Is distinct location evidence of distinct objects? Multilocation and the problem of parsimony

IF 0.6 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Analytic Philosophy Pub Date : 2023-12-13 DOI:10.1111/phib.12331
David Harmon
{"title":"Is distinct location evidence of distinct objects? Multilocation and the problem of parsimony","authors":"David Harmon","doi":"10.1111/phib.12331","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For an object to be multilocated is for it to wholly occupy disjoint spatial regions simultaneously. If multilocation is possible, it is possible that a multilocated particle is wholly located at 10<sup>80</sup> distinct locations, such that it constitutes a particle-for-particle duplicate of the actual universe. Such a universe would presumably be perceptually identical to the actual universe. If we take multilocation as possible, we are thus presented with two accounts between which our perceptual evidence cannot adjudicate: one wherein the universe is constituted by many particles and another wherein it is constituted by one radically multilocated particle. Parsimony concerns dictate that the latter is the more rational to accept. Since this is absurd, we should reject that multilocation is possible. Mooney responds to the problem by arguing that distinct location is evidence of non-identity, even if acceptance of the possibility of multilocation entails that this evidence is not decisive. If this is right, then the evidence favors a theory featuring many particles. In this paper, I contend that our commitment to taking distinct location as evidence of nonidentity is motivated by a more fundamental intuition that does not apply in the relevant context.","PeriodicalId":45646,"journal":{"name":"Analytic Philosophy","volume":"68 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analytic Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/phib.12331","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

For an object to be multilocated is for it to wholly occupy disjoint spatial regions simultaneously. If multilocation is possible, it is possible that a multilocated particle is wholly located at 1080 distinct locations, such that it constitutes a particle-for-particle duplicate of the actual universe. Such a universe would presumably be perceptually identical to the actual universe. If we take multilocation as possible, we are thus presented with two accounts between which our perceptual evidence cannot adjudicate: one wherein the universe is constituted by many particles and another wherein it is constituted by one radically multilocated particle. Parsimony concerns dictate that the latter is the more rational to accept. Since this is absurd, we should reject that multilocation is possible. Mooney responds to the problem by arguing that distinct location is evidence of non-identity, even if acceptance of the possibility of multilocation entails that this evidence is not decisive. If this is right, then the evidence favors a theory featuring many particles. In this paper, I contend that our commitment to taking distinct location as evidence of nonidentity is motivated by a more fundamental intuition that does not apply in the relevant context.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
独特的位置是独特对象的证据吗?多重定位与解析问题
一个物体的多点定位是指它同时完全占据不同的空间区域。如果多位置是可能的,那么多位置粒子就有可能完全位于 1080 个不同的位置,从而构成实际宇宙的粒子对粒子复制品。这样的宇宙在感知上大概与实际宇宙完全相同。如果我们认为多点定位是可能的,那么我们就会看到两种说法,而我们的感知证据无法在这两种说法之间做出判断:一种说法是宇宙由许多粒子构成,另一种说法是宇宙由一个根本上多点定位的粒子构成。出于对 "解析性 "的考虑,我们更有理由接受后者。既然这是荒谬的,我们就应该拒绝多位置是可能的。穆尼在回答这个问题时认为,不同的位置是非同一性的证据,即使接受多位置的可能性意味着这一证据不是决定性的。如果穆尼的观点是正确的,那么证据就倾向于以多粒子为特征的理论。在本文中,我争辩说,我们之所以致力于将独特位置作为非同一性的证据,是出于一种更基本的直觉,而这种直觉在相关的语境中并不适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Analytic Philosophy
Analytic Philosophy PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Categorial versus naturalized epistemology Naked statistical evidence and verdictive justice Issue Information Bringing the deep self back to the racecourse: Rethinking accountability and the deep self
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1