remnants of the previous dwelling. However, when all was said and done, it was not considered .
by any means to be a "new" house. The house still maintained its postal designation, as well as .
the original deed. More importantly it was still my relative's house. When visiting for a holiday .
or just to watch a movie, it was never designated as anything more than my relative's house. It .
was not called my relative's "new" house, my relative's "renovated" house, or my relative's .
"restored" house. It was still my relative's house, and the only way it would stop being my .
relatives house would be if they moved out, and new tenants moved in. .
The reason that this house that now had no resemblance to its predecessor remained in .
my mind, "my relatives house", is that the perception of an object is given a value by the context .
in which we place it. In this particular case the context being assigned to the house is my .
relatives. The same concept can be applied to the Ship of Theseus. Anyone who was familiar .
with the crew of the ship, whether it was intimately or in passing, will believe the ship that .
contains the original crew to be the Ship of Theseus. If they are on the ship of replacement parts .
people will conclude the following: .
1.) Their ship does indeed look different.*.
2.) The ship next to it looks like the ship that had departed port. .
3.) The different looking ship however is the Ship of Theseus, because it contains the crew of the Ship of Theseus. .
* I am assuming the ship looks different.
.
If the crew happens to be on the ship of original parts the following will be concluded:.
1.) There is the Ship of Theseus.
2.) It contains the crew of the Ship of Theseus.
3.) Next to it is another ship. .
Now it may appear that I have just come to a conclusion. I would like to leave things just .
the way they are, but unfortunately I just cannot think like that. Just because I associated an .
object within a particular context does not mean that the context is correct.