Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that An entity r can count as a region even though nothing but r is exactly located at r
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Regions, qua spatial entities, are individuated solely by the objects or fields that occupy them, following Leibniz's relational conception of space.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
An unoccupied region r lacks the relational structure required to distinguish it from any other candidate region, rendering self-location vacuous.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Dependent Reflexivity entails that r's being located at r is grounded in r's existence, but existence alone cannot generate genuine locative facts without a distinction between locator and located.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Collapsing the locator and located into a single entity r violates the asymmetric, cross-categorial structure that location relations require, as Casati and Varzi argue in 'Parts and Places'.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
The combination of Dependent Reflexivity (DR) and Conditional Reflexivity permits cases where a region is self-located without any distinct entity being located at it
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42