Batman & Identity: Crash Course Philosophy #18

Summary

This Crash Course Philosophy episode delves into the concept of identity, using the Ship of Theseus paradox to explore when an object can be considered the same despite its changing parts. It discusses the philosophical principles of the Indiscernibility of Identicals and the distinction between essential and accidental properties. The episode also ponders personal identity, questioning if Batman is truly identical to Bruce Wayne, and challenges viewers to consider the implications of identity on objects they value.

Takeaways

• 🚢 The Ship of Theseus paradox raises the question of whether an object that has had all its parts replaced remains the same object.
• 🧐 Identity in philosophy is the unique relation a thing has to itself, defining what makes it what it is.
• 🤔 The concept of identity becomes complex when objects change over time, potentially becoming something else.
• 🦸‍♂️ The identity of Batman is explored, questioning whether Batman and Bruce Wayne are identical, considering different individuals have taken on the role.
• 📚 Leibniz's Indiscernibility of Identicals principle suggests that if two things are identical, they must share all properties, implying the ship and Batman undergo identity changes.
• 🗿 The Thought Bubble presents a puzzle about a lump of clay shaped into a statue, challenging our intuitions about the persistence of identity through change.
• 🔍 Essential and accidental properties are distinguished, with the former being core to an object's identity and the latter being removable without changing the object's nature.
• 🌳 The example of a tree losing its leaves or being turned into notebooks illustrates the difficulty in determining when an object loses its essential properties and identity.
• ❓ Existentialists and Heraclitus deny the existence of essential properties, suggesting that everything is in constant flux and thus never identical to itself.
• 💰 The concept of fungibility is introduced, explaining why we consider some objects interchangeable, like money, but not others, like a cherished coffee mug.
• 🤝 Personal identity is teased as a topic for the next episode, indicating a shift from object identity to the identity of a person over time.

Q & A

What is the Ship of Theseus paradox and how does it relate to the concept of identity?

The Ship of Theseus paradox is an ancient Greek legend about a ship that, over time, has all its parts replaced during its voyage. The question it raises is whether the ship that returns is the same as the one that left. This paradox relates to the concept of identity by challenging the idea of whether an object's identity remains the same even when all its components have changed.

How does the philosophy of identity deal with the idea that things change over time?

The philosophy of identity explores the concept that identity is the relation a thing bears only to itself, and what makes a thing uniquely what it is defines its identity. It grapples with the idea that as things change, they may stop being what they were and become something else, which can complicate the notion of identity.

What is the Indiscernibility of Identicals principle proposed by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz?

The Indiscernibility of Identicals is a principle proposed by Leibniz which states that if any two things are identical, they must share all the same properties. This principle suggests that once an object's properties change, such as the Ship of Theseus when its first plank was replaced, it acquires a new identity.

How does the identity of Batman relate to the concept of identity in philosophy?

The identity of Batman is used as an example to explore the philosophy of identity. The question of whether Batman and Bruce Wayne are identical, despite having different properties, challenges the idea of what constitutes the essential identity of a person or character.

What is the difference between essential and accidental properties in the context of identity?

Essential properties are the core elements needed for a thing to be what it is, while accidental properties are traits that can be changed without altering the fundamental nature of the thing. For example, a dog's tail or color might be accidental properties, whereas its ability to bark and its canine nature would be essential.

How does the concept of fungibility relate to the discussion of identity in the script?

Fungibility is the property of being interchangeable with other objects of the same kind. It relates to identity by questioning whether objects that are functionally identical (like money) maintain the same identity over time, or if the unique characteristics of an object (like a favorite mug) make it non-fungible and thus its identity is preserved.

What is the Lumpl and Goliath puzzle, and what does it illustrate about identity?

The Lumpl and Goliath puzzle involves a lump of clay that is shaped into a statue. It illustrates the complexity of identity by asking whether the lump and the statue are identical despite their different forms. It challenges the idea that identity is solely based on physical composition and raises questions about the role of form and function in defining identity.

How does the concept of identity apply to personal identity, as hinted at the end of the script?

The concept of identity in personal identity explores what connects an individual's past and present selves, considering factors like memories, experiences, and physical changes. It questions whether a person's identity remains constant despite changes in their body, mind, and circumstances.

What role does the idea of persistence over time play in the philosophy of identity?

Persistence over time is a central theme in the philosophy of identity as it deals with whether an object or person maintains its identity despite changes or damage over time. It asks whether the continuity of identity is dependent on the continuity of its components or on other factors.

How does the script use the example of a tree to discuss the loss of essential properties?

The script uses the example of a tree that loses its leaves and is eventually turned into notebooks to discuss the loss of essential properties. It questions at what point the tree ceases to be a tree, whether it's when it's cut down, turned into pieces, or pulped, highlighting the subjective nature of determining when an object loses its identity.

Outlines

00:00

🚢 The Paradox of Identity: Ship of Theseus

This paragraph introduces the philosophical concept of identity through the ancient Greek legend of the Ship of Theseus. The ship, which embarked on a journey and underwent numerous repairs and replacements, raises the question of whether it remained the same ship upon its return. The narrative explores the idea that identity is a unique relation a thing has only to itself, and how changes over time can affect this identity. The paragraph also delves into the philosophical implications of identity through the example of Batman, questioning whether Batman and Bruce Wayne are identical despite different properties and roles they play.

05:03

🌳 The Continuity of Identity and Essential Properties

The second paragraph continues the discussion on identity by examining the concept of essential and accidental properties. It uses the metaphor of a tree losing its leaves and being transformed into notebooks to illustrate how the loss of essential properties can change a thing's identity. The paragraph also touches on existentialist views that reject the concept of essential properties, referencing Heraclitus's philosophy that everything is in a state of constant change, thus challenging the idea of persistent identity. The discussion then relates these philosophical ideas to everyday objects, such as money and personal items, to explore the practical implications of identity and change.

Keywords

💡Identity

Identity in the context of the video refers to the concept of what makes something uniquely itself. It is the relation that a thing bears only to itself, defining its uniqueness. The video explores this concept through the Ship of Theseus paradox, questioning whether the ship that returns is the same after all its parts have been replaced. This theme is central to the philosophical discussion of what constitutes the enduring essence of an object or entity.

💡Ship of Theseus

The Ship of Theseus is a thought experiment used in the video to illustrate the problem of identity. It tells the story of a ship that, over time, has all its parts replaced. The video uses this legend to question whether the ship that returns to port is the same ship that left, thus challenging the viewer to consider what it means for something to remain the same through change.

💡Indiscernibility of Identicals

This principle, introduced by philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, states that if two things are identical, they must share all the same properties. The video uses this concept to argue that the Ship of Theseus became a new ship once its first plank was replaced, as it then had a new property. This principle is central to understanding identity and change.

💡Essential Properties

Essential properties are those core elements that are necessary for a thing to be what it is. In the video, the concept is used to discuss what makes an object endure over time. For example, the video questions whether a tree is still a tree when it loses its leaves or is transformed into notebooks, asking at what point it loses its 'tree-ness'.

💡Accidental Properties

Accidental properties are traits that can be changed or removed without altering the fundamental nature of an object. The video gives the example of a dog's tail or bark, suggesting that these are not essential to the dog's identity. This concept helps to distinguish between changes that affect identity and those that do not.

💡Batman

Batman is used as an example in the video to explore the concept of identity. The video questions whether Batman and Bruce Wayne are identical, considering that others, like Dick Grayson and Jim Gordon, have also taken on the role of Batman. This challenges the idea that the person behind the mask is the sole determinant of Batman's identity.

💡Lumpl and Goliath

Lumpl and Goliath are a thought experiment introduced by philosopher Alan Gibbard, mentioned in the video to discuss identity. A sculptor molds a lump of clay into a statue, leading to the question of whether Lumpl (the clay) and Goliath (the statue) are identical. This example is used to illustrate the complexities of identity and change.

💡Fungibility

Fungibility is the property of being interchangeable with other objects of the same kind. The video discusses how money is often considered fungible because it represents value, not the physical bill itself. This concept is contrasted with objects like a favorite coffee mug, where personal significance might make it non-fungible.

💡Personal Identity

While not explicitly detailed in the script, the concept of personal identity is hinted at as a topic for future discussion. It relates to the video's theme by extending the philosophical inquiry from objects to individuals, asking what constitutes the enduring identity of a person over time.

💡Existentialists

Existentialists are mentioned in the video as philosophers who deny the existence of essential properties. This reference is used to highlight a perspective that everything, including people, is in a constant state of change, thus challenging the concept of a stable identity.

Highlights

Introduction of the Ship of Theseus paradox to explore the concept of identity.

Discussion on the philosophical definition of identity as a unique relation to oneself.

The problem of identity when objects change over time, using the ship's replacement parts as an example.

Philosophical inquiry into whether Batman and Bruce Wayne share the same identity.

Historical reference to the Indiscernibility of Identicals principle by Leibniz.

Exploration of the difference between essential and accidental properties in defining identity.

Thought experiment with a clay sculpture and statue to challenge identity concepts.

The dilemma of whether a destroyed statue and the original clay are identical.

Differentiation between fungible and non-fungible objects in terms of identity and value.

Existentialist and Heraclitus's rejection of essential properties and the constant change of identity.

Practical implications of identity in determining the persistence of objects like money and personal belongings.

The role of personal attachment and memories in attributing identity to objects.

Squarespace's sponsorship and its platform for sharing passions with the world.

Crash Course Philosophy's collaboration with PBS Digital Studios for educational content.

Invitation to try Squarespace for a special offer linked to Crash Course.

Introduction of the next episode's theme: applying concepts of identity to personal identity.

Transcripts

Crash Course Philosophy is brought to you by Squarespace.

Squarespace: share your passion with the world.

There’s an ancient Greek legend about a ship that launched from the port of Theseus,

and sailed around the world.

Probably not around the WHOLE world. Just AROUND the world.

During its journey, the ship encountered many dangers.

Storms ravaged its sails, which had to be replaced.

The floorboards gradually gave way, and had to be changed out, one by one.

Eventually, crew members decided that they liked the look of some island or another along the way, and stayed behind.

And as the ship sailed on, more and more of it – and its crew – was replaced,

until finally, not a single original plank of wood, or hand on deck, remained.

Now here’s the question: When the ship finally returned to Theseus, was it the same ship that left?

The answer – whether we can find it or not – lies in the concept of identity.

Philosophers describe identity as the relation that a thing bears only to itself.

So, whatever makes a thing uniquely what it is defines its identity.

And if two things are identical, they’re said to share an identity relation.

Now, whether two things are the same might seem blindingly obvious.

But of course it isn’t. Because: philosophy.

The philosophy of identity can get pretty slippery, largely because, like the Ship of Theseus, things change.

And when they do, they eventually stop being what they are, and become something else.

This goes not just for mythological ships, but for all kinds of things.

Like, this mug can acquire a new identity. And this money.

And you. And even … Batman.

[Theme Music]

So, riddle me this: Is Batman identical to Bruce Wayne?

And when I say “identical,” I don’t mean that they just look alike.

I mean that they share the same identity – they’re literally one and the same.

So, you might think the answer is yes –

Bruce Wayne and Batman are identical because everyone knows that Bruce Wayne is the man behind the cowl.

Not only that, you might say: Bruce Wayne is the very essence of Batman.

He saw his parents get killed in that alley. He became the Dark Knight.

No one else could take his place.

But hold up. People have taken his place.

It turns out that Dick Grayson, the original Robin, has pinch-hit for Batman,

donning the cape and cowl to protect the streets of Gotham in his boss’s absence.

And so has Police Commissioner Jim Gordon.

After Bruce Wayne was reported dead, he reluctantly accepted the role himself.

Both of those guys have been Batman.

So if the person inside the costume doesn’t make Batman Batman, then what does?

17th century German philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz came up with a principle

that might help us solve the puzzle of Who Batman Is.

He called it the Indiscernibility of Identicals.

The idea is that, if any two things are identical, then they must share all the same properties.

If Leibniz is right, then the Ship of Theseus became a new ship as soon as that first plank of wood was replaced.

As soon as its parts were not all original, then the ship suddenly acquired a new property.

And with a new property came a new identity.

So likewise, Bruce Wayne and Batman can’t be identical, because they have different properties.

Bruce Wayne, for example, has the property of being a millionaire playboy, but Batman doesn’t.

That guy is all business.

Meanwhile, Batman has the property of having fought the Joker, but Bruce Wayne doesn’t.

And the different versions of Batman aren’t identical to each other either.

Because the person wearing the costume, even if it’s the exact same costume – which it usually isn’t –

is going to have different combat techniques, and even, say, a different moral code.

So, is there a limit to how much something can change, and still be the same thing?

Let’s head over to the Thought Bubble for some Flash Philosophy.

Think about this little puzzler, originally offered by contemporary American philosopher Alan Gibbard.

A sculptor takes a lump of clay, and names it Lumpl.

She then forms Lumpl into a statue, which she names Goliath.

Are Lumpl and Goliath identical?

Our intuition might say yes, because they’re composed of exactly the same amount of the same physical stuff.

It’s been kneaded and molded into a different shape, but still:

No part of Lumpl is not Goliath, and no part of Goliath is not Lumpl.

But consider this: If we wreck the statue, and smush into into a big blob, Goliath is gone,

because part of what it means to be Goliath is to be shaped like a statue.

But, Lumpl, being a lump, doesn’t have a set shape.

So it will remain, after Goliath has been destroyed.

So on one hand, Gibbard observed, Lumpl and Goliath seem to be identical,

because they’re the same exact thing, just in different shapes.

