Graduate studies at Western
Review of Symbolic Logic 2 (1):164-174 (2009)
|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|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Aaron J. Cotnoir & Andrew Bacon (2012). Non-Wellfounded Mereology. Review of Symbolic Logic 5 (2):187-204.
Yvonne Raley (2007). Ontology, Commitment, and Quine's Criterion. Philosophia Mathematica 15 (3):271-290.
Kathrin Koslicki (2007). Towards a Neo-Aristotelian Mereology. Dialectica 61 (1):127–159.
Desmond Paul Henry (1991). Medieval Mereology. B.R. Grüner.
Gabriele Contessa (2006). Constructive Empiricism, Observability, and Three Kinds of Ontological Commitment. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 37 (4):454–468.
Jamin Asay (2010). How to Express Ontological Commitment in the Vernacular. Philosophia Mathematica 18 (3):293-310.
Massimiliano Carrara & Achille C. Varzi (2001). Ontological Commitment and Reconstructivism. Erkenntnis 55 (1):33-50.
Howard Peacock (2011). Two Kinds of Ontological Commitment. Philosophical Quarterly 61 (242):79-104.
Added to index2009-05-29
Total downloads93 ( #9,066 of 732,277 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,087 of 732,277 )
How can I increase my downloads?