Fiat and Bona Fide Boundaries

Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 60 (2):401-420 (2000)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

There is a basic distinction, in the realm of spatial boundaries, between bona fide boundaries on the one hand, and fiat boundaries on the other. The former are just the physical boundaries of old. The latter are exemplified especially by boundaries induced through human demarcation, for example in the geographic domain. The classical problems connected with the notions of adjacency, contact, separation and division can be resolved in an intuitive way by recognizing this two-sorted ontology of boundaries. Bona fide boundaries yield a notion of contact that is effectively modeled by classical topology; the analogue of contact involving fiat boundaries calls, however, for a different account, based on the intuition that fiat boundaries do not support the open/closed distinction on which classical topology is based. In the presence of this two-sorted ontology it then transpires that mereotopology—topology erected on a mereological basis—is more than a trivial formal variant of classical point-set topology.

Other Versions

No versions found

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
1,222 (#15,949)

6 months
193 (#18,583)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Achille C. Varzi
Columbia University
Barry Smith
University at Buffalo

Citations of this work

Sixteen days.Barry Smith & Berit Brogaard - 2003 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 28 (1):45 – 78.
Truthmaker realism.Barry Smith - 1999 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 77 (3):274 – 291.
Fiat objects.Barry Smith - 2001 - Topoi 20 (2):131-148.
Lady Parts: The Metaphysics of Pregnancy.Elselijn Kingma - 2018 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 82:165-187.
Explaining essences.Michael J. Raven - 2020 - Philosophical Studies 178 (4):1043-1064.

View all 86 citations / Add more citations