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

Two Finean Arguments Reconsidered

novitàdigital Two Finean Arguments Reconsidered
Articolo
rivista RIVISTA DI FILOSOFIA NEO-SCOLASTICA
fascicolo RIVISTA DI FILOSOFIA NEO-SCOLASTICA - 2022 - 1
titolo Two Finean Arguments Reconsidered
Autore
Editore Vita e Pensiero
formato Articolo | Pdf
online da 05-2022
doi 10.26350/001050_000313
issn 0035-6247 (stampa) | 1827-7926 (digitale)
€ 6,00

Ebook in formato Pdf leggibile su questi device:

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

Biografia dell'autore

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