The Controversy over the Existence of Ordinary Objects

Abstract

The basic philosophical controversy regarding ordinary objects is: Do tables and chairs, sticks and stones, exist? This paper aims to do two things: first, to explain why how this can be a controversy at all, and second, to explain why this controversy has arisen so late in the history of philosophy. Section 1 begins by discussing why the ‘obvious’ sensory evidence in favor of ordinary objects is not taken to be decisive. It goes on to review the standard arguments against the existence of ordinary objects – including those based on problems with causal redundancy, parsimony, co‐location, sorites arguments, and the special composition question. Section 2 goes on to address what it is about the contemporary approach to metaphysics that invites and sustains this kind of controversy, and helps make evident why debates about ordinary objects lead so readily to debates in metametaphysics about the nature of metaphysics itself.

Hylomorphism and Complex Properties

“…For further discussion of structural properties, seeKoons & Pickavance (2017: 215-219).15 Though his concerns are quite different from ours here, seeScaltsas (1994: 77-86) for a discussion of forms and structural properties.16 For an overview of this debate, seeThomasson (2010).17 For further discussion, seeBennett (2004).…”

When Do Scientific Explanations Compete? Steps Toward a Heuristic Checklist

“…Jenkins's conclusion is not surprising. Philosophers have long debated about what a merely verbal disagreement is (see Carnap ; Sidelle ; Thomasson ; Sider ; Hirsch ; Chalmers ; Jackson a; Jenkins ). There certainly doesn't seem to be much hope of identifying simple necessary and sufficient conditions for it.…”