." The philosopher Ludwig
Josef Johann Wittgenstein was absolutely right
to observe that "to say of one thing that it is
identical with itself is to say nothing at all."
The statement "A=A" is purported to tell us about
the nature of identity, and yet it fails by 100%.
>> it cannot be said to be a
>> true identity theory,
>
>A definition is not a theory.
IAN: A defintion of A tells us what
A is, and a theory of identity
tells us what identity is.
The statement "A=A" does not
tell us what identity is.
>> and logic therefore
>> dictates that it must be a false theory,
>> particularly when the identity theory,
>> "A=A+~A," is never shown to be false.
>
>Because it is vacuous.
IAN: But the statement "A=A" is not??!!
>"A=A" is *useful*. "A = the whole universe" may be interesting in some
>contexts but where does it get us?!
IAN: To the truth.
****************************************************************
VISIT Ian Williams Goddard ----> http://www.erols.com/igoddard
________________________________________________________________
GODDARD'S METAPHYSICS --> http://www.erols.com/igoddard/meta.htm
________________________________________________________________