Philosophia 43 (1):25-33 (2015)
AbstractThe paper provides a new and detailed critique of Barker and Dowe’s argument against multi-location. This critique is not only novel but also less committal than previous ones in the literature in that it does not require hefty metaphysical assumptions. The paper also provides an analysis of some metaphysical relations between mereological and locational principles
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
Parts and Places: The Structures of Spatial Representation.Roberto Casati & Achille C. Varzi - 1999 - MIT Press.
Contemporary Debates in Metaphysics.Theodore Sider, John Hawthorne & Dean W. Zimmerman (eds.) - 2007 - Blackwell.
Citations of this work
Similar books and articles
Mereology and Modality.Gabriel Uzquiano - 2014 - In Shieva Kleinschmidt (ed.), Mereology and Location. Oxford University Press. pp. 33-56.
How to Define a Mereological (Collective) Set.Rafał Gruszczyński & Andrzej Pietruszczak - 2010 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 19 (4):309-328.
Non-Mereological Universalism.Kristie Miller - 2006 - European Journal of Philosophy 14 (3):404–422.
Mereological Vagueness and Existential Vagueness.Maureen Donnelly - 2009 - Synthese 168 (1):53 - 79.
More on The Decidability of Mereological Theories.Hsing-Chien Tsai - 2011 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 20 (3):251-265.
Occupy Wall: A Mereological Puzzle and the Burdens of Endurantism.Paul Richard Daniels - 2014 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 92 (1):91-101.