22 lines
1.0 KiB
Markdown
22 lines
1.0 KiB
Markdown
*and we need to stop using this ill-defined secular canard*
|
|
|
|
I have in so many contexts found this term "identity" used, and every time it is used, I sit and ask: "what... are you referring to exactly?"
|
|
|
|
The trouble is manifold. On one hand, it doesn't arise from tradition. In philosophical tradition, we have many more words to more accurately describe what is being referenced. I posed the question, "What is identity" to one friend of mine and he gave perhaps the best answer:
|
|
|
|
"When I think of identity I think of essence as St. Thomas uses it. So what something is by its nature."
|
|
|
|
The trouble is... this word gets used in a myriad of ways which is profoundly unhelpful.
|
|
|
|
# The engineer-brain I'm coming from
|
|
|
|
"All models are wrong. Some models are useful." - George Box
|
|
|
|
This has become something of a modern-day proverb in engineering. Maybe it suggests a deep relativism, but I don't honestly believe so. What is meant by this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Universals really do exist in the intellect, but outside the mind, only as instantiated in individual beings."
|