Identity through Change and Substitutivity Salva Veritate
Uncorrect authors' proofs
This paper has three modest aims: to present a puzzle, to show why some obvious solutions aren’t really “easy outs”, and to introduce our own solution. The puzzle is this. When it was small and had waterlogged streets, Toronto carried the moniker ‘Muddy York’. Later, the streets were drained, it grew, and Muddy York officially changed its name to ‘Toronto’. Given this, each premise in the following argument seems true. Yet the conclusion is a contraction. P1: Muddy York = Toronto P2: Muddy York evolved into Toronto P3: The context “__ evolved into Toronto” is transparent, i.e., it allows substitution of co-referring singular terms P4: It’s not the case that Toronto evolved into Toronto C1: Toronto evolved into Toronto [By P1, P2 and P3] C2: Toronto both did and did not evolve into Toronto [By P4 and C1]
Ray Elugardo and Robert J. Stainton. "Identity through Change and Substitutivity Salva Veritate" Time and Identity. Ed. Michael O’Rourke, et al.. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2010.
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/robertstainton/100