Composition, Contingency, and Local Supervenience

A growing number of philosophers have argued against the orthodoxy that the correct principle of composition will be a metaphysically necessary truth. With contingentism about composition a seemingly viable option, it would appear that would‐be necessitarians shoulder the burden of proof. The aim of...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Southern journal of philosophy 2019-12, Vol.57 (4), p.589-612
1. Verfasser: Smith, Deborah C.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 612
container_issue 4
container_start_page 589
container_title The Southern journal of philosophy
container_volume 57
creator Smith, Deborah C.
description A growing number of philosophers have argued against the orthodoxy that the correct principle of composition will be a metaphysically necessary truth. With contingentism about composition a seemingly viable option, it would appear that would‐be necessitarians shoulder the burden of proof. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate that the contingentist, too, has a significant burden. I argue that nonbrutal principles of composition satisfy a principle according to which facts about whether or not a collection composes supervene on noncomposition facts that are spatiotemporally local to the collection. I further argue that the contingentist has reason to reject both brutal composition and the supervenience principle. This reveals a significant internal tension in the contingentist's position. Unless this tension can be resolved, there will be (defeasible) reason to prefer necessitarianism about composition.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/sjp.12358
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2330592004</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2330592004</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2578-bbb758ba49fe6fde982e10fe00cb7a153c8489a6ec8ac48ee1743925728ce3c83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LxDAQhoMouK4e_AcFT8J2d_LRNj1K8ZOCwuo5pNmptOwmNdlV-u-N1qtzmcP7vDPwEHJJYUnjrEI_LCnjmTwiMwaCpnmZs2MyA-AyFUzyU3IWQg9AM5GLGaGV2w0udPvO2UVSObvv7DtaMy4SbTdJ7YzeJuvDgP4TbRcDPCcnrd4GvPjbc_J2d_taPaT18_1jdVOnhmWFTJumKTLZaFG2mLcbLCVDCi0CmKbQNONGClnqHI3URkhEWghexiqTBmPI5-Rqujt493HAsFe9O3gbXyrGOWQlAxCRup4o410IHls1-G6n_agoqB8jKhpRv0Yiu5rYr26L4_-gWj-9TI1vv0Zhbg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2330592004</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Composition, Contingency, and Local Supervenience</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Smith, Deborah C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Smith, Deborah C.</creatorcontrib><description>A growing number of philosophers have argued against the orthodoxy that the correct principle of composition will be a metaphysically necessary truth. With contingentism about composition a seemingly viable option, it would appear that would‐be necessitarians shoulder the burden of proof. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate that the contingentist, too, has a significant burden. I argue that nonbrutal principles of composition satisfy a principle according to which facts about whether or not a collection composes supervene on noncomposition facts that are spatiotemporally local to the collection. I further argue that the contingentist has reason to reject both brutal composition and the supervenience principle. This reveals a significant internal tension in the contingentist's position. Unless this tension can be resolved, there will be (defeasible) reason to prefer necessitarianism about composition.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0038-4283</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2041-6962</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/sjp.12358</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Memphis: Southern Journal of Philosophy</publisher><subject>Credibility ; Metaphysics ; Philosophy ; Truth</subject><ispartof>The Southern journal of philosophy, 2019-12, Vol.57 (4), p.589-612</ispartof><rights>2019 University of Memphis</rights><rights>2019 The University of Memphis</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2578-bbb758ba49fe6fde982e10fe00cb7a153c8489a6ec8ac48ee1743925728ce3c83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Fsjp.12358$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Fsjp.12358$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Smith, Deborah C.</creatorcontrib><title>Composition, Contingency, and Local Supervenience</title><title>The Southern journal of philosophy</title><description>A growing number of philosophers have argued against the orthodoxy that the correct principle of composition will be a metaphysically necessary truth. With contingentism about composition a seemingly viable option, it would appear that would‐be necessitarians shoulder the burden of proof. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate that the contingentist, too, has a significant burden. I argue that nonbrutal principles of composition satisfy a principle according to which facts about whether or not a collection composes supervene on noncomposition facts that are spatiotemporally local to the collection. I further argue that the contingentist has reason to reject both brutal composition and the supervenience principle. This reveals a significant internal tension in the contingentist's position. Unless this tension can be resolved, there will be (defeasible) reason to prefer necessitarianism about composition.</description><subject>Credibility</subject><subject>Metaphysics</subject><subject>Philosophy</subject><subject>Truth</subject><issn>0038-4283</issn><issn>2041-6962</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kE1LxDAQhoMouK4e_AcFT8J2d_LRNj1K8ZOCwuo5pNmptOwmNdlV-u-N1qtzmcP7vDPwEHJJYUnjrEI_LCnjmTwiMwaCpnmZs2MyA-AyFUzyU3IWQg9AM5GLGaGV2w0udPvO2UVSObvv7DtaMy4SbTdJ7YzeJuvDgP4TbRcDPCcnrd4GvPjbc_J2d_taPaT18_1jdVOnhmWFTJumKTLZaFG2mLcbLCVDCi0CmKbQNONGClnqHI3URkhEWghexiqTBmPI5-Rqujt493HAsFe9O3gbXyrGOWQlAxCRup4o410IHls1-G6n_agoqB8jKhpRv0Yiu5rYr26L4_-gWj-9TI1vv0Zhbg</recordid><startdate>201912</startdate><enddate>201912</enddate><creator>Smith, Deborah C.</creator><general>Southern Journal of Philosophy</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>4T-</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201912</creationdate><title>Composition, Contingency, and Local Supervenience</title><author>Smith, Deborah C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2578-bbb758ba49fe6fde982e10fe00cb7a153c8489a6ec8ac48ee1743925728ce3c83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Credibility</topic><topic>Metaphysics</topic><topic>Philosophy</topic><topic>Truth</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Smith, Deborah C.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><jtitle>The Southern journal of philosophy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Smith, Deborah C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Composition, Contingency, and Local Supervenience</atitle><jtitle>The Southern journal of philosophy</jtitle><date>2019-12</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>57</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>589</spage><epage>612</epage><pages>589-612</pages><issn>0038-4283</issn><eissn>2041-6962</eissn><abstract>A growing number of philosophers have argued against the orthodoxy that the correct principle of composition will be a metaphysically necessary truth. With contingentism about composition a seemingly viable option, it would appear that would‐be necessitarians shoulder the burden of proof. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate that the contingentist, too, has a significant burden. I argue that nonbrutal principles of composition satisfy a principle according to which facts about whether or not a collection composes supervene on noncomposition facts that are spatiotemporally local to the collection. I further argue that the contingentist has reason to reject both brutal composition and the supervenience principle. This reveals a significant internal tension in the contingentist's position. Unless this tension can be resolved, there will be (defeasible) reason to prefer necessitarianism about composition.</abstract><cop>Memphis</cop><pub>Southern Journal of Philosophy</pub><doi>10.1111/sjp.12358</doi><tpages>24</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0038-4283
ispartof The Southern journal of philosophy, 2019-12, Vol.57 (4), p.589-612
issn 0038-4283
2041-6962
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2330592004
source Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Credibility
Metaphysics
Philosophy
Truth
title Composition, Contingency, and Local Supervenience
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T11%3A26%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Composition,%20Contingency,%20and%20Local%20Supervenience&rft.jtitle=The%20Southern%20journal%20of%20philosophy&rft.au=Smith,%20Deborah%20C.&rft.date=2019-12&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=589&rft.epage=612&rft.pages=589-612&rft.issn=0038-4283&rft.eissn=2041-6962&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/sjp.12358&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2330592004%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2330592004&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true