Search Results
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 |
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
13
votes
Why hasn't mereology succeeded as an alternative to set theory?
I can never quite grasp what it is that mereology is supposed to be all about as a supposed contrast to set theory, but if it's just a matter of viewing subsethood as more elementary a concept than membership …