4 ms·

Ship of Theseus comes to mind.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
highcountess 2y ago
That is not really applicable here. The cathedral itself was never really destroyed even though the Christian rejectors’ mob ransacked it in the “French” Revolution and the latest fire also did not really cause structural damage. It is also still a functioning Christian church with services.
- akerl_ 2y ago
  The ship of Theseus was never really destroyed either. It was a functional ship with services.
anon291 2y ago
I mean it's a living church. The entire thing can be rebuilt and it will still be the real Notre Dame de Paris. It'd have to stop being used for the original function. Similar to how the California missions that are still parishes will continue to be complete. The ones that are museums will deteriorate. The beauty of a building is more than just its physical materials but also those things for which it was built and those people who built it
- akerl_ 2y ago
  > The entire thing can be rebuilt and it will still be the real Notre Dame de Paris This statement is kindof the whole point of the "ship of Theseus" thought experiment.
  - Sebb767 2y ago
    A more favorable interpretation would be that the church consists of more than just its worldly parts; its place and use are also part of its identity. Even if you'd completely rebuild the church building, the other parts of its identity would persist. Therefore, the "ship of Theuses" argument doesn't apply, as, in this case, we would never replace all parts of [the identity of] this church.
    - akerl_ 2y ago
      It feels like you’re referring to the “ship of Theseus” as an argument that the identity does not persist… It’s not. It’s a hypothetical designed to call attention to the exact thing you’re saying: that potentially identity is more than the specific physical parts.
  - anon291 2y ago
    I gave my differentiating factor.. Yes it's my take on the ship of Theseus problem. In that problem we re asked to consider if a ship with all it's parts replaced is the same as the original.. My argument is that so long as the ship is being used for the same purpose by the same people then it is. Without a purpose, wood in the shape of a ship is not even necessarily a ship Things are more than just their physical form.
    - astrobe_ 2y ago
      Our own bodies are ships of Theseus. I've read once that every atom in our bodies are replaced in 40 years. In 40 years, our bodies change a lot and so are our minds. What make Theseus' ship the ship of Theseus, is that Theseus is the owner of the ship. Ownership is a social convention, a construction of the mind. What makes Notre Dame, is that people generally agree it is still Notre Dame. If hypothetically we were in a time of modernism craze, and that our government decided to rebuilt it in some modern style (there actually was proposals like that), it would still be the people who makes it Notre Dame de Paris or not.
- tsimionescu 2y ago
  > The entire thing can be rebuilt and it will still be the real Notre Dame de Paris. It'd have to stop being used for the original function. This is demonstrably wrong, as we have many examples of old buildings and we know what people actually feel about them. Consider two very famous examples of buildings that completely changed their purpose, but are still the same building: the Pantheon and the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul. The Pantheon was a Roman temple to all of the Gods when it was built in 126, and became a Christian church ~400 years later, but everyone recognizes it as the same building. The Hagia Sophia was a Christian church built in 537, and 1100 years later became an Islamic mosque, but it is still the same building to everyone. Then for the opposite example: St Peter's Basillica at the Vatican. This was built in 1506 on the site of a much older church, also called St Peter's Basillica (commissioned by emperor Constantine), which also served as a Christian church, was also used the parish of the Pope, was also the location of papal coronation and so on. And still, no one would say "St Peter's Basilica was built by Saint Constantine", because the current basilica is universally recognized as a new building, despite serving the same function. A building is recognized for the beauty and specifics of its structural and painterly elements, not for its role. If it is destroyed and rebuilt in almost the same size and shape, then it is recognized as the same building; regardless of entirely changing its purpose. Conversely, if a building is rebuilt into a completely different shape, even a universally admired as beautiful one, it is considered a different building, even if keeps serving the same purpose.
  - anon291 2y ago
    The Pantheon no longer exists. It is now the church of St Mary and the Martyrs. And this is the difference I'm getting at. The Pantheon is a temple dedicated to all the ancient Roman gods. It cannot be both that and the Church of St Mary and the Martyrs. When the Church took it over, it ceased to be the Pantheon. There's no doubt the building is the same, and we can argue about how 'true to form' it is. But that's the point. When it stopped being what it originally was, its 'form' is now a goal to never deviate from. Whereas, the various depictions of the martyrs present within the Church of St Mary and the Martyrs, for example, has no such ideal yet. The Church can (and does) shift that around. However, if it were to stop being the church of st Mary and the Martyrs, then it would have an ideal form that any restorer may want to restore it towards.
scientist4397 2y ago
You’ll have to wait a long time to think about it, lot of materials of the cathédrale are originals (especially the stones)

