ArticleslgStudy

physics

Necessity of identity

Necessity of identity is a physics topic covered in the lgStudy science library. This page brings together a partial reference excerpt, illustrations, worked examples, real-world applications and a short study plan, so you can understand Necessity of identity rather than just read about it. In short: In modal logic, the necessity of identity is the thesis that for every object x and object y, if x and y are the same object, it is necessary that x and y are the same object. The thesis is best known for its association with Saul Kripke, who published it in 1971, although it was first derived by the logician Ruth Barcan Marcus in 1947, and later, in simplified form, by W.

Key takeaways

  • Necessity of identity belongs to physics; place it in that map before memorising details.
  • Learn the definition first, then one example that makes the definition concrete.
  • Connect Necessity of identity to a quantity you can measure, compute or draw — that is where exam questions come from.
  • Reproduce the core statement of Necessity of identity from memory before moving on to harder problems.

Reference excerpt

In modal logic, the necessity of identity is the thesis that for every object x and object y, if x and y are the same object, it is necessary that x and y are the same object. The thesis is best known for its association with Saul Kripke, who published it in 1971, although it was first derived by the logician Ruth Barcan Marcus in 1947, and later, in simplified form, by W. V. O. Quine in 1953.

Kripke's derivation The derivation in Kripke's 'Identity and Necessity' is in three steps:

(1) ∀ x ◻ ( x = x ) {\displaystyle \forall x\Box (x=x)} . (2) ∀ x ∀ y ( x = y → ( ◻ ( x = x ) → ◻ ( x = y ) ) ) {\displaystyle \forall x\forall y(x=y\to (\Box (x=x)\to \Box (x=y)))} . (3) ∀ x ∀ y ( x = y → ◻ ( x = y ) ) {\displaystyle \forall x\forall y(x=y\to \Box (x=y))}

The first premise is simply postulated: every object is identical to itself. The second is an application of the principle of substitutivity: if a = b, then a has all the properties b has, thus from Fa, infer Fb, where F is ◻ ( a = _ ) {\displaystyle \Box (a=\_)} . The third follows by elementary predicate logic.

Rigid designation

In the later Naming and Necessity, Kripke suggested that the principle could be derived directly, assuming what he called rigid designation. A term is a rigid designator when it designates the same object in every possible world in which that object exists. When a name's referent is fixed by the original act of naming, it becomes a rigid designator. Some examples of rigid designators include proper names (i.e. "Richard Nixon"), natural kind terms (i.e. "gold" or "H2O") and some descriptions. Proper names are typically rigid designators, but definite descriptions are typically not. So we can speak of "Richard Nixon" referring to the same person in all possible worlds, but the description "the man who won the 1968 election" could refer to many different people. According to Kripke, the proper name "Richard Nixon" can only be used rigidly, but the description "the man who won the 1968 election" can be used non-rigidly. Kripke argues, that if names are rigid designators, then identity must be necessary, because the names ‘a’ and ‘b’ will be rigid designators of an object x if a is identical to b, and so in every possible world, ‘a’ and ‘b’ will both refer to this same object x, and no other, and there could be no situation in which a might not have been b, otherwise x would not have been identical with itself.

