Artifacts and fiat objects: two families apart?

In Richard Davies (ed.), Natural and Artifactual Objects in Contemporary Metaphysics. Exercises in Analytic Ontology. Londra, Regno Unito: pp. 141-155 (2019)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Fiat objects may come into existence by intentional explicit defnition and convention or they can be the result of some spontaneous and unintentional activity resulting in tracing fat spatial boundaries. Artifacts and fiat objects seem intuitively to be correlated: both artifacts and fiat objects depend for their existence on agents and their intentions. Is it possible to consider fiat objects as artifacts and to what extent? Or else can we conceive at least some artifacts as fiat objects? In order to draw a map of the possible answers to these two questions we will take into account various defnitions of artifacts stemming from the two classical approaches: the intentional and the functional one.
Categories
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
CARAAF-6
Revision history
Archival date: 2019-04-04
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Functional Analysis.Cummins, Robert
Realism and Human Kinds.Thomasson, Amie L.
Fiat and Bona Fide Boundaries.Smith, Barry & Varzi, Achille C.
Function and Design.Kitcher, Philip

View all 7 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2019-04-04

Total views
21 ( #39,828 of 42,199 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
21 ( #26,562 of 42,199 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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