Making sense of the 'is' of constitution.

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Published Feb 16, 2021
Ezequiel Zerbudis

Abstract

I consider a problem that arises in connection with (alleged) cases of coincident objects, such as a statue and the lump of clay it is made of, and that affects the two main accounts of such cases, namely, Pluralism (according to which statue and lump are distinct) and Monism (according to which they are one). The problem is that both views seem committed to give strained interpretations of some statements describing the situation. I consider Pickel's arguments against the Pluralist's strategy of interpreting 'is' as expressing constitution in sentences such as 'The statue is the lump of clay', and provide reasons for rejecting them - so as to eventually vindicate the Pluralist position.


How to Cite

Zerbudis, E. (2021). Making sense of the ’is’ of constitution. THEORIA. An International Journal for Theory, History and Foundations of Science, 36(1), 25–47. https://doi.org/10.1387/theoria.21232
Abstract 184 | PDF Downloads 129 XML Downloads 32

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##

Keywords

Material Object, Coincidence, Constitution, Polysemy, Identity, Predication.

Section
ARTICLES