Dictionary of Arguments

Philosophical and Scientific Issues in Dispute

Screenshot Tabelle Begriffes


Find counter arguments by entering NameVs… or …VsName.

Enhanced Search:
Search term 1: Author or Term Search term 2: Author or Term

together with

The author or concept searched is found in the following 1 entries.
Disputed term/author/ism Author
Maximum Chisholm II 80f
Minimum/Maximum/Sorites/Gombocz: for some properties there is no unproblematic minimum - unproblematic: e.g. shortest duration, smallest speed. - But also: minimum of dentition: one tooth; of hair: one hair - no hair: categorical transition, other property than hairiness. Cf. >Sorites, >Minimum/Chisholm.

Wolfgang L. Gombocz. Maxima. In: M.David/L. Stubenberg (Hg) Philosophische Aufsätze zu Ehren von R.M. chisholm Graz 1986

Chisholm I
R. Chisholm
The First Person. Theory of Reference and Intentionality, Minneapolis 1981
German Edition:
Die erste Person Frankfurt 1992

Chisholm II
Roderick Chisholm

Philosophische Aufsäze zu Ehren von Roderick M. Ch, Marian David/Leopold Stubenberg Amsterdam 1986

Chisholm III
Roderick M. Chisholm
Theory of knowledge, Englewood Cliffs 1989
German Edition:
Erkenntnistheorie Graz 2004

The author or concept searched is found in the following controversies.
Disputed term/author/ism Author Vs Author
Essentialism Simons Vs Essentialism I 272
Mereological Essentialism/Chisholm/Simons: there is a disarmingly simple example by Chisholm (1976, 146): E.g. a table is formed out of a stub and a plate. It is only the same table, if both remain the same.
chisholm: so it should seem that a certain table is necessarily built of this plate and this stub.
Simons: this is the only example of "person and object".
I 273
As it stands, it is indeed convincing. a: stub, b: plate, c: the restulting table:

N(E!c > (t)[Ext c > a ≤≤t c u b ≤≤t c])

Everyday language translation/logical form/(s) : "(t)[E Ext a...": "at all times in which", "always if a c exists.. " – "N(E!c > …”:a c has to....”… - "N(E!c > (t)[Ext c ..." "a c always has to...".
Simons: this is different than the sum that also would exist if plate and stub would not be connected, the table can only exist if both are connected.
Superposition/Simons: so the parts do not guarantee the existence of the table (or the identity of the table with the sum)!
I 275
SimonsVsEssentialism: that e.g. the engine of a car must be a specific engine is not so clear. Here there is room for vagueness and convention. Pro essentialism: clear case: e.g. an atom must have these particular protons, otherwise it is a different atom.
I 276
(...) Chisholm pro Essentialism: >Sorites, Sorites/Chisholm.
SimonsVschisholm/SimonsVsEssentialism: our everyday linguistic concept scheme provides no such identity conditions and living conditions for ordinary objects (things, objects) so that they could not continue to exist at the slightest change.
I 278
Most of the objects of science, e.g. stars, planets, organisms or volcanoes are such that they are both: natural objects or whole while mereologically variable so that there is a middle path. Middle path: there is a middle path between chisholm's extreme essentialism and the position that the parts of an object would be merely determined arbitrarily or conventionally.
Simons: thesis: one could assume a "naturally unified object". (see below: "normal style", "normal thing", "normal piece of music").
I 338
Connection/Whitehead: (see above WD5’) individuals are connected if they have a binary sum. Together with Tiles' definition then in Whitehead's system each individual is self-connected, which corresponds to his intentions. SimonsVsExtensionality: all this does not refute the arguments VsCEM: systems that limit the existence of sums and smallest upper bounds, but nevertheless remain extensional, are still too strong to be able to act as a general theory of part and whole. (However, they are still useful.)
Characteristic relation/whole/Simons: continuity is only one characteristic relationship among many. Some may not be important, but one should not exclude any a priori.
E.g. the political relations between Alaska and the rest of the United States outweigh the spatial continuity with Canada.
Continuity: continuity helps to exclude discontinuous sums, e.g. sums of chemicals of several organisms.

Simons I
P. Simons
Parts. A Study in Ontology Oxford New York 1987