Graduate studies at Western
Philosophical Studies 125 (1):61-83 (2005)
|Abstract||In “Tropes and Ordinary Physical Objects”, Kris McDaniel argues that ordinary physical objects are fusions of monadic and polyadic tropes. McDaniel calls his view “TOPO”—for “Theory of Ordinary Physical Objects”. He argues that we should accept TOPO because of the philosophical work that it allows us to do. Among other things, TOPO is supposed to allow endurantists to reply to Mark Heller’s argument for <span class='Hi'>perdurantism</span>. But, we argue in this paper, TOPO does not help endurantists do that; indeed, we argue that anyone who accepts TOPO should reject endurantism.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Ned Markosian (2000). What Are Physical Objects? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 61 (2):375-395.
Katherine Hawley (2008). Persistence and Determination. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 62 (62):197-212.
Aaron Ben-Ze[hamza ]ev (2003). Perceptual Objects May Have Nonphysical Properties. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (1):22-23.
Andrew Melnyk (1995). Physicalism, Ordinary Objects, and Identity. Journal of Philosophical Research 20:221-235.
Jiri Benovsky (2008). There Are Vague Objects (in Any Sense in Which There Are Ordinary Objects). Studia Philosophica Estonica 1 (3):1-4.
Kris McDaniel (2001). Tropes and Ordinary Physical Objects. Philosophical Studies 104 (3):269-290.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads21 ( #65,621 of 751,836 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,163 of 751,836 )
How can I increase my downloads?