Two Finean Arguments Reconsidered - Marco Larotonda - Vita e Pensiero - Articolo Filosofia Neo-Scolastica Vita e Pensiero

Two Finean Arguments Reconsidered

newdigital Two Finean Arguments Reconsidered
Article
journal RIVISTA DI FILOSOFIA NEO-SCOLASTICA
issue RIVISTA DI FILOSOFIA NEO-SCOLASTICA - 2022 - 1
title Two Finean Arguments Reconsidered
Author
Publisher Vita e Pensiero
format Article | Pdf
online since 05-2022
doi 10.26350/001050_000313
issn 0035-6247 (print) | 1827-7926 (digital)
Write a comment for this product
€ 6.00

Ebook format Pdf readable on these devices:

According to Classical Extensional Mereology, ordinary objects are unstructured. But our intuitions guide us in the opposite direction; ordinary objects (such as sandwiches, tables,  and chairs) have their parts arranged in a precise way. Some philosophers take this thought as a decisive reason to find Classical Extensional Mereology inadequate to account for  ordinary objects. Indeed, the two arguments (the Aggregative Objection and the Monster Objection) that Kit Fine presents in his paper Things and Their Parts, purports to show that  Classical Extensional Mereology does not correctly represent the conditions of existence of ordinary objects. In this paper, I provide a detailed critique of the Finean objections in  order to argue that we can continue to employ Classical Extensional Mereology for the analysis of ordinary objects.

keywords

Analytic Metaphysics, Mereology, Classical Extensional Mereology, Parthood, Ordinary Objects

Author biography

Università degli Studi di Milano. Email: marco.larotonda@studenti.unimi.it

Pinterest