Page 51 - Pure Life 34
P. 51
/
(
50 International Multi. J. of PURE LIFE. 10(34), Spring. 2023
Since what is at issue in I think that Allamah
Allamah Misbah’s dilemma is Misbah might have responded
the possession of an to this suggestion by pointing
immaterial soul, I will out that what is at issue here
transpose Smith’s explication is not something that might
of how fuzzy logic treats fade in or out of existence,
vaguenss according to the like a shade of grey. The issue
following schema: is one of identity. The soul is
If “S possesses a soul” is not just a power or a
less true at tn than it is at possession; a person simply is
“tn+1”, then “S” is less in her soul. If “a=b”, and “b” is
possession of a soul at tn than necessarily an immaterial
“S” is at “tn+1”. substance, then there is no
In bivalent logic, the values way for “a” to be corporeal,
of a proposition are just true ever. He might have used an
and false, whereas in fuzzy argument similar to one
logic, true and false are the against vague identity, due to
extremes of a spectrum of Gareth Evans: (Ref: Evans,
values. 1978)
In fuzzy logic possession of Suppose things may be
a soul is not an all or nothing either vaguely or definitely
affair. Possession of a soul identical, and that “a” is
can be weak, sporadic, or vaguely identical to “b”.
insignificant. Then this state Clearly, “a” is definitely
can gain in intensity until one identical to “a”. Hence, Evans
is in full possession of an concluded, “a” and “b” are
immortal soul. definitely non-identical, since
one has a property the other
