Van Inwagen famously raised the Special Composition Question (SCQ): What is an informative criterion for when a proper plurality of objects composes a whole.
There is, however, the Reverse Special Composition Question (RSCQ): What is an informative criterion for when an object is composed of a proper plurality?
The SCQ seems a more fruitful question when we think of parts as prior to the whole. The RSCQ seems a more fruitful question when we think of wholes as prior to the parts.
If by parts we mean something like “integral parts”, we have a pretty quick starter option for answering the RSCQ:
- An object is composed of a proper plurality of parts just in case it takes up more than a point of space.
I am not inclined to accept (1) because I like the possibility of extended simples, but it is a pretty neat and simple answer. Suppose that (1) is correct. Then we have a kind of simplicity argument for the thesis that the whole is prior to its parts. If the parts are prior to the whole, SCQ is a reasonable question, but doesn’t have an elegant and plausible answer (let us suppose). If the whole is prior to the parts, SCQ is not a reasonable question but RSCQ instead is, and RSCQ has an elegant and plausible answer (let us suppose). So we have some reason to accept that the whole is prior to the parts.
No comments:
Post a Comment