Abstract
In order to solve the problem of identity through time of ordinary objects, Roderick Chisholm was led to distinguish two types of entities and two types of identity relations. In this lecture, I will defend Chisholm's theory by adding the thesis of existential pluralism. Drawing on the work of Roman Ingarden, I will show that the mode of being of what Chisholm calls entia successiva must be distinguished from that of entia per se. While the latter are real objects, which exist autonomously and could not have had parts other than those they possess, the former are purely intentional objects, which could have possessed parts other than those they possess, and which depend ontologically both on the real objects that serve as their ontological foundation and on certain individuals who intentionally produce them.
