1

"there is no difference that does not make a difference"

according to Bryant. Specifically, and independent of whether this is stated by him, does it mean that any two terms with the same referent have the same concept (say the same thing)? That the morning star and the evening star are different things?

If so, that's confusing, and probably not only for those loosely familiar with analytic philosophy. Would it mean that causes must not be the same as -- by which I specifically mean already contain -- effects, if we are to refer to them as different things?

Can we infer anything about the nature of causation from the ontic principle, perhaps that any effect is always undergone by its cause?

Improve this question
6
  • suddenly not totally sure that's the question i wanted to ask
    – user38026
    Feb 4, 2020 at 10:53
  • 1
    The ontic is a phenomenological term and about things presenting themselves to have particular properties by virtue of being what they are, eg. things presenting themselves to have a certain colour by virtue of possessing a certain molecular structure which absorbs particular wavelengths of light. Phenomenology is all about trying to get at those and only those ontic structures which underlie our perception and categorisation. Causation and reference are ontological categories about how ontic structures relate to one another, so maybe that's the source of confusion here?
    – Philip Klöcking ♦
    Feb 4, 2020 at 11:38
  • so you'd say "no" to e.g. the last question @PhilipKlöcking
    – user38026
    Feb 4, 2020 at 11:42
  • 1
    OOO is not analytic philosophy, it is continental. The OnP is a restriction on epistemological posits and distinctions that are deemed ontologically legitimate based on the ontic presupposition of independent being. For example, thing in itself is not, as it makes no difference, and neither are property "lacks" generally. It has little to do with analytic semantics of concepts in terms of reference, or causes and effects.
    – Conifold
    Feb 4, 2020 at 11:48
  • Is this not just the 'identity of indiscernables'?
    – user20253
    Feb 4, 2020 at 13:00

0

Reset to default

You must log in to answer this question.