On Cotnoir’s two notions of proper parthood
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21371007 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Massimiliano Carrara (0000-0002-3509-1585, University of Padua), Jeroen Smid (0000-0003-2621-1562, University of Amsterdam, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 179 |
| Issue | 9 |
| Pages | 2787-2795 |
| Publication date | 2022-09-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Philosophical Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0031-8116 • E-ISSN: 1573-0883 |
| Publisher | Springer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1007/s11098-022-01795-5 |
| OpenAlex | W4210507646 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 15 |
A.J. Cotnoir has argued that we should distinguish between two notions of proper parthood: outstripped part and non-identical part. Outstripped parthood is an asymmetric relation, but non-identical parthood is not. We argue, first, that the intuitions Cotnoir uses to motivate these notions do not always give the right verdict; and, second, that systematic reasons for distinguishing these two notions of parthood have further counter-intuitive consequences. This means the distinction between two notions of proper parthood currently lacks adequate motivation
Epistemology · Metaphysics · Philosophy of language · Philosophy of mind · Political science · Relation (database) · Verdict · Computer Science · Free Will and Agency · Law · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Philosophy · Philosophy and Theoretical Science
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |