Science and the special composition question

Abstract

Mereological nihilism is the thesis that composition never occurs. Some philosophers have thought that science gives us compelling evidence against nihilism. In this article I respond to this concern. An initial challenge for nihilism stems from the fact that composition is such a ubiquitous feature of scientific theories. In response I motivate a restricted form of scientific antirealism with respect to those components of scientific theories which make reference to composition. A second scientifically based worry for nihilism is that certain specific scientific phenomena (quantum entanglement, natural selection) might require ineliminable quantification over composite objects. I address these concerns, and argue that there seem to be nihilist-friendly construals of the scientific phenomena in question.

The mereology of thermodynamic equilibrium

“…I should also mention an important assumption of the proposed approach: I have inferred the existence of composite thermodynamic systems from the fact that they are an essential part of thermodynamics, for which I have to make the assumption that entities whose existence is assumed in successful scientific descriptions of the world actually exist. This assumption has been challenged by Brenner (2018) in the context of the SCQ, who argued that nihilistic alternatives to scientific theories involving composite objects are not usually considered (such that one cannot say that the compositional aspects of the theories have been tested empirically), and that compos-ite objects are often introduced in science merely as a matter of a more convenient description. However, as discussed above, composition has a much more central status in thermodynamics than merely that of simplifying the description, such that the empirical success of thermodynamics does give us an argument for the existence of composite objects.…”

The Mereology of Thermodynamic Equilibrium

“…In particular, Näger prefers RPH over MPH based on the argument that the macro objects are not required in the theory (they are not causally relevant and their time-independent properties straightforwardly reduce to those of their constituents). The idea of properties instantiated collectively has also been put forward in the context of quantum entanglement by Brenner (2018) to establish the view that one cannot infer the metaphysical reality of composite objects from the fact that these objects are used in science.…”

“…Second, I have inferred the existence of composite thermodynamic systems from the fact that they are an essential part of thermodynamics, for which I have to make the assumption that entities whose existence is assumed in successful scientific descriptions of the world actually exist. This assumption has been challenged by Brenner (2018) in the context of the SCQ, who argued that nihilistic alternatives to scientific theories involving composite objects are not usually considered (such that one cannot say that the compositional aspects of the theories has been tested empirically), and that composite objects are often introduced in science merely as a matter of a more convenient description. However, as discussed above, composition has a much more central status in thermodynamics than merely that of simplifying the description, such that the empirical success of thermodynamics does give us an argument for the existence of composite objects.…”

Mereological Nihilism and Personal Ontology

“…The parallel argument against composite objects is fairly well known, as a variant of that argument was defended in an influential book by Merricks 8 Elsewhere (Brenner 2015b) I defend nihilism in part on the basis of the fact that nihilism is more parsimonious than its rivals insofar as it does not require that we posit mereological laws. 9 Thanks to Chad Marxen for this objection.…”