A Spatial Approach to Mereology

In Shieva Keinschmidt (ed.), Mereology and Location. Oxford University Press (2014)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
When do several objects compose a further object? The last twenty years have seen a great deal of discussion of this question. According to the most popular view on the market, there is a physical object composed of your brain and Jeremy Bentham’s body. According to the second-most popular view on the market, there are no such objects as human brains or human bodies, and there are also no atoms, rocks, tables, or stars. And according to the third-ranked view, there are human bodies, but still no brains, atoms, rocks, tables, or stars. Although it’s pleasant to have so many crazy-sounding views around, I think it would also be nice to have a commonsense option available. The aim of this paper is to offer such an option. The approach I offer begins by considering a mereological question other than the standard one that has been the focus of most discussions in the literature. I try to show that the road to mereological sanity begins with giving the most straightforward and commonsensical answer to this other question, and then extending that answer to further questions about the mereology of physical objects. On the approach I am recommending, it turns out that all of the mereological properties and relations of physical objects are determined by their spatial properties and relations.
Reprint years
2014
PhilPapers/Archive ID
MARASA-5
Upload history
Archival date: 2014-07-10
View other versions
Added to PP index
2013-01-02

Total views
898 ( #5,699 of 64,084 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
72 ( #9,515 of 64,084 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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