David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Philosophy 94 (5):260-265 (1997)
Suppose a certain man, Dion, has his foot amputated, and lives to tell the tale. That tale involves a well-known metaphysical puzzle, for most of us assume that there was, before the operation, an object made up of all of Dion’s parts except those that overlapped with his foot-- ”all of Dion except for his foot”, we might say, or Dion’s “foot-complement”. Call that object Theon. (Anyone who doubts that there is such a thing as Dion’s undetached foot-complement may imagine that ‘Theon’ is a name for Dion’s undetached head. Surely there is such a thing as Dion’s head? And surely Dion could, in principle, survive if his head were detached from the rest of him and kept alive?) It seems obvious that Theon, like Dion, continues to exist after the operation, for you cannot destroy an object merely by changing its surroundings--merely by removing something that was never a part of it. The puzzle, then (which might be called the problem of undetached parts), is how Dion and Theon are related after the operation. The most common answer to this question is that Dion and Theon come to occupy just the same region of space and to be made of just the same matter after the operation. The next-mostpopular answer is that Dion and Theon are made up of temporal parts, and while those of their temporal parts that “occur” before the operation only partly overlap, Dion and Theon have the very same post-operative temporal parts. Much as two roads can merge and have spatial parts in common, Dion and Theon merge and have temporal parts in common. Less popular accounts of the relation between Dion and Theon involve relativizing identity to concepts or times, and denying that there is such a thing as Theon. Michael Burke has recently proposed an intriguing new solution (or resurrected an ancient one) to the problem of undetached parts.  He argues that, despite appearances, Theon-- Dion’s foot-complement--ceases to exist when Dion’s foot is removed..
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Bernard Mandeville (1953). A Letter to Dion, 1732. Los Angeles, William Andrews Clark Memorial Library, University of California.
F. W. Walbank (1958). Dion. The Classical Review 8 (3-4):269-.
Bernard Mandeville (1954). A Letter to Dion. [Liverpool]University Press of Liverpool.
R. Hackforth (1935). Dion Renata Von Scheliha: Dion: Dieplatonische Staatsgründung in Sizilien. Mit Münztafel und Karte. Pp. viii+ 166. (Das Erbe der Alten: Zweite Reihe XXV.) Leipzig: Dieterich, 1934. Paper, M. 5.50 (bound, 6.50). [REVIEW] The Classical Review 49 (02):77-.
F. W. Walbank (1954). Plutarch's Life of Dion Plutarch: Life of Dion. Edited with Introduction and Notes by W. H. Porter. Pp. Xxxii+106; 1 Map. Dublin: Hodges, Figgis, & Co. 1952. Paper. [REVIEW] The Classical Review 4 (01):18-20.
F. W. Walbank (1958). Dion Helmut Berve: Dion. (Akad. der Wissenschaften in Mainz: Abh. der. geistes- und sozialwissenschaftlichen Klasse, 1956, Nr. 10.) Pp. 141 Wiesbaden: Steiner, 1957. Paper, DM. 10.80. [REVIEW] The Classical Review 8 (3-4):269-271.
Michael B. Burke (2004). Dion, Theon, and the Many-Thinkers Problem. Analysis 64 (283):242–250.
Michael B. Burke (1994). Dion and Theon: An Essentialist Solution to an Ancient Puzzle. Journal of Philosophy 91 (3):129-139.
Josh Parsons (2004). Dion, Theon, and Daup. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 85 (1):85–91.
A. S. Ferguson (1924). Dion Chrysostom, Or. XII. 44. The Classical Review 38 (1-2):15-16.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads18 ( #76,948 of 1,011,665 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,700 of 1,011,665 )
How can I increase my downloads?