Mereological nihilism and the special arrangement question

Synthese 192 (5):1295-1314 (2015)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Mereological nihilism is the thesis that composite objects—objects with proper parts—do not exist. Nihilists generally paraphrase talk of composite objects F into talk of there being “xs arranged F-wise” . Recently several philosophers have argued that nihilism is defective insofar as nihilists are either unable to say what they mean by such phrases as “there are xs arranged F-wise,” or that nihilists are unable to employ such phrases without incurring significant costs, perhaps even undermining one of the chief motivations for nihilism. In this paper I defend nihilism against these objections. A key theme of the paper is this: if nihilists need to employ such phrases as “there are xs arranged F-wise,” non-nihilists will need to do so as well. Accordingly, any costs incurred by the nihilist when she employs such phrases will be shared by everyone else. What’s more, such phrases are intelligible when employed by the nihilist, as well as when they are employed by the non-nihilist, insofar as analyses of such phrases will not essentially involve mereological concepts incompatible with nihilism
Categories
(categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
BREMNA
Revision history
Archival date: 2015-09-04
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Naming and Necessity.Kripke, Saul A.
Against Parthood.Sider, Theodore

View all 27 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Ordinary Objects.Korman, Daniel Z.

View all 9 citations / Add more citations

Added to PP index
2014-12-05

Total views
564 ( #4,700 of 41,654 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
117 ( #3,706 of 41,654 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.