Roberto Casati and Achille C. Varzi (1999), The MIT Press — DOI-10.7551/mitpress/5253.001.0001

Key takeaways

Filed, not read. Known here by what it is standardly cited for.

  • Mereology gives parthood and nothing else. It cannot tell two halves of one ball from two separate balls, because both have the same mereological description; connection has to be added as a primitive.
  • With connection, interior, boundary and self-connectedness become definable, which is what makes boundary talk possible.
  • Its contents beyond this, including how it treats holes, location and fiat boundaries, are not checked here.

Standing in the record

Filed with Smith & Varzi (2000; LIT-1024), beside it, as the reference theory behind the fiat/bona fide distinction, for QUESTION-035 and CLAIM-194. The survey of the Mathematics of Meaning corpus pointed to both (MOM-LIT-016).

What a reading should check. The record’s boundary criterion is dynamical: a block whose spectral gap beats the Occam factor (CLAIM-157). Mereotopology’s connection is a primitive of space. Whether connection can be read off a coupling structure, so that the two meet, is the question to bring to the book.