Abstract
We consider the so-called problem of the many, formulated by Peter Unger. It arises because ordinary material things do not have precise boundaries: it is always possible to find borderline parts of which it is not true to say either that they are parts or that they are not. Unger’s conclusion is that there are no ordinary things at all. We describe the solutions of Peter van Inwagen and David Lewis, and make some critical comments upon them. After that we present our own suggestion which is based on ideas developed by Leibniz in connection with problems of unity and plurality. We suggest that what the problem of the many teaches us is that in order to understand what ordinary things are, we have to take seriously the Leibnizian-Kantian distinction between phenomena and things-in-themselves.
Similar content being viewed by others
Bibliography
Geach, P. 1980. Reference and Generality. Cornell University Press.
Kant, I. 1929. Critique of Pure Reason. Translated by N. Kemp Smith. Macmillan.
Kant, I. 1997. “Metaphysik Mrongovius”, in Lectures on Metaphysics. Cambridge University Press.
Kim, J. 1976. “Events as Property Exemplifications”. In Action Theory, eds. Myles Brand and Douglas Walton. Reidel.
Leibniz, G. W. 1967. The Leibniz-Arnauld Correspondence. Edited and translated by H.T. Mason. Manchester University Press, 1967.
Leibniz, G. W. 1989. Philosophical Essays. Edited and translated by R. Ariew and D. Garber. Hackett.
Lewis, D. 1993. “Many, but almost one”. In Ontology, Causality and Mind, eds. J. Bacon, et al. Cambridge University Press.
Lewis, D. 1986. On the Plurality of Worlds. Basil Blackwell.
Russell, B. 1937. The Philosophy of Leibniz. George Allen & Unwin, 1937.
Unger, P. 1980. “The Problem of the many”Midwest Studies in Philosophy vol. 5, 1980.
van Inwagen, P. 1990. Material Beings. Cornell University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Koistinen, O., Repo, A. Vague objects and phenomenal wholes. Acta Analytica 17, 83–99 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12136-002-1006-4
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12136-002-1006-4