Noûs 40 (4):716–737 (2006)
|Abstract||There’s an argument around from so-called “linguistic theories of vagueness”, plus some relatively uncontroversial considerations, to powerful metaphysical conclusions. David Lewis employs this argument to support the mereological principle of unrestricted composition, and Theodore Sider employs a similar argument not just for unrestricted composition but also for the doctrine of temporal parts. This sort of argument could be generalised, to produce a lot of other less palatable metaphysical conclusions. However, arguments to Lewis’s and Sider’s conclusions on the basis of considerations about vagueness are uncompelling, even if we accept the crucial premises about vagueness. And a good thing too, since the generalised form of the argument would prove far too much.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Tuomas E. Tahko (2009). Against the Vagueness Argument. Philosophia 37 (2):335-340.
Marta Campdelacreu (2010). Naturalness, Vagueness, and Sortals. Metaphysica 11 (1):79-91.
Nikk Effingham (2009). Universalism, Vagueness and Supersubstantivalism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 87 (1):35 – 42.
Elizabeth Barnes (2007). Vagueness and Arbitrariness: Merricks on Composition. Mind 116 (461):105-113.
Andrew Wake (2011). Spacetime and Mereology. Erkenntnis 74 (1):17-35.
Dan López de Sa (2006). Is 'Everything' Precise? Dialectica 60 (4):397–409.
Chad Carmichael (2011). Vague Composition Without Vague Existence. Noûs 45 (2):315-327.
Yuri Balashov (2005). On Vagueness, 4d and Diachronic Universalism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 83 (4):523 – 531.
Daniel Z. Korman (2010). The Argument From Vagueness. Philosophy Compass 5 (10):891-901.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads60 ( #16,354 of 556,803 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #13,107 of 556,803 )
How can I increase my downloads?