Defending Substantivism about Disputes in the Metaphysics of Composition

Journal of Philosophy 111 (9-10):529-556 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper defends substantivism about disputes in the metaphysics of composition. That is, it defends the view that disputes about the metaphysics of composition are substantial: they are neither merely apparent disputes in which disputants are talking past one another in virtue of disagreeing about the truth conditions for certain sentences; nor are they disputes in which there is no fact of the matter in the world in virtue of which one party to the dis-pute is right and the other(s) wrong.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Method of Verbal Dispute.Alan Sidelle - 2007 - Philosophical Topics 35 (1-2):83-113.
Disagreement Lost.Martín Abreu Zavaleta - 2020 - Synthese (1-2):1-34.
Composition, colocation, and metaontology.Karen Bennett - 2009 - In Ryan Wasserman, David Manley & David Chalmers (eds.), Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. pp. 38.
Disagreements about taste.Timothy Sundell - 2011 - Philosophical Studies 155 (2):267-288.
More than merely verbal disputes.Rogelio Miranda Vilchis - 2021 - Metaphilosophy 52 (3-4):479-493.
Why Composition Matters.Andrew M. Bailey & Andrew Brenner - 2020 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 50 (8):934-949.
Ontology in Plain English.John Horden - 2014 - Philosophical Quarterly 64 (255):225-242.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-05-02

Downloads
453 (#63,974)

6 months
91 (#67,606)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Kristie Miller
University of Sydney

Citations of this work

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references