Resemblance in the glass can support a hypothesis about whiskey identity but cannot by itself establish its production history or category membership.
Some profiles are informative clues. The claim limits their evidential reach, not their usefulness. Polger does not settle whether whiskey is a natural kind.
Separate the observed profile, the proposed causal history and the definition being applied. Reveal documentary information after independent notes to examine which hypotheses survive.
Idea
Resemblance in the glass can support a hypothesis about whiskey identity but cannot by itself establish its production history or category membership.
Why it matters
Separate the observed profile, the proposed causal history and the definition being applied. Reveal documentary information after independent notes to examine which hypotheses survive.
Source and reasoning
Polger, chapter 11, pp. 187–192; Sweeney, chapter 18, pp. 293–296. This is an original synthesis of the contributor's argument, not an experimental finding.
Whiskey and Philosophy — Authenticity, categories and sensory resemblance
Connection to the existing library
This note develops a specific implication of that existing idea.
Counterpoint
Some profiles are informative clues. The claim limits their evidential reach, not their usefulness. Polger does not settle whether whiskey is a natural kind.