Philosophical analysis explores identity persistence under transformation, suggesting a new framework for evaluating identity claims.
This paper positions identity persistence under transformation within the Brouwer-Hilbert-HoTT-verification landscape. It argues that Hilbertian formal admissibility, Brouwerian constructive witness, homotopy type-theoretic transport, and formal verification each answer different questions, but none alone determines when a changing object, process, proof, or decision remains the same through transformation. The paper introduces identity persistence as a prior admissibility frame for persistence claims: the declared regime under which transformations may be treated as preserving the same identity-bearing unit. It develops the argument through counterfactual tests showing formal legality without invariant preservation, construction without persistence, verification without replay-stable identity, and probability without stable objects of measurement. The paper is a philosophical companion to the Universal Identity and Persistence forcing theorem. It does not prove or extend the formal stack.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Devin Bostick (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: