Abstract
I examine the link between extensionality principles of classical mereology and the anti-symmetry of parthood. Varzi’s most recent defence of extensionality depends crucially on assuming anti-symmetry. I examine the notions of proper parthood, weak supplementation and non-well-foundedness. By rejecting anti-symmetry, the anti-extensionalist has a unified, independently grounded response to Varzi’s arguments. I give a formal construction of a non-extensional mereology in which antisymmetry fails. If the notion of ‘mereological equivalence’ is made explicit, this non-anti-symmetric mereology recaptures all of the structure of classical mereology.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 396-405 |
Number of pages | 9 |
Journal | The Philosophical Quarterly |
Volume | 60 |
Issue number | 239 |
Early online date | 9 Sept 2009 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Apr 2010 |