more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
Only those objects exist which have to particular parts of space and time the special relation of 'occupying' them.
Gist of Idea
Objects only exist if they 'occupy' space and time
Source
Bertrand Russell (Meinong on Complexes and Assumptions [1904], p.29)
Book Ref
Russell,Bertrand: 'Essays in Analysis', ed/tr. Lackey,Douglas [George Braziller 1973], p.29
A Reaction
He excepts space and time themselves. Clearly this doesn't advance our understanding much, but it points to a priority in our normal conceptual scheme. Is Russell assuming absolute space and time?
| 14960 | Bodies are independent of thought, and coincide with part of space [Hobbes] |
| 17250 | If you separate the two places of one thing, you will also separate the thing [Hobbes] |
| 17249 | If you separated two things in the same place, you would also separate the places [Hobbes] |
| 12506 | A thing is individuated just by existing at a time and place [Locke] |
| 12563 | Obviously two bodies cannot be in the same place [Locke] |
| 12693 | A body is that which exists in space [Leibniz] |
| 13098 | We use things to distinguish places and times, not vice versa [Leibniz] |
| 21535 | Objects only exist if they 'occupy' space and time [Russell] |
| 16496 | Singling out extends back and forward in time [Wiggins] |
| 4480 | Times and places are identified by objects, so cannot be used in a theory of object-identity [Loux] |
| 8292 | Diversity of two tigers is their difference in space-time; difference of matter is a consequence [Lowe] |
| 7961 | A 'thing' cannot be in two places at once, and two things cannot be in the same place at once [Macdonald,C] |