Are some identity statements vague for ontic reasons? Are some contingentidentity statements true? Is there a notion of relative identity such that two things are identical relative to one sortal, but not with respect to another? I don't know. What I do know, though, is that all these claims can be made true, and are all consistent with Leibniz' law being a validity. I show how this is possible by making use of recent ideas for the modeling of vagueness; one that accepts the tolerance principle

more »

... as a validity. I will show that being tolerant about the notion of consequence allows (though not forces) one to be tolerant about identity as well.