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

That is not really applicable here. The cathedral itself was never really destroyed even though the Christian rejectors’ mob ransacked it in the “French” Revolution and the latest fire also did not really cause structural damage. It is also still a functioning Christian church with services.

akerl_ 2y ago
The ship of Theseus was never really destroyed either. It was a functional ship with services.

anon291 2y ago

I mean it's a living church. The entire thing can be rebuilt and it will still be the real Notre Dame de Paris. It'd have to stop being used for the original function. Similar to how the California missions that are still parishes will continue to be complete. The ones that are museums will deteriorate. The beauty of a building is more than just its physical materials but also those things for which it was built and those people who built it

akerl_ 2y ago
> The entire thing can be rebuilt and it will still be the real Notre Dame de Paris This statement is kindof the whole point of the "ship of Theseus" thought experiment.
- Sebb767 2y ago
  A more favorable interpretation would be that the church consists of more than just its worldly parts; its place and use are also part of its identity. Even if you'd completely rebuild the church building, the other parts of its identity would persist. Therefore, the "ship of Theuses" argument doesn't apply, as, in this case, we would never replace all parts of [the identity of] this church.
  - akerl_ 2y ago
    It feels like you’re referring to the “ship of Theseus” as an argument that the identity does not persist… It’s not. It’s a hypothetical designed to call attention to the exact thing you’re saying: that potentially identity is more than the specific physical parts.
- anon291 2y ago
  I gave my differentiating factor.. Yes it's my take on the ship of Theseus problem. In that problem we re asked to consider if a ship with all it's parts replaced is the same as the original.. My argument is that so long as the ship is being used for the same purpose by the same people then it is. Without a purpose, wood in the shape of a ship is not even necessarily a ship Things are more than just their physical form.
  - astrobe_ 2y ago
    Our own bodies are ships of Theseus. I've read once that every atom in our bodies are replaced in 40 years. In 40 years, our bodies change a lot and so are our minds. What make Theseus' ship the ship of Theseus, is that Theseus is the owner of the ship. Ownership is a social convention, a construction of the mind. What makes Notre Dame, is that people generally agree it is still Notre Dame. If hypothetically we were in a time of modernism craze, and that our government decided to rebuilt it in some modern style (there actually was proposals like that), it would still be the people who makes it Notre Dame de Paris or not.
tsimionescu 2y ago
> The entire thing can be rebuilt and it will still be the real Notre Dame de Paris. It'd have to stop being used for the original function. This is demonstrably wrong, as we have many examples of old buildings and we know what people actually feel about them. Consider two very famous examples of buildings that completely changed their purpose, but are still the same building: the Pantheon and the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul. The Pantheon was a Roman temple to all of the Gods when it was built in 126, and became a Christian church ~400 years later, but everyone recognizes it as the same building. The Hagia Sophia was a Christian church built in 537, and 1100 years later became an Islamic mosque, but it is still the same building to everyone. Then for the opposite example: St Peter's Basillica at the Vatican. This was built in 1506 on the site of a much older church, also called St Peter's Basillica (commissioned by emperor Constantine), which also served as a Christian church, was also used the parish of the Pope, was also the location of papal coronation and so on. And still, no one would say "St Peter's Basilica was built by Saint Constantine", because the current basilica is universally recognized as a new building, despite serving the same function. A building is recognized for the beauty and specifics of its structural and painterly elements, not for its role. If it is destroyed and rebuilt in almost the same size and shape, then it is recognized as the same building; regardless of entirely changing its purpose. Conversely, if a building is rebuilt into a completely different shape, even a universally admired as beautiful one, it is considered a different building, even if keeps serving the same purpose.
- anon291 2y ago
  The Pantheon no longer exists. It is now the church of St Mary and the Martyrs. And this is the difference I'm getting at. The Pantheon is a temple dedicated to all the ancient Roman gods. It cannot be both that and the Church of St Mary and the Martyrs. When the Church took it over, it ceased to be the Pantheon. There's no doubt the building is the same, and we can argue about how 'true to form' it is. But that's the point. When it stopped being what it originally was, its 'form' is now a goal to never deviate from. Whereas, the various depictions of the martyrs present within the Church of St Mary and the Martyrs, for example, has no such ideal yet. The Church can (and does) shift that around. However, if it were to stop being the church of st Mary and the Martyrs, then it would have an ideal form that any restorer may want to restore it towards.

scientist4397 2y ago

You’ll have to wait a long time to think about it, lot of materials of the cathédrale are originals (especially the stones)