Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Search  
 
Parts, philosophy: in contrast to elements of a set, parts of a whole can stand in hierarchical relations. There may be dependencies, in particular ontological dependencies between parts and whole, as well as between parts of a whole, because parts may not exist if a questionable part does not exist. See also extrinsic, transitivity, reflexivity, symmetry, mereology, set theory, elements, order, overlap, dependency, ontological dependence.

_____________
Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments.

 
Author Item Excerpt Meta data

 
Books on Amazon
II 145
Part-Whole Relationship/Martin: (instead of supervenience) - Parts: as part of the whole, they are not really separated - interdependence: brings forth a mass of dispositions that are never realized - Whole: consists of the parts in their correlation and their stability and the degrees of their stability.
II 164 ff
Part/Whole: MartinVsPlace: collection of parts weak description of what the whole has more - there is no correlation and interaction of the parts that make them parts of this machine.
II 176
Problem: then the separateness of the whole is lost which they need to produce the emergence in causally active way - Solution/Martin: instead of parts: assume properties, properties of the whole consist of properties of the parts - liquid (viscosity) is not a causal effect of the mobility of the molecules against each other, it is made of them.
II 168
Constitution is not causation


_____________
Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution.

AR II = Disp
D. M. Armstrong

In
Dispositions, Tim Crane, London New York 1996

AR III
D. Armstrong
What is a Law of Nature? Cambridge 1983


> Counter arguments against Armstrong



> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
 
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-07-22