Why I am not an Anti-Haecceitist

Abstract In this paper I argue that if the Identity of Indiscernibles is not necessarily true, then Haecceitism ensues—where view there are maximal possibilities include all same qualitative possibilities, and yet differ with respect to non-qualitative they include. This goes against common intuition Anti-Haecceitism compatible being only contingently true. My argument interesting in many respects. First, it shows any modal framework a connection between number worldbound ordinary spatio-temporal objects, overall possibilities. Second, has repercussions for tenability some philosophical positions, like Generalism, which usually interpreted as entailing while at time claim If am correct, Generalism similar accounts turn out be inconsistent. Finally, provides strong Haecceitism, given majority authors today find counterexamples extremely convincing, positions have been continue criticised on basis their commitment Indiscernibles. The structured follows: introduce Sects. 1 2 respectively. Drawing result from Philosophy Quantum Mechanics, survey Sect. 3, give my main 4. discuss implications 5.