Tollensing van Inwagen

Van Inwagen ( 1990 ) has an ingenious argument for the non-existence of human artefacts (and other non-living complex things). But the argument cannot be accepted, since human artefacts are everywhere. However, it cannot be ignored. The proper response to it is to treat it as a refutation of its lea...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Philosophia (Ramat Gan) 2014-12, Vol.42 (4), p.1055-1061
1. Verfasser: Noonan, Harold W.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Van Inwagen ( 1990 ) has an ingenious argument for the non-existence of human artefacts (and other non-living complex things). But the argument cannot be accepted, since human artefacts are everywhere. However, it cannot be ignored. The proper response to it is to treat it as a refutation of its least plausible premise, i.e., to ‘tollens’ it. I first set out van Inwagen’s argument. I then identify its least plausible premise and explain the consequence of denying it, that is, the acceptance of a plenitudinous, pluralist ontology. I argue that denying it is not so difficult, since its denial is an easy consequence of ordinary beliefs. I finish by explaining why van Inwagen has not persuaded me that it may be that artefacts do not exist and conclude that nothing stands in the way of tollensing van Inwagen and accepting the consequence of doing so.
ISSN:0048-3893
1574-9274
DOI:10.1007/s11406-014-9521-2