Vagueness in Geography

Philosophy and Geography 4 (1):49–65 (2001)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Some have argued that the vagueness exhibited by geographic names and descriptions such as ‘Albuquerque’, ‘the Outback’, or ‘Mount Everest’ is ultimately ontological: these terms are vague because they refer to vague objects, objects with fuzzy boundaries. I take the opposite stand and hold the view that geographic vagueness is exclusively semantic, or conceptual at large. There is no such thing as a vague mountain. Rather, there are many things where we conceive a mountain to be, each with its precise boundary, and when we say ‘Everest’ we are just being vague as to which thing we are referring to. This paper defends this view against some plausible objections.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2015-11-21
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
.Williamson, Timothy
Vagueness.Williamson, Timothy

View all 52 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Mereology.Varzi, Achille C.
Fiat Objects.Smith, Barry

View all 23 citations / Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
353 ( #12,555 of 50,260 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
51 ( #11,331 of 50,260 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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