That parthood is a transitive relation is among the most basic principles of classical mereology. Alas, it is also very controversial. In a recent paper, Ingvar Johansson has put forward a novel diagnosis of the problem, along with a corresponding solution. The diagnosis is on the right track, I argue, but the solution is misleading. And once the pieces are properly put together, we end up with a reinforcement of the standard defense of transitivity on behalf of classical mereology.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Achille C. Varzi (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: