Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic

A General Concept of Being a Part of a Whole

Andrzej Pietruszczak

Full-text: Access denied (no subscription detected)

We're sorry, but we are unable to provide you with the full text of this article because we are not able to identify you as a subscriber. If you have a personal subscription to this journal, then please login. If you are already logged in, then you may need to update your profile to register your subscription. Read more about accessing full-text

Abstract

The transitivity of the relation of part to whole is often questioned. But it is among the most basic principles of mereology. In this paper we present a general solution to the problem of transitivity of parthood which may be satisfactory for both its advocates and its opponents.

We will show that even without the transitivity of parthood one can define—basic in mereology—the notion of being a mereological sum of some objects. We formulate several proposals of general approaches to the concept of being a part of a whole, none of which contains any existential assumptions. By adding the transitivity of parthood we obtain an axiomatization of “existentially neutral” (or “nonexistential”) mereology.

Article information

Source
Notre Dame J. Formal Logic, Volume 55, Number 3 (2014), 359-381.

Dates
First available in Project Euclid: 22 July 2014

Permanent link to this document
https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ndjfl/1406034052

Digital Object Identifier
doi:10.1215/00294527-2688069

Mathematical Reviews number (MathSciNet)
MR3263533

Zentralblatt MATH identifier
1337.03010

Subjects
Primary: 03B80: Other applications of logic
Secondary: 03A99: None of the above, but in this section 06A99: None of the above, but in this section

Keywords
parthood transitivity of parthood nonexistential theory of wholes and parts nonexistential mereology

Citation

Pietruszczak, Andrzej. A General Concept of Being a Part of a Whole. Notre Dame J. Formal Logic 55 (2014), no. 3, 359--381. doi:10.1215/00294527-2688069. https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.ndjfl/1406034052


Export citation

References

  • [1] Johansson, I., “Formal mereology and ordinary language—Reply to Varzi,” Applied Ontology, vol. 1 (2005/2006), pp. 157–61.
  • [2] Leśniewski, S., “On the foundations of mathematics,” pp. 174–382 in Collected Works, Volumes I, II, edited by S. J. Surma, J. J. T. Srzednicki, D. I. Barnett, and V. F. Rickey, vol. 44 in Nijhoff International Philosophy Series, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1991.
  • [3] Lyons, J., Semantics, Volume 1, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1977.
  • [4] Pietruszczak, A., Metamereologia, Nicolaus Copernicus University Press, Toruń, Poland, 2000.
  • [5] Pietruszczak, A., “Pieces of mereology,” Logic and Logical Philosophy, vol. 14 (2005), pp. 211–34.
  • [6] Rescher, N., “Axioms for the part relation,” Philosophical Studies, vol. 6 (1955), pp. 8–11.
  • [7] Simons, P. M., Parts: A Study in Ontology, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1987.
  • [8] Tarski, A., “On the foundations of Boolean algebra,” pp. 320–41 in Logic, Semantics, Metamathematics: Papers from 1923 to 1938, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1956.
  • [9] Varzi, A., “A note on the transitivity of parthood,” Applied Ontology, vol. 1 (2005/2006), pp. 141–46.
  • [10] Vieu, L., “On the transitivity of functional parthood,” Applied Ontology, vol. 1 (2005/2006), pp. 147–55.