Axiomathes 19 (1):73--85 (2009)
|Abstract||In a recent paper, Jiri Benovsky argues that the bundle theory and the substratum theory, traditionally regarded as ‘deadly enemies’ in the metaphysics literature, are in fact ‘twin brothers’. That is, they turn out to be ‘equivalent for all theoretical purposes’ upon analysis. The only exception, according to Benovsky, is a particular version of the bundle theory whose distinguishing features render unappealing. In the present reply article, I critically analyse these undoubtedly relevant claims, and reject them.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Matteo Morganti (2011). Bundles, Individuation and Indiscernibility. European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 7 (1):36-48.
Jiri Benovsky (2009). The Self : A Humean Bundle and/or a Cartesian Substance ? European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 5 (1).
Douglas Ehring (2001). Temporal Parts and Bundle Theory. Philosophical Studies 104 (2):163 - 168.
Gonzalo Rodriguez-P. Ereyra, The Bundle Theory is Compatible with Distinct but Indiscernible Particulars.
Jiri Benovsky (2006). A Modal Bundle Theory. Metaphysica 7 (2).
Sun Demirli (2010). Indiscernibility and Bundles in a Structure. Philosophical Studies 7 (1):1-18.
Jiri Benovsky (2010). Relational and Substantival Ontologies, and the Nature and the Role of Primitives in Ontological Theories. Erkenntnis 73 (1).
Ross Cameron (2006). Tropes, Necessary Connections, and Non-Transferability. Dialectica 60 (2):99–113.
Theodore Sider (2006). Bare Particulars. Philosophical Perspectives 20 (1):387–397.
Jiri Benovsky (2008). The Bundle Theory and the Substratum Theory: Deadly Enemies or Twin Brothers? Philosophical Studies 141 (2):175 - 190.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads106 ( #5,453 of 549,198 )
Recent downloads (6 months)33 ( #1,274 of 549,198 )
How can I increase my downloads?