Is Weak Supplementation analytic?
MetadataShow full item record
Mereological principles are often controversial; perhaps the most stark contrast is between those who claim that Weak Supplementation is analytic—constitutive of our notion of proper parthood—and those who argue that the principle is simply false, and subject to many counterexamples. The aim of this paper is to diagnose the source of this dispute. I’ll suggest that the dispute has arisen by participants failing to be sensitive to two different conceptions of proper parthood: the outstripping conception and the non-identity conception. I’ll argue that the outstripping conception (together with a specific set of definitions for other mereological notions), can deliver the analyticity of Weak Supplementation on at least one sense of ‘analyticity’. I’ll also suggest that the non-identity conception cannot do so independently of considerations to do with mereological extensionality.
Cotnoir , A 2018 , ' Is Weak Supplementation analytic? ' , Synthese , vol. In press . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-018-02066-9
© The Author(s) 2018. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
DescriptionThe research and writing of this paper was supported in part by a 2017-2018 Leverhulme Research Fellowship from the Leverhulme Trust.
Items in the St Andrews Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.