The Law of Identity
What is The Law of Identity?
The law of identity: within one discussion, a term has to keep one meaning. A team debating “improve performance” may have one person meaning revenue, another profit, and a third market share — the same word covering three different problems, so the harder they argue the more confused the conclusion gets. A couple discussing “the kids’ schooling” may have one parent meaning grades, the other meaning interest and wellbeing, and a third person quietly worrying about the money and the time.
The Law of Identity: common mistakes and how to handle them
Equivocation is the most common way the law gets broken: “cut wasted communication” becomes “cancel every cross-team meeting”; “I don’t accept being criticised this way” becomes “you don’t want to improve”; a question about a course becomes “disloyalty”. The fix comes before the argument, not during it — ask what exactly we are improving, by how much, over what period, and measured how. Split the term apart and mark the boundaries of the discussion first.
What the The Law of Identity questions test
judging whether a term holds one meaning through a dialogue; pointing out which sentence quietly swapped a concept and what it was swapped for; deciding whether two people are even discussing the same thing; naming the definition that has to be settled before the discussion can go on.