Beingg: Gluon Theory and Inconsistent Grounding
Beingg: Gluon Theory and Inconsistent Grounding
复制标题
Beingg：胶子理论和不一致的基础
DOI：
10.1080/09672559.2017.1352259
复制
发表时间：
2017
影响因子：
0.6
通讯作者：
Casati Filippo
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Casati Filippo
536书籍专题讨论会变成有意义的命题，而有意义的命题又统一成一篇报纸文章。对不对？这是怎么发生的？两个或两个以上的事物可以统一成一个单一的物体吗？是不是有什么东西使这些部分成为一个整体？自西方思想诞生以来，哲学家们就一直试图回答这类问题。然而，两千多年后，统一的概念仍然是一个悬而未决的问题。让我们来看看为什么。考虑一个对象o，它只有两个部分（称为a和B）。为了得到对象o，我们可以在a和B之间的差距中插入一些东西，从而统一它们。在Priest（2014 a）之后，我们称第三种元素为胶子（g）。然而，如果g不同于a和B，我们需要在a和g之间的间隙以及B和g之间差距中插入另一个胶子（假设为g1）。很容易看出，如果我们总是在对象o的各个部分之间以及它们之间的间隙中插入一个新元素，我们最终会陷入胶子、超胶子（g1）、超超胶子（g2）等的恶性无限回归。格雷厄姆·普里斯特在他的《一》中为一个旨在解释对象统一性的理论辩护，避免了这种有问题的无限回归。根据他的理论，一个物体o的胶子g“与物体o的所有部分相同”（Priest 2014a，20）。根据我们的例子，由于物体o有两个部分（a和B），o的胶子g与a相同，也与B相同。由于这个原因，因为g等同于a，g等同于B，所以在对象o的各部分和统一它们的元素（g）之间没有间隙。没有差距需要填补。无限的回归被阻止了。
536 BOOK SYMPOSIUM into meaningful propositions and meaningful propositions are unified into a newspaper article. Right? How does this happen? Can two or more things be unified into one single object? Is there something that makes these parts a unity? Since the beginning of Western thought, philosophers have tried to answer these kinds of questions. Nevertheless, after more than two thousand years, the concept of unity still remains an open problem. Let’s see why. Consider an object o, which has only two parts (call them a and b). In order to obtain object o, we could insert something in the gap between a and b, which unifies them. Following Priest (2014a), we call this third element a gluon (g). Nevertheless, if g is different from a and b, we need to insert another gluon (let’s say g1) in the gap between a and g and in the gap between b and g. It is easy to see that, if we always insert a new element between the parts of the object o and the gaps between them, we end up in a vicious infinite regress of gluons, hyper-gluons (g1), hyper-hyper-gluon (g2) and so on.Graham Priest, in his One, defends a theory which aims to explain the unity of objects avoiding such a problematic infinite regress. According to his theory, the gluon, g, of an object, o, is ‘identical to all and only the parts of the object’o (Priest 2014a, 20). Since, according to our example, object o has two parts (a and b), the gluon g of o is identical to a and it is identical to b. For this reason, since g is identical to a and g is identical to b, there is no gap between the parts of object o and the element that unifies them (g). No gap needs to be filled. The infinite regress is blocked.