Abstract
In philosophy we often use mereological notions such as parthood, overlap, and composition, as well as principles concerning these notions. One example is David Lewis’ definitions of endurance and perdurance, which employ mereological concepts. Another example is Kathrin Koslicki’s argument for the existence of formal parts which employs a mereological principle.
Besides using mereology, one needs to choose a mereology: which principles hold for parthood, overlap and related notions? Obviously, there are different ways to rationally decide this question of theory-choice. In this talk I distinguish different ways in which people use a mereology, and I also distinguish different ways in which people choose a mereology.
I then highlight some of the interactions between these two projects: some uses of mereology become far less appealing given how one thinks we should decide on the correct mereological theory; and some ways of deciding on the correct mereological theory make certain uses mereology more fruitful.
*
For information about participating online, see the contact card above.
Upcoming seminars
6/11, 13-15 Daniela Dover (joint seminar)
13/11, 10-12 Ylwa Sjölin Wirling
20/11, 10-12 Daniel Giberman
27/11, 10-12 Tricia Magalotti
4/12, 10-12 Alva Stråge
11/12, 13-15 Ulrike Heuer (joint seminar)
18/12, 10-12 Felix Larsson
