Boundaries In Reality

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)

Abstract

This paper defends the idea that there must be some joints in reality, some correct way to classify or categorize it. This may seem obvious, but we will see that there are at least three conventionalist arguments against this idea, as well as philosophers who have found them convincing. The thrust of these arguments is that the manner in which we structure, divide or carve up the world is not grounded in any natural, genuine boundaries in the world. Ultimately they are supposed to pose a serious threat to realism. The first argument that will be examined concerns the claim that there are no natural boundaries in reality, the second one focuses on the basis of our classificatory schemes, which the conventionalist claims to be merely psychological, and the third considers the significance of our particular features in carving up the world, such as physical size and perceptual capabilities. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate that none of these objections succeed in undermining the existence of genuine joints in reality.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)405-424
JournalRatio
Volume25
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2012

Keywords

  • Metaphysics
  • Realism
  • Boundaries

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Boundaries In Reality'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this