COOKIES: By using this website you agree that we can place Google Analytics Cookies on your device for performance monitoring. |
University of Cambridge > Talks.cam > HPS Philosophy Workshop > Location, multi-location and endurance
Location, multi-location and enduranceAdd to your list(s) Download to your calendar using vCal
If you have a question about this talk, please contact tlb29. Endurance theorists have often appealed to the notions of exact location or occupation and multi-location in order to explain how objects persist through spacetime in the context of the Special Theory of Relativity (STR). Specifically, endurantists invoke these two notions in order to claim that objects persist through spacetime by exactly occupying multiple spacetime regions, each of which is temporally unextended and disjoint from the other. The aim of this paper is to provide a better understanding of these two notions and of the implications they have for understanding our preferred account of endurance. Bearing such aim in mind, in the first section of the paper I discuss the five conditions proposed by Cody Gilmore that any account of exact occupation must satisfy, and also the difficulties that arise for this cluster of conditions (2006). In the next section I evaluate an Parsons’ alternative proposal, which defines exact occupation in terms of overlap (2007). In spite of some advantages over Gilmore’s account, one noticeable shortcoming of this account is that it does not allow enduring objects to be multi-located at different spacetime regions. Enduring objects exactly occupy one spacetime region, which coincides with their spatiotemporal path. Next, I explore the possibility of a middle ground between Gilmore’s and Parsons’ account, which might allow us to retain the advantages of Parsons’ accounts along with multi-location. Such theory seems to be defended by Crisp and Smith (2005), but I argue that they fail in their attempt of treating overlap as primitive and at the same time allowing multi-location. If time allows, I will finally discuss the prospects for some alternative ways of characterizing the endurance vs. perdurance debate which are available for those who remain skeptics of the intelligibility of the notion of multi-location. Crucially, these ways of characterizing the current debate would switch its focus of the dispute from issues about location to issues about parthood (Donnelly 2010, 2011). This talk is part of the HPS Philosophy Workshop series. This talk is included in these lists:
Note that ex-directory lists are not shown. |
Other listsInteresting talks- 1st try South Asia Film Series AUTOMATE* Meeting the Challenge of Healthy Ageing in the 21st Century Cancer Metabolism Interest Group Seminars Theory of Condensed MatterOther talksUnbiased Estimation of the Eigenvalues of Large Implicit Matrices Simulating Electricity Prices: negative prices and auto-correlation Phenotypic changes induced by stress and developmental reprogramming in plants Plant host-pathogen coevolution and exploring local adaptation of an Arabidopsis thaliana complex Resistance gene locus Transport and Settling of Sediments in River Plumes A compositional approach to scalable statistical modelling and computation 100 Problems around Scalar Curvature Refugees and Migration A feast of languages: multilingualism in neuro-typical and atypical populations Single Cell Seminars (August) DataFlow SuperComputing for BigData Gaze and Locomotion in Natural Terrains |