Basically this comes down to the "Heap of Sand" paradox. That is, a grain of sand is not a heap of sand, and if you take a heap of sand, and remove a grain, it is still a heap of sand, but if you remove one grain many times, so that there is only one grain left, is it still a heap of sand?
@Supreme_Overlord This is an example of confidence issues correlating with intelligence. I think I understood this pretty easily; that is it didn't take much thinking. But on the other hand, I wouldn't know if I didn't understand it fully, would I? And at the same time, I could still be wrong, and just capable of making the best argument for my position, so that others will agree with me even though the position they originally held was actually correct (It's happened before).
Now I've thoroughly confused myself as to whether I'm correct or not, and I was actually hesitant to post anything because of the distinct possibility that I don't fully understand it, and just think I do, because other people responded like this:
about something I think is simple.
What I'm saying is that that's not a different ship, it's the original. The restored one is the new one.
~ @Ranger0203
This could be something other than a confidence issue involving intelligence; it could instead be an overly analytical desire to make sure that you're correct, which is based off of being intelligent in the first place. Either way, I see what you mean (and I usually always feel the same way about stuff like this).
Firstly, I think there's a difference between not understanding something at all and understanding something in the wrong way. To have made a claim on this, you obviously understand it in some way. If you didn't understand it at all, I do think that you'd be aware of this, but it is possible that you wouldn't have any idea if you understood it in the wrong way.
Secondly, I think that anybody that goes through this much analysis and overthought of their idea(s) on subjects like this is probably pretty intelligent, lol. While not everybody that's intelligent goes through this, it does seem to be a common occurrence for intelligent people to critically analyze and overthink their thoughts and opinions (not that unintelligent people can't overthink things too, but it's not usually as common or to the same degree). Again, like I said, this might not be a confidence issue; this could instead be an effect of an intelligence-driven desire to be 'intellectually perfect.' Although, if this is the case, perhaps at this point it could be safely said that this desire causes confidence issues. Perhaps it's not exactly confidence issues with intelligence, but confidence issues with living up to our own standards.
Thirdly, perhaps the fact that you feel like this is simple is a sign that you are (at least somewhat) confident with your ability to find an answer. I don't think that someone that lacks any confidence at all is going to be confident enough to say that the topic is simple, even if they do doubt themselves afterwards.
Anyway, I want to talk about video while I'm here as well.
I agree with you on saying that the ship that's rebuilt with all the original pieces is the original ship. I don't think you meant to say, "Ship B," though. Ship B is the one with all new pieces and Ship A is the original one from when it was used; the ship reconstructed with all the parts from Ship A wasn't given a letter, so let's just call it Ship C. I agree that Ship C is the original ship. As for Ship B, I don't agree with that arguments that the video offers; that is, I don't think that the gradual time that it took for the pieces to be replaced of Theseus's presence are relevant to whether or not the ship is still the same ship. I think that as soon as the number of replaced ship parts passes 50%, the ship is therefore closer to a new ship than it is to Theseus's ship.
I don't feel like this really works as a comparison to human identity though, because humans have consciousness. I think that even if all of our 'parts' were replaced, as long as we kept our consciousness, we'd still be the same person. Unlike a physical object (such as a ship) that derives its identity from its physical parts, I think that we derive our identity from our minds.
