Graduate studies at Western
Philosophical Studies 140 (3):319-334 (2007)
|Abstract||Many of those who accept the universalist thesis that mereological composition is unrestricted also maintain that the folk typically restrict their quantifiers in such a way as to exclude strange fusions when they say things that appear to conflict with universalism. Despite its prima facie implausibility, there are powerful arguments for universalism. By contrast, there is remarkably little evidence for the thesis that strange fusions are excluded from the ordinary domain of quantification. Furthermore, this reconciliatory strategy seems hopeless when applied to the more fundamental conflict between universalism and the intuitions that tell against it.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Daniel Z. Korman (2007). The Naive Conception of Material Objects: A Defense. Dissertation, University of Texas at Austin
Øystein Linnebo (2006). Sets, Properties, and Unrestricted Quantification. In Gabriel Uzquiano & Agustin Rayo (eds.), Absolute Generality. Oxford University Press.
Nikk Effingham, Debunking a Mereological Myth: If Composition as Identity is True, Universalism Need Not Be.
Nikk Effingham (2011). Undermining Motivations for Universalism. Noûs 45 (4):696-713.
Dan López de Sa (2006). Is 'Everything' Precise? Dialectica 60 (4):397–409.
By Kristie Miller (2008). Endurantism, Diachronic Vagueness and the Problem of the Many. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 89 (2):242–253.
Gabriel Uzquiano (2006). The Price of Universality. Philosophical Studies 129 (1):137 - 169.
Michael Glanzberg (2006). Context and Unrestricted Quantification. In A. Rayo & G. Uzquiano (eds.), Absolute Generality. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads165 ( #2,729 of 739,352 )
Recent downloads (6 months)20 ( #6,453 of 739,352 )
How can I increase my downloads?