|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. |
Books on Amazon
Real part/mereology: there must be at least a second real part. BrentanoVs: E.g. a man is a real part of the event - "sitting human" - "but here there is no second real part -" otherwise: Thatcher qua Prime Minister: not part of Thatcher - "solution: Supplement principles: there must be at least two real parts (if at all) -" there must be the possibility of separate parts -" not only overlapping.
Predicate/part/whole/mereology/Simons: certain predicates are true of their objects because other predicates are true of their parts: E.g. Socrates was snub-nosed, because his nose was blunt - E.g. a table mountain is flat, because its upper part is flat - "predication of the whole is inherited by predication of the parts (local predication) - "for continuants this is even the only kind of predication - variation/continuants/mereology/McTaggart/Simons: E.g. the poker which is hot at the front and cool at the back: that is a variation on the object, but no change, no change (change) of the properties - "it is a complex condition - on the other hand: E.g. when the entire poker gets hot, we have to say that the point in time is not the same.
Part/whole/Simons: thesis we reject the antisymmetry between part and whole- "then different objects can have the same parts -" and these are necessarily in the same place at the same time - "(superposition).
Part/Simons: the joke of this expression is that without it, we have no concept of space restrictions or perhaps of the space at all.
Part/plural designation/multiplicity/Simons: (1): b is part of a: here b is a mass term (e.g. dough) or individual term (e.g. an apple) - (2): b is part of a: here b must be an individual term (e.g. an apple) - (3) b are parts of a: here b must be a plural term (e.g. wolves). E.g. blueberries are part of the cake, they are not "a part" of the cake - "are part of": is the plural of "is part of" - "are parts of": is the plural of "is part of" - (4): b are parts of a: here any b must be part of a E.g. crankshaft and transmission are parts of the car - E.g. "the front" is part of the car, but not a part of the car - whatever is a part of something, is also part of it but not vice versa - "a part of" has extra sense opposed to "part of" - "component ("a part of") exists before installation and survived replacement.
Part/fragment/relation/function/mereology/Simons: an arbitrary conceptual cut, E.g. "northern part of the house" is typically not closed under the relation, under which the whole is closed.
Part/pure mereology/Simons: a mere relation of co-parts could not distinguish which objects are more unified (integrated)._____________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.
Parts Oxford New York 1987