The polysemy of ‘part’

Some philosophers assume that our ordinary parts-whole concepts are intuitive and univocal. Moreover, some assume that mereology—the formal theory of parts-whole relations—adequately captures these intuitive and univocal notions. Lewis (Parts of classes. Blackwell, Oxford, 1991 : p. 75), for example...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Synthese (Dordrecht) 2021-08, Vol.198 (Suppl 18), p.4331-4354
Main Author: Wallace, Meg
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Compositional styles
Dialects
Education
Epistemology
Linguistics
Logic
Mereology
Metaphysics
Multiculturalism & pluralism
Philosophy
Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of Science
Polysemy
S.I.: Mereology and Identity
Taxonomy
Terminology
Theory
Topics
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Some philosophers assume that our ordinary parts-whole concepts are intuitive and univocal. Moreover, some assume that mereology—the formal theory of parts-whole relations—adequately captures these intuitive and univocal notions. Lewis (Parts of classes. Blackwell, Oxford, 1991 : p. 75), for example, maintains that mereology is “perfectly understood, unproblematic, and certain.” Following his lead, many assume that expressions such as ‘is part of’ are (i) univocal, (ii) topic-neutral, and that (iii) compositional monism is true. This paper explores the rejection of (i)–(iii). I argue that our ordinary parts-whole expressions are polysemous; they have multiple distinct, but related, interpretations or meanings. I canvass several criteria by which to test for polysemy, and apply these criteria to some of our parts-whole terminology. I also examine some philosophical examples involving abstracta and abstract parts, which give us additional reasons to think that our parts-whole expressions are polysemous and topic-specific. Yet if so, then compositional pluralism is true.
ISSN:0039-7857
1573-0964
DOI:10.1007/s11229-019-02088-x