Re: Holism Tested!

Steve Massey (
Fri, 29 May 1998 09:52:40 CDT

>>...I suspect that most people would not include
>>the location of an object as part of its identity - they would
>>hold that the piano before and after movement was the same
>>piano; that the coin one picks up, and the coin one slips into
>>ones pocket are identical.
> IAN: If location is not an attribute of identity,
> then identity is non-local, if identity is non-
> local, then A = -A, which is to say that the
> identity of A exists equally in all locations.

If location is not an attribute of identity, then objects in
different locations can be identical. Identical objects in
different locations have different values of 'not-the-object',
so can not be defined by it.

Additionally, defining 'not-the-object' begs the question of
what set one is defining the 'not' operation on. If we are
talking about the set { A B C }, then not-A is { B C }. If
we are considering the latin alphabet, not-A is { B .. Z }.
Yet A retains its identity with each definition: it is the
same symbol. Indeed, the set { A B C } is a subset of the latin

Thus A is defined, not solely by not-A, but by not-A and the
set or universe under consideration.


Get Your Private, Free Email at