The Chief Supreme Court Justice: a metaphysical puzzle?

Critica 39 (115):61-68 (2007)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

What are things like the Supreme Court? Gabriel Uzquiano has defended that they are groups, entities which are somehow composed of members (at certain times) but which, unlike sets (or pluralities), allow for fluctuation in membership. The main alternative holds that 'the Supreme Court' refers (at any time) to the set (or plurality) of their members (at the time). Uzquiano motivates his view by posing a metaphysical puzzle for this reductive alternative. I argue that a parallel reasoning would also find a corresponding 'puzzle' in the case of singular terms like 'The Chief Supreme Court Justice'.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,616

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
74 (#203,119)

6 months
3 (#447,120)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

Social Ontology.Brian Epstein - 2018 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Easy Ontology without Deflationary Metaontology.Daniel Z. Korman - 2019 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 99 (1):236-243.
Social Groups Are Concrete Material Particulars.Kevin Richardson - 2022 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 52 (4):468-483.
Groups as pluralities.John Horden & Dan López de Sa - 2020 - Synthese 198 (11):10237-10271.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Rigidity, ontology, and semantic structure.Alan Sidelle - 1992 - Journal of Philosophy 89 (8):410-430.
Rigidity, Ontology, and Semantic Structure.Alan Sidelle - 1992 - Journal of Philosophy 89 (8):410.

Add more references