Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 64 (2):398 - 405 (2002)
Abstract |
I have argued that contemporary humeans face a trilemma: either give up temporal parts, deny the humean supervenience of causal relations, or deny the possibility of there being a difference between rotating and nonrotating homogeneous spheres. Mark Scala describes an interesting class of seemingly possible objects, spinning and stationary simples; and argues their possibility undermines my argument. I argue that it does not. And I conclude with a more general assessment of the status of objections to humeanism from the possibility of homogeneous objects in motion
|
Keywords | Analytic Philosophy Contemporary Philosophy Philosophy of Mind |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
ISBN(s) | 0031-8205 |
DOI | 10.1111/j.1933-1592.2002.tb00009.x |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
Causal Independence, the Identity of Indiscernibles, and the Essentiality of Origins.Charles B. Cross - 2009 - Journal of Philosophy 106 (5):277-291.
The Unity and Diversity of Reasons.John Skorupski - 2009 - In Simon Robertson (ed.), Spheres of Reason. Oxford University Press.
Two Spheres, Twenty Spheres, and the Identity of Indiscernibles.Michael Della Rocca - 2005 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 86 (4):480–492.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2009-01-28
Total views
113 ( #85,942 of 2,401,553 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #257,496 of 2,401,553 )
2009-01-28
Total views
113 ( #85,942 of 2,401,553 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #257,496 of 2,401,553 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads