Abstract
AbstractLogics of part/whole relations frequently takeparthoodorproper parthoodas primitive, defining the remaining mereological properties and relations in terms of them. I argue from considerations involving Weak Supplementation for the conclusion that we should takefusionas our mereological primitive. I point out that the intuitions supporting Weak Supplementation also support a stronger principle, Weak Supplementation of Pluralities, and that the principle can only do the work demanded by our intuitions when formulated in terms of a notion offusionthat cannot be defined merely in terms of mereological properties and relations, logic, and a membership relation. So, insofar as we think any definition offusionmust be so restricted, we have motivation to takefusionas primitive; further, we have greater insight into the motivation for our supplementation principle and which version of that principle we ought to endorse.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
