Home Philosophy Link’s Revenge: A Case Study in Natural Language Mereology
Chapter
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Link’s Revenge: A Case Study in Natural Language Mereology

  • Eric Snyder and Stewart Shapiro
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill
Philosophy of Logic and Mathematics
This chapter is in the book Philosophy of Logic and Mathematics

Abstract

Most philosophers are familiar with the metaphysical puzzle of the statue and the clay. A sculptor begins with some clay, eventually sculpting a statue from it. Are the clay and the statue one and the same thing? Apparently not, since they have different properties. For example, the clay could survive being squashed, but the statue could not. The statue is recently formed, though the clay is not, etc. Godehart Link 1983’s highly influential analysis of the count/mass distinction recommends that English draws a distinction between uncountable “stuff” and countable “things”. There are two mereological relations, related in specific ways. Our primary question here is whether an empirically adequate account of the mass/count distinction really does require distinguishing “things” from “stuff”, and thus postulating two corresponding mereological relations, or if instead positing only one sort of entity and corresponding mereological relation is sufficient, as other semantic theories would have it. This question is meant to be one of what we call natural language mereology. We are asking about the mereological commitments of English, or perhaps competent speakers of English, and not about ultimate reality as such. There is no pretense that we will definitively solve the metaphysical puzzle of the statue and clay.

Abstract

Most philosophers are familiar with the metaphysical puzzle of the statue and the clay. A sculptor begins with some clay, eventually sculpting a statue from it. Are the clay and the statue one and the same thing? Apparently not, since they have different properties. For example, the clay could survive being squashed, but the statue could not. The statue is recently formed, though the clay is not, etc. Godehart Link 1983’s highly influential analysis of the count/mass distinction recommends that English draws a distinction between uncountable “stuff” and countable “things”. There are two mereological relations, related in specific ways. Our primary question here is whether an empirically adequate account of the mass/count distinction really does require distinguishing “things” from “stuff”, and thus postulating two corresponding mereological relations, or if instead positing only one sort of entity and corresponding mereological relation is sufficient, as other semantic theories would have it. This question is meant to be one of what we call natural language mereology. We are asking about the mereological commitments of English, or perhaps competent speakers of English, and not about ultimate reality as such. There is no pretense that we will definitively solve the metaphysical puzzle of the statue and clay.

Chapters in this book

  1. Frontmatter I
  2. Contents V
  3. Preface IX
  4. Part I: Philosophy of Logic
  5. Link’s Revenge: A Case Study in Natural Language Mereology 3
  6. Universal Translatability: An Optimality- Based Justification of (Classical) Logic 37
  7. Invariance and Necessity 55
  8. Translations Between Logics: A Survey 71
  9. On the Relation of Logic to Metalogic 91
  10. Free Logic and the Quantified Argument Calculus 105
  11. Dependencies Between Quantifiers Vs. Dependencies Between Variables 117
  12. Three Types and Traditions of Logic: Syllogistic, Calculus and Predicate Logic 133
  13. Truth, Paradox, and the Procedural Conception of Fregean Sense 153
  14. Wittgenstein and Frege on Assertion 169
  15. Assertions and Their Justification: Demonstration and Self-Evidence 183
  16. Surprises in Logic: When Dynamic Formality Meets Interactive Compositionality 197
  17. Part II: Philosophy of Mathematics
  18. Neologicist Foundations: Inconsistent Abstraction Principles and Part-Whole 215
  19. What Hilbert and Bernays Meant by “Finitism” 249
  20. Wittgenstein and Turing 263
  21. Remarks on Two Papers of Paul Bernays 297
  22. The Significance of the Curry-Howard Isomorphism 313
  23. Reductions of Mathematics: Foundation or Horizon? 327
  24. What Are the Axioms for Numbers and Who Invented Them? 343
  25. Part III: Wittgenstein
  26. Following a Rule: Waismann’s Variation 359
  27. Propositions in Wittgenstein and Ramsey 375
  28. An Unexpected Feature of Classical Propositional Logic in the Tractatus 385
  29. Ontology in Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus: A Topological Approach 397
  30. Adding 4.0241 to TLP 415
  31. Understanding Wittgenstein’s Wood Sellers 429
  32. On the Infinite, In-Potentia: Discovery of the Hidden Revision of Philosophical Investigations and Its Relation to TS 209 Through the Eyes of Wittgensteinian Mathematics 441
  33. Incomplete Pictures and Specific Forms: Wittgenstein Around 1930 457
  34. „Man kann die Menschen nicht zum Guten führen“ – Zur Logik des moralischen Urteils bei Wittgenstein und Hegel 473
  35. Der Status mathematischer und religiöser Sätze bei Wittgenstein 485
  36. Gutes Sehen 499
  37. Wittgenstein’s Conjecture 515
  38. Index of Names 535
  39. Index of Subjects 539
Downloaded on 17.10.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110657883-002/html
Scroll to top button