The paradox of decrease and dependent parts

Ratio 31 (3):273-284 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper is concerned with the paradox of decrease. Its aim is to defend the answer to this puzzle that was propounded by its originator, namely, the Stoic philosopher Chrysippus. The main trouble with this answer to the paradox is that it has the seemingly problematic implication that a material thing could perish due merely to extrinsic change. It follows that in order to defend Chrysippus’ answer to the paradox, one has to explain how it could be that Theon is destroyed by the amputation without changing intrinsically. In this paper, I shall answer this challenge by appealing to the broadly Aristotelian idea that at least some of the proper parts of a material substance are ontologically dependent on that substance. I will also appeal to this idea in order to offer a new solution to the structurally similar paradox of increase. In this way, we will end up with a unified solution to two structurally similar paradoxes.

Other Versions

No versions found

Similar books and articles

A Bitter Pill for Closure.Marvin Backes - 2019 - Synthese 196:3773-3787.
The Liar Paradox and Bivalence.Douglas Steven Oro - 1988 - Dissertation, Brown University
The Paradox of Pain.Adam Bradley - 2021 - Philosophical Quarterly 71 (4):pqaa084.
The new paradox of the stone revisited.Erik J. Wielenberg - 2001 - Faith and Philosophy 18 (2):261-268.
Acknowledgement and the paradox of tragedy.Daan Evers & Natalja Deng - 2016 - Philosophical Studies 173 (2):337-350.
Can you seek the answer to this question? (Meno in India).Amber Carpenter & Jonardon Ganeri - 2010 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 88 (4):571-594.
Chrysippus and the epistemic theory of vagueness.Susanne Bobzien - 2002 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 102 (1):217-238.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-01-19

Downloads
623 (#46,607)

6 months
117 (#52,573)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Alex Moran
Université de Fribourg

Citations of this work

Ordinary objects.Daniel Z. Korman & Jonathan Barker - 2025 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Kind‐Dependent Grounding.Alex Moran - 2018 - Analytic Philosophy 59 (3):359-390.
The Puzzle of Dion and Theon Solved.H. E. Baber - 2024 - Philosophia 52 (2):257-267.
Only God Can Make a Tree.Christopher J. Martin - 2019 - Oxford Studies in Medieval Philosophy 7 (1).

Add more citations

References found in this work

Essence and modality.Kit Fine - 1994 - Philosophical Perspectives 8 (Logic and Language):1-16.
Real Definition.Gideon Rosen - 2015 - Analytic Philosophy 56 (3):189-209.
XIV*—Ontological Dependence.Kit Fine - 1995 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 95 (1):269-290.
Things and Their Parts.Kit Fine - 1999 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 23 (1):61-74.
The least discerning and most promiscuous truthmaker.Jonathan Schaffer - 2010 - Philosophical Quarterly 60 (239):307 - 324.

View all 33 references / Add more references