Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 64 (2):398 - 405 (2002)
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)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
Humean Supervenience and Rotating Homogeneous Matter.C. Callender - 2001 - Mind 110 (437):25-44.
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.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads70 ( #73,976 of 2,158,458 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #354,692 of 2,158,458 )
How can I increase my downloads?