And, of course, there is this:
We can only determine that 'A' and 'B' are not two names for the same thing if we can account for the way we distinguish between the 'things' they might be names for. This doesn't reach 'outside the language'. It's just like the game of 'Pangolin' - Is there a question we can ask about something that must have a different answer for A than for B?
If there is no such question, we have no grounds for denying identity. To claim that there may be a 'real' distinction that we cannot discern is no more than to claim that we may have to review our conclusion in the light of new circumstances. If the possibility of review is unintelligible, then the identity is necessary.
No comments:
Post a Comment