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 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Anti-symmetry and non-extensional mereology'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver