Anti-Criterialism Does Not Result in an Unacceptable Consequence

Author:

Zhan Xinyi1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Philosophy , Peking University , Beijing , China

Abstract

Abstract Anti-criterialists argue that there are no criteria that ensure personal persistence. However, this perspective is criticized for resulting in an unacceptable consequence that undermines our intuitions, daily beliefs, and direct introspective awareness of personal persistence. I defend anti-criterialism by responding to this objection and arguing that none of these aspects are undermined by anti-criterialism. The flawed objection against anti-criterialism reveals the excessive ambition of criterialism in seeking criteria for personal persistence with metaphysical necessity, which goes beyond our abilities and needs. As beings living in the actual world, we are not able to consider what happens to personal persistence in remote possible worlds. Moreover, to judge whether a person persists or not in daily life, we do not need a criterion that ensures personal persistence in all situations. Anti-criterialism acknowledges the complexity and variability of personal persistence and offers a more realistic and practical approach to understanding personal identity.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Reference24 articles.

1. DeRose, K. 1995. “Solving the Skeptical Problem.” The Philosophical Review 104 (1): 1–52. https://doi.org/10.2307/2186011.

2. Duncan, M. 2014. “A Challenge to Anti-Criterialism.” Erkenntnis 79 (2): 283–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-013-9494-8.

3. Duncan, M. 2020. “A Renewed Challenge to Anti-Criterialism.” Erkenntnis 85 (1): 165–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-018-0023-7.

4. Fiocco, M. O. 2021. “There is Nothing to Identity.” Synthese 199 (3–4): 7321–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-021-03117-4.

5. Ichikawa, Jonathan J., and S. Matthias. 2018. “The Analysis of Knowledge.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta, Summer 2018 ed. Stanford: The Metaphysics Research Lab, Philosophy Department, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2018/entries/knowledge-analysis/ (accessed January 20, 2024).

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3