Skip to main content
Ken Hochstetter

    Ken Hochstetter

    © Brian Ellis 2002 "Two Problems for Essentialism" © DM Armstrong 2002 ISBN 0-7735-2473-8 (hardcover) ISBN 0-7735-2474-6 (paperback) Legal deposit second quarter 2002 Bibliotheque nationale du Quebec This book is... more
    © Brian Ellis 2002 "Two Problems for Essentialism" © DM Armstrong 2002 ISBN 0-7735-2473-8 (hardcover) ISBN 0-7735-2474-6 (paperback) Legal deposit second quarter 2002 Bibliotheque nationale du Quebec This book is copyright under the Berne ...
    Eric Olson and Ned Markosian have, independently, complained that the ways in which the problem of personal identity has been formulated rule out certain views of personal identity just by how the problem is formulated. As a result, both... more
    Eric Olson and Ned Markosian have, independently, complained that the ways in which the problem of personal identity has been formulated rule out certain views of personal identity just by how the problem is formulated. As a result, both have proposed alternative formulations, each attempting theory neutrality. They have not succeeded, however, since both of their formulations, as well as the formulations that they have rejected, are biased against presentist solutions to the problem, and some are biased against four-dimensionalist solutions, as well as stage theory solutions. In this paper, I show how previous formulations, including Olson’s and Markosian’s, are biased in the ways mentioned, and I propose a list of criteria that any formulation of the problem must meet in order to be theory neutral. Finally, I attempt a formulation that is neutral.
    Eric Olson and Ned Markosian have, independently, complained that the ways in which the problem of personal identity has been formulated rule out certain views of personal identity just by how the problem is formulated. As a result, both... more
    Eric Olson and Ned Markosian have, independently, complained that the ways in which the problem of personal identity has been formulated rule out certain views of personal identity just by how the problem is formulated. As a result, both have proposed alternative formulations, each attempting theory neutrality. They have not succeeded, however, since both of their formulations, as well as the formulations that they have rejected, are biased against presentist solutions to the problem, and some are biased against four-dimensionalist solutions, as well as stage theory solutions. In this paper, I show how previous formulations, including Olson's and Markosian's, are biased in the ways mentioned, and I propose a list of criteria that any formulation of the problem must meet in order to be theory neutral. Finally, I attempt a formulation that is neutral. Keywords Personal identity Á Presentism Á Eternalism Á Four-dimensionalism Á Three-dimensionalism Á Stage theory Eric Olson and Ned Markosian have, independently, undertaken the task of formulating the problem of personal identity over time, both of whom have complained that the ways in which the problem has been formulated rule out certain views of personal identity just by how the problem is formulated. 1 For example, consider a standard way in which the problem has been formulated: