Abstract

I present a taxonomy of forms of spatial unity of objects, culminating in a contrast between what I call ‘loose qualitative unity' and 'strict qualitative unity'. The former corresponds to a familiar conception of spatial unity in terms of relations between the parts of an object. The latter corresponds to a less familiar, non-relational conception of spatial unity. I proceed to argue, first, that animals are paradigmatic possessors of strict qualitative unity (and not of loose qualitative unity, as they are often held to be). Second, I argue that strict qualitative unity serves as an intuitively plausible general criterion for the occurrence of composition of wholes by parts. The paper thus offers a detailed account of a sense in which it is appropriate to maintain that animals are paradigmatic wholes. 

Quantity: