theory/Proof_of_OI.md
2025-07-24 15:55:12 -04:00

5.1 KiB
Raw Blame History

Formal Proof: Open Individualism Necessarily Follows from EMR and PSR

Front Matter

Definitions

  • Open Individualism (OI): The metaphysical view that there is only one subject of experience — all conscious beings, across all space, time, and modality, are numerically the same experiencer.

  • Closed Individualism (CI): The view that each person is a separate, distinct subject of experience. You are only your body and not anyone else.

  • Empty Individualism (EI): The view that each moment of consciousness is a distinct experiencer. There is no enduring self — only a sequence of isolated experiential events.

  • Extended Modal Realism (EMR): The metaphysical view that all possible, impossible, and even incoherent worlds exist. Modal existence is total — nothing is arbitrarily excluded.

  • Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR): The principle that every fact must have a sufficient, non-arbitrary reason for why it is so and not otherwise. This includes identity facts.


Assumptions

  • EMR is true: all minds in all forms exist across all modal realities.
  • PSR is true: no fact, including personal identity, can be brute or arbitrary.
  • We are not attempting to prove EMR or PSR in this document — only what follows from them.

Step-by-Step Proof

Step 1: EMR implies that all minds — including identical and near-identical ones — exist.

  • There exist minds in different bodies and worlds that are phenomenally identical to your own.
  • Some of these duplicates are exact copies; others differ by small degrees.

Step 2: PSR requires that distinctions between minds have sufficient reason.

  • If two minds are phenomenally and structurally identical, there can be no non-arbitrary basis to say one is “you” and the other is not.
  • Any attempt to do so would violate PSR by positing an unexplained identity difference.

Step 3: Therefore, identical conscious states must correspond to the same subject.

  • The “you” experiencing Mind A must also be the “you” experiencing Mind B if there is no reason to distinguish them.
  • The only non-arbitrary solution is numerical identity of subject across instantiations.

Step 4: This principle generalizes to all minds.

  • Minds form a continuum across all modal realities.
  • If two minds differ, they do so gradually and by degree — but boundaries between “subjects” remain arbitrary unless grounded.
  • PSR disallows such brute boundary-making.

Step 5: Therefore, Open Individualism is the only theory of identity compatible with EMR and PSR.

  • CI fails because it posits brute separateness.
  • EI fails because it posits brute fragmentation of subjecthood at every moment.
  • OI alone requires no brute distinctions in assigning subjective identity.

Q.E.D.


Rejection of Competing Theories

Closed Individualism (CI)

  • Treats each body as a separate subject.
  • Under EMR, there are many identical bodies and minds — yet only one “you.”
  • Assigning “you” to only one version is arbitrary unless justified.
  • CI therefore violates PSR.

Empty Individualism (EI)

  • Treats each moment of experience as a distinct subject.
  • Fails to account for continuity of experience — treats successive moments as fundamentally unconnected.
  • Introduces brute numerical identity distinctions across time with no justification.
  • EI therefore violates PSR.

Rebuttals to Common Objections

Objection 1: “I only feel like I am this body — not all others.”

Response:
This is an epistemic limitation, not a metaphysical one. You dont feel your past self directly either, but you still consider it to be “you.” Introspective feeling does not justify metaphysical distinctness.


Objection 2: “Its absurd to say I am everyone.”

Response:
Absurdity is not the same as incoherence. The conclusion may be counterintuitive, but it is logically required by EMR + PSR. Rejecting it requires accepting brute facts, which violates PSR.


Objection 3: “But different minds have different thoughts and experiences — how can they be one?”

Response:
Differences in experience do not imply differences in the experiencer. A single subject can undergo varying states without fragmenting into multiple subjects. Just as you are still “you” when you wake up with different thoughts than yesterday.


Objection 4: “Personal identity must be tied to physical continuity.”

Response:
This is a physicalist assumption that cannot account for modal duplicates. In EMR, there are exact replicas with no causal link to “your” body. Without PSR-justified boundaries, physical continuity cannot ground unique subjecthood.


Conclusion

  • EMR ensures that all minds — including duplicates and variants — exist.
  • PSR ensures that distinctions between them must be non-arbitrary and justified.
  • Only Open Individualism avoids brute identity facts and fully satisfies both.
  • Therefore, Open Individualism is necessarily true given EMR and PSR.

Final Conclusion: OI is the only metaphysically coherent theory of personal identity under EMR and PSR.