Question 1 2 pts Amie Thomasson considers one possible argument against the exis

Question

Question 1 2 pts Amie Thomasson considers one possible argument against the existence of ordinary objects that she calls the overdetermination argument. Which of the following claims is a central part of the overdetermination argument? Removing a single particle from an ordinary object doesn't cause it to cease to exist O There is no good account of how multiple things--and just what things--compose a single object. Ordinary objects are not identical to their microphysical structure If something is unable to cause anything else to happen--if it has no causal powers--then O that thing does not exist. Question 2 2 pts Which of the following claims is a central part of the argument that objects are not identical with the subatomic particles that make them up? Any object can be composed of any two things, no matter how random (e.g., this quiz & the Queen of England's hat) If two things are identical, they must share all properties in common. OPositing the existence of an object over and above its subatomic properties violates Occam's Razor. O There's no account of how a collection of subatomic particles come together to compose a single object.

Explanation / Answer

1.optiin D)

The author uses Merrick's baseball argument to represent the overdetermination argument.If something exists, it has causal powers, if it has no causal powers, it does not exist.An ordinary object does not have its pwn causal power, the power lies in the microscopic parts that the object consists of, so the object does not exist.

2.Option B)

if two things are identical they must share the same space, volume and properties as each other, which cannot be true for objects and subatomic particles, the particles are constituents, not identical.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse Q
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.