But on the other hand, how can Lumpl and Goliath be identical, if one can exist while the other does not?

Thanks, Thought Bubble! One way to try and make sense of identity, and explain how an object endures over time,

is by making a distinction between what we call essential and accidental properties.

Essential properties are the core elements needed for a thing to be the thing that it is.

Accidental properties are traits that could be taken away from an object without making it a different thing.

Think about a dog. A dog without a tail is still a dog.

Give him a shave, or a silly poodle doo, don’t let it bark – you still have a dog.

So all those things are all accidental properties, and they’re pretty easy to pick out.

But it can be really tough to find its essential properties, the things that,

if they were absent, would make the dog not a dog anymore.

And the more something changes, the harder it can be to determine its identity.

A tree can lose its leaves and still be a tree.

But if you cut the tree up and make it into a bunch of notebooks, is it still a tree?

And if you think a notebook is not a tree, then at what point in the process did the tree lose its tree-ness?

Was it when it was cut down, and thus no longer living?

Maybe. But isn’t a dead tree still a tree?

Or did it happen when the dead tree was cut into pieces, and was lying on the ground?

Did it make a difference when those pieces were collected?

How about when they were ground up into pulp?

The tree stopped being a tree when its essential property was lost.

But when exactly that happened depends on your perspective.

Plus, many thinkers reject the concept of essential properties altogether.

Existentialists, for example, deny the very existence of essential properties.

And ancient Greek philosopher Heraclitus famously said that you can’t step in the same river twice.

What he meant was: Nothing is identical to itself because everything

– including both you and the river – is changing all the time.

So not only is the Ship of Theseus a new ship by the time it gets to Theseus,

but it was a new ship the first time anything about it changed!

Now, it’s amusing enough to think about whether ships and trees endure over time,

or what makes Batman Batman.

But, ultimately, why should you care? How does this affect your life?

Well, if objects are important to you,

then you’ll want to know whether you have the same object that you think you have.

And, when it comes to tangible stuff, we tend to value persistent identity.

If you take $20 out of my wallet to buy lunch and then stop at an ATM and replace it,

is the money you gave me identical to what I had this morning?

If Nick breaks my favorite coffee mug here, and replaces it with a new one and I can’t tell the difference,

do I still have the same mug I started with?

What if your dog runs away while I’m house-sitting for you,

and I replace your dog with a new dog so similar that you can’t tell? Is it the same dog?

What’s the difference between the money and the cups and the dogs?

Philosophers actually have a word that explains why we think one $20 bill is the same as another,

but one corgi isn’t the same as her cosmetically identical sister.

It’s fungibility – the property of being interchangeable with other objects of the same kind.

Most people think that money is fungible, because it’s just a place-holder for the value it represents –

and it’s the value that we really care about.

As long as there’s a $20 bill in my wallet to buy me some nice Thai drunken noodles,

I really don’t care whether it’s the same one I put there or not –

although I would like to know why you’re digging around in my wallet.

Now the coffee mug … this one is interesting.

It seems like what matters here is why that mug that Nick broke was my favorite.

If I loved it because it’s the perfect size and shape to fit in my hands, and it keeps my coffee warm,

then I’d probably be just as happy with a new one.

So in that case, the mug appears to be fungible.

But if I love the mug for personal reasons –

like, say it was the first Crash Course Philosophy mug ever manufactured, or it was a gift from my Dad.

Then a new one, even if it’s cosmetically the same, wouldn’t mean the same thing to me.

Because it might be that what I care about isn’t the mug at all, but some sort of abstract idea behind the mug –

like my love for Crash Course, or the connection between Dad and me.

In any case, I gotta ask, Nick just be more careful when you’re around my stuff.

Today we’ve learned about different ways of understanding identity –

including the Indiscernibility of Identicals, and essential and accidental properties.

We thought about how change does and doesn’t affect identity, and what it means for a thing to persist over time.

And next time, we’re going to take what we’ve learned about identity, and apply it to personal identity –

thinking about what connects this guy to me.

This episode of Crash Course Philosophy is made possible by Squarespace.

Squarespace is a way to create a website, blog or online store for you and your ideas.

Squarespace features a user-friendly interface, custom templates and a 24/7 customer support team.

Try Squarespace at squarespace.com/crashcourse for a special offer.

Squarespace: share your passion with the world.

Crash Course Philosophy is produced in association with PBS Digital Studios.

You can head over to their channel to check out some amazing shows like

The Art Assignment, Blank on Blank, and Braincraft.

This episode of Crash Course was filmed in the Doctor Cheryl C. Kinney Crash Course Studio

with the help of all of these awesome people and our equally fantastic graphics team is Thought Cafe.