Abstract
AbstractIt would be a good thing to have at our disposal a general theory of location that is neutral with respect to (i.e. that does not rule out or entail) (i) the view that some objects have more than one exact location, (ii) the view that some objects are located without having an exact location, and (iii) the view that some objects are “spanners”—where a spanner is an object exactly located at a region that has proper parts but which has no proper part exactly located at a proper part of the region. As far as I know, no theory of location that can be found in the literature has this feature. I put forward a new theory that does—or so I argue. The theory takes as its sole locational primitive the notion of being entirely located at.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference26 articles.
1. Simons, P. (2004). Location. Dialectica, 58, 341–347.
2. Parsons, J. (2007). Theories of location. In D. Zimmerman (Ed.), Oxford Studies in Metaphysics (Vol. 3, pp. 201–232). Oxford University Press.
3. Gilmore, C. (2008). Persistence and location in relativistic Spacetime. Philosophy Compass, 3, 1224–1254.
4. Gilmore, C. (2006). Where in the relativistic world are we? Philosophical Perspectives, 20, 199–236.
5. Calosi, C., & Costa, D. (2015). Multilocation, fusions, and confusions. Philosophia, 43, 25–33.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献