Dion, Theon, and DAUP

J  Parsons

doi:10.1111/j.1468-0114.2004.00188.x

Dion, Theon, and DAUP

J Parsons

School of Philosophical, Anthropological and Film Studies

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Peter van Inwagen's puzzle of Descartes's foot, and Chrysippus' similar puzzle of Dion and Theon, do not have as much bearing on the Doctrine of Arbitrary Undetached Parts (or DAUP) as is usually supposed. Van Inwagen's argument against DAUP works via his rejection of the "Remainder Principle", which, I argue, is in fact independent of DAUP itself.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	85-91
Number of pages	7
Journal	Pacific Philosophical Quarterly
Volume	85
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0114.2004.00188.x
Publication status	Published - Mar 2004

Keywords

PARTS

Access to Document

10.1111/j.1468-0114.2004.00188.x

Cite this

@article{cdbb5dd88c0a46ee978bfcef0282b68f,

title = "Dion, Theon, and DAUP",

abstract = "Peter van Inwagen's puzzle of Descartes's foot, and Chrysippus' similar puzzle of Dion and Theon, do not have as much bearing on the Doctrine of Arbitrary Undetached Parts (or DAUP) as is usually supposed. Van Inwagen's argument against DAUP works via his rejection of the {"}Remainder Principle{"}, which, I argue, is in fact independent of DAUP itself.",

keywords = "PARTS",

author = "J Parsons",

year = "2004",

month = mar,

doi = "10.1111/j.1468-0114.2004.00188.x",

language = "English",

volume = "85",

pages = "85--91",

journal = "Pacific Philosophical Quarterly",

issn = "0279-0750",

publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Dion, Theon, and DAUP

AU - Parsons, J

PY - 2004/3

Y1 - 2004/3

N2 - Peter van Inwagen's puzzle of Descartes's foot, and Chrysippus' similar puzzle of Dion and Theon, do not have as much bearing on the Doctrine of Arbitrary Undetached Parts (or DAUP) as is usually supposed. Van Inwagen's argument against DAUP works via his rejection of the "Remainder Principle", which, I argue, is in fact independent of DAUP itself.

AB - Peter van Inwagen's puzzle of Descartes's foot, and Chrysippus' similar puzzle of Dion and Theon, do not have as much bearing on the Doctrine of Arbitrary Undetached Parts (or DAUP) as is usually supposed. Van Inwagen's argument against DAUP works via his rejection of the "Remainder Principle", which, I argue, is in fact independent of DAUP itself.

KW - PARTS

U2 - 10.1111/j.1468-0114.2004.00188.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1468-0114.2004.00188.x

M3 - Article

SN - 0279-0750

VL - 85

SP - 85

EP - 91

JO - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly

JF - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly

IS - 1

ER -

Dion, Theon, and DAUP

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this