-
14. Carving Up Reality
- The Catholic University of America Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
14 Carving Up Reality BARRY SMITH 1. the problem of the many ThinkofMontBlanc,withitsrabbitsandfoothillsanditsslurriesof moistenedrock.WecancarveuptherealityaroundMontBlancindifferent ways.Ifwearehunters,wemightincluderabbitsaspartsofthe mountain;ifwearegeologistswemightincludeonlyrock,per hapstogether withacertainamountofairinthecrevicesandtunnelsthat have beenformedbeneaththemountainsur face. Ifwearesoil chemists wemightincludealsoasurroundingthinlayeroforganic matter;ifweareskiers,wewillwantsomesnow;andifweareFrenchor Italiangovernmentsurveyors,thenourrespectivemapsofthemoun tain mightincludeslightlydifferentdeterminationsastowhere,precisely ,itsborderslie.Ifwearearmedwithamicroscopewewilldiscover that thecloserweapproachthesur face ofthemountain,themore questionable doesthebelongingnessornon-belongingnessofmicroscopic particlestothemountainitselfbegintoappear . Whatcould makeittrue,givensomeatomormoleculeverynearthesurfaceofthe mountain,thatitis,orisnot,a part ofthemountain?Reflectiono suchpuzzlessuggeststhehypothesis—expoundedintheliteratureon vaguenessundertheheading“supervaluationism”—thatthereisnosingle answertothequestionwhatitistowhich“MontBlanc”refers. Rather,thereareatanygiventimemanyanswers,manyparcelsofreality thatdeservethename“MontBlanc.” Somethingsimilarappliesalsotoyouyourself,andindeedtoever y otherorganism.WhenyourefertoJohn,youdonotthinkofallthe partsofJohnorofhisimmediatesurroundings.Youdonotthinkofthe cellsinJohn’sarm,orthef ynexttohisear,ortheneutrinosthatpass throughhisbody.Thesethingsdonotfallunderthebeamofyourref erential searchlight.Rather,theyaretracedover.YouapprehendJohn asasingle,unitar yobject.Hisdermatologist,though,hasadifferent perspective,forheisalltoowellawarethat,likeMontBlanc,Johnhas 225 questionablepartsandthatthereareatthemolecularlevelmanyoverlapping aggregatesofmatter,allofwhichhaveaclaimtobeingJohn. Noticethatthisisnotanepistemologicalmatter .Evenanomniscient beingwouldbeinthesamepredicamentasyouorIconcerningwhere theboundariesofJohn,orMontBlanc,preciselylie. ThatJohnislosingorgainingmoleculesfromonemomenttothe nextisofnoconsequence,however ,forourever ydaypurposes:itfalls belowournormalthresholdofconcern.Ourcognitivehabitshavethus developed insuchawaythattheyrelatetorealityina coarse-grained fashion, andthisallowsustoignorequestionsaboutthelower-levelconstituents oftheobjectsforegroundedbyourreferentialsearchlight. Thisinturniswhatallowssuchobjectstobespecified,notprecisel , butratherinsuchawaythatarangeofalternativebutnearlyidentical objectsaresimultaneouslycomprehendedwithinthescopeofwhatwe see orreferto.W e donotrecognizethis“many”becausewearefocused preciselyonthosepartsandmomentsofthemattersinhandthat lieabovethepertinentgranularitythreshold.Onthelevelofgranularity weembraceinoureverydaycognitiveactivitiesitisasifonlyoneobject servesasthefocusofourattentions. Theactsinwhichwemakereferencetoobjectsinrealitythusbring about apartitioningofrealityintotwodomains:theforegrounddomain ,withinwhichtherelevantobjectislocated,andthebackground domain,whichcomprehendsallentitiesleftinthedarkbytheoperating perceptualorreferentialsearchlight.Buthowisthispartitioningto beunderstood?Certainlyitcannotbeunderstoodintermsofanysimple pigeonholingofrealityintojointlyexhaustiveandmutuallyexclusive parts,eitherofthesortthatisinvolvedinasystemofcategorieslike thatofAristotleorofthesortthatunderliestheperiodictableofthe chemicalelements.1 Norcantheforeground-backgroundpartitionbe understoodalonggeographicallines(byanalogywiththesortofpartition thatmightbedepictedonamap).Thusitisnotasifoneconnect ed ,compact(hole-free)portionofrealityissetinreliefinrelationto itssurroundings,as...