Gendler on Why We Can't Trust Thought Experiments on Personal Identity

In "Exceptional Persons," Tamar Gendler argues
that we cannot make reliable judgments about imaginary
cases because the conceptually necessary and sufficient
conditions for application of the concept of personal
identity (sameness of person) don"t guide our application in
everyday cases, and while acceptable in actual cases, this
leads to error in considering hypothetical cases. In this
paper, I explain Gendler's argument against the utility of
thought experiments on personal identity and argue that
the central case she uses to illustrate the problem is
mishandled.