more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 19302

[filed under theme 9. Objects / C. Structure of Objects / 5. Composition of an Object ]

Full Idea

How shall we prevent a sorites taking us to the conclusion that a chair might have originated in a completely disjoint lot of wood, or even in some other material altogether?

Clarification

A 'sorites' is a slippery slope

Gist of Idea

If a chair could be made of slightly different material, that could lead to big changes

Source

Bob Hale (Necessary Beings [2013], 11.3.7)

Book Ref

Hale,Bob: 'Necessary Beings' [OUP 2013], p.276


A Reaction

This seems a good criticism of Kripke's implausible claim that his lectern is necessarily (or essentially) made of the piece of wood it is made of. Could his lectern have had a small piece of plastic inserted in it?


The 23 ideas with the same theme [objects seen as made up of their parts]:

In Parmenides, if composition is identity, a whole is nothing more than its parts [Plato, by Harte,V]
If one object is divided into its parts, someone can then say that one are many and many is one [Plato]
Is there a house over and above its bricks? [Aristotle]
A mass consists of its atoms, so the addition or removal of one changes its identity [Locke]
Identity is an atemporal relation, but composition is relative to times [Wiggins, by Sider]
The many are many and the one is one, so they can't be identical [Lewis]
Lewis affirms 'composition as identity' - that an object is no more than its parts [Lewis, by Merricks]
Composition is not just making new things from old; there are too many counterexamples [Lewis]
If contact causes composition, do two colliding balls briefly make one object? [Inwagen]
If bricks compose a house, that is at least one thing, but it might be many things [Inwagen]
Why should packed-together particles be a thing (Mt Everest), but not scattered ones? [Benardete,JA]
The identity of composite objects isn't fixed by original composition, because how do you identify the origin? [Lowe]
'Composition as identity' says that an object just is the objects which compose it [Sider]
If a chair could be made of slightly different material, that could lead to big changes [Hale]
'Composition is identity' says multitudes are the reality, loosely composing single things [Varzi]
'Unrestricted composition' says any two things can make up a third thing [Merricks]
Composition as identity is false, as identity is never between a single thing and many things [Merricks]
Composition as identity is false, as it implies that things never change their parts [Merricks]
There is no visible difference between statues, and atoms arranged statuewise [Merricks]
Composition is asymmetric and transitive [Simons]
The idea of composition, that parts of the world are 'made of' something, is no longer helpful [Ladyman/Ross]
Complex particulars are either masses, or composites, or sets [Hossack]
The relation of composition is indispensable to the part-whole relation for individuals [Hossack]