A Hole in the Box and a Pain in the Mouth

Bibliographic Data

ID10691074
AuthorsLaurenz Casser (0000-0001-7438-5087, The University of Texas at Austin), Laurenz C Casser, Herbert I Schiller (0000-0001-7229-9337, The University of Texas at Austin), Henry Ian Schiller (The University of Texas at Austin)
Year2021
Volume71
Issue4
Publication date2021-09-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueThe Philosophical Quarterly (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0031-8094 • E-ISSN: 1467-9213
PublisherOxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1093/pq/pqaa091
OpenAlexW3125909809
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited36

The following argument is widely assumed to be invalid: there is a pain in my finger; my finger is in my mouth; therefore, there is a pain in my mouth. The apparent invalidity of this argument has recently been used to motivate the conclusion that pains are not spatial entities. We argue that this is a mistake. We do so by drawing attention to the metaphysics of pains and holes and provide a framework for their location which both vindicates the argument's validity and explains why it appears invalid. To this end, we show that previously proposed explanations for the apparent invalidity of the argument fail. Moreover, we show that our account accommodates and explains seemingly opposing linguistic data. We conclude that the ‘pain-in-mouth argument’ does not undermine the view that pains are spatial entities

Argument (complex analysis) · Epistemology · Metaphysics · Mistake · Political science · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · Law · Medicine · Philosophy · Philosophy and Theoretical Science · Psychology · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment