University of Groningen
Identity/Nonidentity in Emily Elizabeth Constance Jones (1848-1922)
Peijnenburg, Jeanne; Ostertag, Gary
Published in:
The Encyclopedia of Concise Concepts by Women Philosophers
IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below.
Document Version
Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record
Publication date: 2019
Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database
Citation for published version (APA):
Peijnenburg, J., & Ostertag, G. (2019). Identity/Nonidentity in Emily Elizabeth Constance Jones (1848-1922). In M. E. Waithe, & R. Hagengruber (Eds.), The Encyclopedia of Concise Concepts by Women Philosophers Paderborn University. https://historyofwomenphilosophers.org/ecc/#hwps
Copyright
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).
Take-down policy
If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.
How to cite this article: Jeanne Peijnenburg, Gary Ostertag & 2019. "Identity / Nonidentity in Emily Elizabeth Constance Jones (1848–1922)", in Waithe, Mary Ellen & Hagengruber, Ruth (eds.): Encyclopedia
of Concise Concepts by Women Philosophers. DOI: (DOI pending) [12|11|2019].
https://historyofwomenphilosophers.org/ecc/
1/2 Center for the History of Women Philosophers and Scientists
Paderborn University, Germany
Identity / Nonidentity in Emily Elizabeth
Constance Jones (1848–1922)
Gary Ostertag & Jeanne Peijnenburg
University of Groningen & City University of New York
According to E.E. Constance Jones, the most general form of an informative (or “significant”) categorical proposition is given by ‘S is P’ or ‘S is not P’. The proposition ‘S is
P’ asserts “Identity in Diversity” (Jones 1890: ix). The identity applies to the denomination
(denotation, extension) of S and P, the diversity to their determination or intension (see
Intension/Extension). ‘S is P’ is uninformative if it asserts the identity of both the
denomination and the determination (Jones 1890: 128, note 1; Jones 1893-1894: 37-38). The proposition’s nonidentity form ‘S is not P’ does not simply deny what the proposition ‘S is P’ asserts. One does not use this form to assert the mere “diversity” of intension: one uses it to assert, in addition, the distinctness of the denomination. It thus asserts difference both in “signification” (or intension) and in “application” (or extension) (Jones 1892: 23).
Jones considers the Aristotelian propositions of the forms ‘All S are P’ , ‘No S are P’, ‘Some
S are P’, ‘Some S are not P’ – which she calls ‘class-propositions’ – as a proper subset of
her categorical propositions (Jones 1890: 198; Jones 1911b, pp. 25ff). She also takes her view of a significant categorical proposition to constitute a new law of thought (see Law of
Significant Assertion), intending this law to replace the first of three fundamental laws of
thought, viz. the Law of Identity (‘A is A’), which according to Jones is uninformative and renders impossible any passage to an informative ‘A is B’ (Jones 1911a, 1911b; cf. Ostertag 2011). Somewhat remarkably, however, she also regards the Law of Identity as “a necessary presupposition of all significant assertion [...] and even […] of thought itself” (Jones 1890: 40).
The new law provides a straightforward formulation of the remaining two fundamental laws of thought, namely
How to cite this article: Jeanne Peijnenburg, Gary Ostertag & 2019. "Identity / Nonidentity in Emily Elizabeth Constance Jones (1848–1922)", in Waithe, Mary Ellen & Hagengruber, Ruth (eds.): Encyclopedia
of Concise Concepts by Women Philosophers. DOI: (DOI pending) [12|11|2019].
https://historyofwomenphilosophers.org/ecc/
2/2 ‘S is P’ and ‘S is not P’ cannot both be false (Law of the Excluded Middle).
Moreover, the law suggests a classification of fallacies, dividing them into (a) those which identify what is different and (b) those which distinguish what is identical (Jones 1890: 178-195; Jones 1911b: 68).
Primary Sources:
Jones, Emily Elizabeth Constance 1890. Elements of Logic as a Science of Propositions. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark.
___________ 1892. An Introduction to General Logic. London: Longman’s, Green, and Co. ___________ 1893–94. Import Of Categorical Propositions. Proceedings of the Aristotelian
Society 2: 35–45.
___________ 1911a. A New ‘Law of Thought’ and its Implications. Mind 20, 41–53.
___________ 1911b. A New Law of Thought and Its Logical Bearings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Secondary Sources:
Ostertag, Gary. 2011. Emily Elizabeth Constance Jones, The Stanford Encyclopedia of
Philosophy, URL: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/emily-elizabeth-constance-jones/
[10|04|2019]. Keywords:
identity, nonidentity, denomination, determination, intension, assertion, Aristotle Copyright 2019
