Z ontologii czasoprzestrzeni

Filozofia Nauki 2 (1994)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The question concerning the ontic nature of space-time points and of space-time itself - is the question: are these objects set-theoretic sets or individuals, i.e. nonsets? Two classifications of the standpoints concerning the nature of these objects are formulated and then they are intersected. In concequence three standpoints appear: mereological substantivalism, set-theoretic substantivalism and set-theoretical relationism; it is showed that mereological relationism is not real. It is proved that set-theoretic standpoints logically imply so called set-theoretic realism which accepts the existence of sets (if Quine's conception of existence is assumed)

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,458

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-03-14

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

On field's argument for substantivalism.Jerzy Gołosz - 1999 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 13 (1):5 – 16.
Ruch, przestrzeń, czas.Jerzy Gołosz - 2002 - Filozofia Nauki 1:7 - 31.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references