Waiving fussy considerations deriving from the fact that x need not have necessary existence, it was clear from ( x ) ◻ ( x = x ) {\displaystyle (x)\Box (x=x)} and Leibniz’s law that identity is an ‘internal’ relation: ( x ) ( y ) ( x = y → ◻ ( x = y ) ) {\displaystyle (x)(y)(x=y\to \Box (x=y))} . (What pairs (x, y) could be counterexamples? Not pairs of distinct objects, for then the antecedent is false; nor any pair of an object and itself, for then the consequent is true.) If ‘a’ and ‘b’ are rigid designators, it follows that ‘a = b’, if true, is a necessary truth. If ‘a’ and ‘b’ are not rigid designators, no such conclusion follows about the statement ‘a = b’ (though the objects designated by ‘a’ and ‘b’ will be necessarily identical). This does not mean that we have knowledge of this necessity. Before the discovery that Hesperus (the evening star) and Phosphorus (the morning star) were the same planet, this fact was not known, and could not have been inferred from first principles. Thus there can be a posteriori necessity. The principle can also be applied to natural kinds. If water is H2O, then water is necessarily H2O. Since the terms 'water' and 'H2O' pick out the same object in every possible world, there is no possible world in which 'water' picks out something different from 'H2O'. Therefore, water is necessarily H2O. It is possible, of course, that we are mistaken about the chemical composition of water, but that does not affect the necessity of identities. What is not being claimed is that water is necessarily H2O, but conditionally, if water is H2O (though we may not know this, it does not change the fact if it is true), then water is necessarily H2O.

See also A posteriori necessity Rigid designator Naming and Necessity

Notes

Worked examples

Example 1 — a first encounter with Necessity of identity

Start with the simplest possible case. Write down what Necessity of identity claims or describes in one sentence, then invent the smallest concrete situation in which that sentence is true. In physics, the smallest case is usually a single object, a single equation or a single measurement. Check that every symbol or term in your sentence has a meaning in that case.

Example 2 — changing one variable

Take the situation from Example 1 and change exactly one quantity: double it, halve it, or set it to zero. Predict what should happen to Necessity of identity before you calculate. Comparing your prediction with the result is the fastest way to find out whether you understand the idea or only the words.

Example 3 — an exam-style question

Typical questions about Necessity of identity ask you to (a) state it precisely, (b) apply it to given data, and (c) explain a limitation. Practise writing all three answers in under five minutes; the third part is what separates a full-mark answer from an average one.

Applications of Necessity of identity

In research
Necessity of identity appears in physics research whenever the underlying quantities have to be modelled precisely. Papers usually cite it as a starting assumption and then explore where it breaks down.
In technology and industry
Engineering practice reuses Necessity of identity in design rules, simulations and safety margins. Knowing the idea lets you read a specification sheet and understand why the numbers look the way they do.
In the classroom
Necessity of identity is common in secondary-school and first-year university syllabi. It links to neighbouring topics Concepts in logic, Identity (philosophy), Modal logic, so understanding it makes those chapters shorter.
In everyday life
Look for Necessity of identity outside the textbook — in sport, cooking, traffic, electronics or the sky above you. An example you found yourself is remembered far longer than one you were given.
Ask Teacher Smith questions about this articleOpens your AI tutor with a question about “Necessity of identity” →

Affiliate

Preply — study more efficiently by working with a personal tutor. 50% off.

How to study Necessity of identity in 20 minutes

  1. Read the reference excerpt below once, without taking notes.
  2. Close the page and write down what Necessity of identity means in your own words.
  3. Compare your version with the excerpt and mark what you missed.
  4. Work through the three examples above with pen and paper.
  5. Explain Necessity of identity out loud to somebody else — or to Teacher Smith in the lgStudy chat.

Frequently asked questions

What is Necessity of identity in simple terms?

In modal logic, the necessity of identity is the thesis that for every object x and object y, if x and y are the same object, it is necessary that x and y are the same object. The thesis is best known for its association with Saul Kripke, who published it in 1971, although it was first derived by t…

Why does Necessity of identity matter?

Because it connects several physics ideas at once: it gives you a definition you can apply, a quantity you can calculate, and a way to check whether a result is plausible.

How should I study Necessity of identity?

Read the excerpt, restate it from memory, then work through the examples and applications listed on this page. The five-step study plan above takes about twenty minutes.

What does this page cover?

It gives you a compact reference excerpt plus original lgStudy explanations, examples, applications and study material on Necessity of identity.

Tags

  • Concepts in logic
  • Identity (philosophy)
  • Modal logic
  • Modal metaphysics
  • Necessity

Keep exploring