The physics of extended simples

Analysis 66 (3):222–226 (2006)
Abstract
The idea that there could be spatially extended mereological simples has recently been defended by a number of metaphysicians (Markosian 1998, 2004; Simons 2004; Parsons (2000) also takes the idea seriously). Peter Simons (2004) goes further, arguing not only that spatially extended mereological simples (henceforth just extended simples) are possible, but that it is more plausible that our world is composed of such simples, than that it is composed of either point-sized simples, or of atomless gunk. The difficulty for these views lies in explaining why it is that the various subvolumes of space occupied by such simples, are not occupied by proper parts of those simples. Intuitively at least, many of us find compelling the idea that spatially extended objects have proper parts at every sub-volume of the region they occupy. It seems that the defender of extended simples must reject a seemingly plausible claim, what Simons calls the geometric correspondence principle (GCP): that any (spatially) extended object has parts that correspond to the parts of the region that it occupies (Simons 2004: 371). We disagree. We think that GCP is a plausible principle. We also think it is plausible that our world is composed of extended simples. the physics of extended simples 223 We reconcile these two notions by two means. On the one hand we pay closer attention to the physics of our world. On the other hand, we consider what happens when our concept of something – in this case space – contains elements not all of which are realized in anything, but instead key components are realized in different features of the world.
Keywords simples  Parts  extended simples  wholes  physics  quantised space-time
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive David Braddon-Mitchell, The physics of extended simples
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
Ned Markosian (1998). Simples. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 76 (2):213 – 228.
Peter Simons (2004). Extended Simples. The Monist 87 (3):371--85.
Peter van Inwagen (1981). The Doctrine Of Arbitrary Undetached Parts. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 62 (April):123-137.
Citations of this work BETA
Joshua Spencer (2010). A Tale of Two Simples. Philosophical Studies 148 (2):167 - 181.

View all 8 citations

Similar books and articles
Kris McDaniel (2007). Extended Simples. Philosophical Studies 133 (1):131 - 141.
Josh Parsons (2008). Hudson on Location. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 76 (2):427 - 435.
Peter Simons (2004). Extended Simples. The Monist 87 (3):371--85.
Mark Scala (2002). Homogeneous Simples. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 64 (2):393-397.
Mark Scala (2002). Homogeneous Simples. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 64 (2):393 - 397.
Joshua Spencer (2010). A Tale of Two Simples. Philosophical Studies 148 (2):167 - 181.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

149 ( #10,067 of 1,707,756 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

54 ( #13,988 of 1,707,756 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.