Abstract
I reply to Hawthorne and Uzquiano's (2011) arguments for the incompatibility between mereological universalism and plenitudinous co-location. I argue that a mereology in which antisymmetry for parthood fails is independently motivated, and allows for both universalism and plenitudinous co-location. There can be as many angels in a place as there are cardinalities.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 959-965 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | Mind |
| Volume | 125 |
| Issue number | 500 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Oct 2016 |