On the ontological commitment of mereology

Review of Symbolic Logic 2 (1):164-174 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In Parts of Classes (1991) and Mathematics Is Megethology (1993) David Lewis defends both the innocence of plural quantification and of mereology. However, he himself claims that the innocence of mereology is different from that of plural reference, where reference to some objects does not require the existence of a single entity picking them out as a whole. In the case of plural quantification . Instead, in the mereological case: (Lewis, 1991, p. 87). The aim of the paper is to argue that one—an innocence thesis similar to that of plural reference is defensible. To give a precise account of plural reference, we use the idea of plural choice. We then propose a virtual theory of mereology in which the role of individuals is played by plural choices of atoms

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,154

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-05-29

Downloads
267 (#99,271)

6 months
16 (#178,915)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

References found in this work

The Structure of Appearance.Nelson Goodman - 1951 - Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press.
Nominalist platonism.George Boolos - 1985 - Philosophical Review 94 (3):327-344.
Nominalist platonism.George Boolos - 1998 - In Richard Jeffrey (ed.), Logic, Logic, and Logic. Harvard University Press. pp. 73-87.

View all 9 references / Add more references