more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
Eliminativism about physical objects does not require a commitment to (or against) simples.
Clarification
'Simples' are irreducible elements of reality
Gist of Idea
We can eliminate objects without a commitment to simples
Source
Trenton Merricks (Objects and Persons [2003], §1.I)
Book Ref
Merricks,Trenton: 'Objects and Persons' [OUP 2003], p.3
A Reaction
His strategy is to eliminate objects in favour of whatever it is (an unknown) to which objects actually reduce. His point seems to be clearly correct, just as I might eliminate 'life' from my ontology, without quite knowing what it is.
| 11209 | The simple's whatness is its very self [Avicenna] |
| 13170 | The analysis of things leads to atoms of substance, which found both composition and action [Leibniz] |
| 14166 | Unities are only in propositions or concepts, and nothing that exists has unity [Russell] |
| 23467 | Objects are simple [Wittgenstein] |
| 17000 | We might fix identities for small particulars, but it is utopian to hope for such things [Kripke] |
| 16070 | There are no objects with proper parts; there are only mereological simples [Unger, by Wasserman] |
| 14593 | Quantum field theory suggests that there are, fundamentally, no individual things [Swoyer] |
| 6125 | We can eliminate objects without a commitment to simples [Merricks] |
| 22613 | Most materialist views postulate smallest indivisible components which are permanent [Ingthorsson] |