On the Mereological Structure of Complex States of Affairs

Synthese 187 (2):403-418 (2012)

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to elucidate the mereological structure of complex states of affairs without relying on the problematic notion of structural universals. For this task tools from graph theory, lattice theory, and the theory of relational systems are employed. Our starting point is the mereology of similarity structures. Since similarity structures are structured sets, their mereology can be considered as a generalization of the mereology of sets..

Download options

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,722

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-03-28

Downloads
826 (#8,897)

6 months
4 (#163,019)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Thomas Mormann
Ludwig Maximilians Universität, München (PhD)

References found in this work

A World of States of Affairs.D. M. Armstrong - 1997 - Cambridge University Press.
Parts: A Study in Ontology.Peter Simons - 1987 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
A World of States of Affairs.D. Armstrong - 1993 - Philosophical Perspectives 7:429-440.
Parts of Classes.David K. Lewis - 1991 - Mind 100 (3):394-397.

View all 15 references / Add more references

Similar books and articles

What Incongruent Counterparts Show.David Landy - 2013 - European Journal of Philosophy 21 (4):507-524.
Structure-Making.Kris McDaniel - 2009 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 87 (2):251-274.
Truth Breakers.Dale Jacquette - 2010 - Topoi 29 (2):153-163.
Social Causality.Theodore R. Schatzki - 1988 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 31 (2):151 – 170.
Mereology and Modality.Gabriel Uzquiano - 2014 - In Shieva Kleinschmidt (ed.), Mereology and Location. Oxford University Press. pp. 33-56.
What Is Classical Mereology?Paul Hovda - 2009 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 38 (1):55 - 82.