Skip to main content
Search type Search syntax
Tags [tag]
Exact "words here"
Author user:1234
user:me (yours)
Score score:3 (3+)
score:0 (none)
Answers answers:3 (3+)
answers:0 (none)
isaccepted:yes
hasaccepted:no
inquestion:1234
Views views:250
Code code:"if (foo != bar)"
Sections title:apples
body:"apples oranges"
URL url:"*.example.com"
Saves in:saves
Status closed:yes
duplicate:no
migrated:no
wiki:no
Types is:question
is:answer
Exclude -[tag]
-apples
For more details on advanced search visit our help page
Results tagged with
Search options answers only not deleted user 1946

Atomic Mereology, Gunk Mereology, Mereology with Bottom, General Extensional Mereology, Mereology and Set Theory, Mereotopology, Boundaries, Grounding point free Geometry, Lewis's Mereology, philosophy of Mereology

6 votes

Can Mereology be bi-interpretable with Set Theory, in absence of the bottom object?

In a set-theoretic context, my view is that the most compelling concept of mereology is simply the $\subseteq$ relation, and so my conception of set-theoretic mereology is simply the theory of the $\subseteq … Namely, we study the relation $\subseteq$ in a model of set theory, and we regard this theory as "set-theoretic mereology." …
Joel David Hamkins's user avatar
10 votes
Accepted

Can rules of set theory be founded by paralleling parts of atomic Mereology?

If one does proceed with $\subseteq$ as the basis of set-theoretic mereology, then there is a bit of literature. … Various posts in the mereology tag on my blog, which includes the articles above as well as various other expository posts I've made and the mereology talks I've given. …
Joel David Hamkins's user avatar
43 votes
Accepted

Why hasn't mereology succeeded as an alternative to set theory?

Joel David Hamkins and Makoto Kikuchi, Set-theoretic mereology, Logic and Logical Philosophy, special issue “Mereology and beyond, part II”, vol. 25, iss. 3, pp. 285-308, 2016. arxiv.org/abs/1601.06593 … Ultimately, for these reasons, we conclude that this form of set-theoretic mereology cannot by itself serve as a foundation of mathematics. …
Joel David Hamkins's user avatar