Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 103
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Carrara, Massimiliano and Martino, Enrico 2016. The Mereological Foundation of Megethology. Journal of Philosophical Logic, Vol. 45, Issue. 2, p. 227.

    Gericke, Jacobus W. 2016. Mereological concepts for modelling parthood relations between אלהים and natural phenomena in the Hebrew Bible. Verbum et Ecclesia, Vol. 37, Issue. 1,

    Maffezioli, Paolo 2016. Analytic Rules for Mereology. Studia Logica, Vol. 104, Issue. 1, p. 79.

    Romero, Gustavo E. 2016. A Formal Ontological Theory Based on Timeless Events. Philosophia,

    Smid, Jeroen 2016. ‘Identity’ as a mereological term. Synthese,

    Tsai, Hsing-chien and Varzi, Achille C. 2016. Atoms, Gunk, and the Limits of ‘Composition’. Erkenntnis, Vol. 81, Issue. 2, p. 231.

    Calosi, Claudio and Fano, Vincenzo 2015. Divisibility and Extension: a Note on Zeno’s Argument Against Plurality and Modern Mereology. Acta Analytica, Vol. 30, Issue. 2, p. 117.

    Cocchiarella, Nino B. 2015. Two Views of the Logic of Plurals and a Reduction of One to the Other. Studia Logica, Vol. 103, Issue. 4, p. 757.

    Kirchhoff, Michael D. 2015. Extended Cognition & the Causal-Constitutive Fallacy: In Search for a Diachronic and Dynamical Conception of Constitution. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, Vol. 90, Issue. 2, p. 320.

    Koenderink, Jan 2015. Parts and Wholes in Pictorial Art. Art & Perception, Vol. 3, Issue. 3, p. 303.

    Markosian, Ned 2015. The Right Stuff. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 93, Issue. 4, p. 665.

    Winter, Yoad and Scha, Remko 2015. The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory.

    Calosi, Claudio 2014. Extensionality, Multilocation, Persistence. Dialectica, Vol. 68, Issue. 1, p. 121.

    Hansson Wahlberg, Tobias 2014. Institutional Objects, Reductionism and Theories of Persistence. Dialectica, Vol. 68, Issue. 4, p. 525.

    Meyers, Jeremy 2014. What is Nominalistic Mereology?. Journal of Philosophical Logic, Vol. 43, Issue. 1, p. 71.

    Cotnoir, A. J. 2013. Strange Parts: The Metaphysics of Non-classical Mereologies. Philosophy Compass, Vol. 8, Issue. 9, p. 834.

    Fried, Edward 2013. Prolegomena to any future mereology of the body. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, Vol. 34, Issue. 5, p. 359.

    Keller, Lorraine 2013. The metaphysics of propositional constituency. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 43, Issue. 5-6, p. 655.

    Nakayama, Yasuo 2013. The Extended Mind and the Extended Agent. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 97, p. 503.

    Romero, Gustavo E. 2013. From Change to Spacetime: An Eleatic Journey. Foundations of Science, Vol. 18, Issue. 1, p. 139.


The calculus of individuals and its uses1

  • Henry S. Leonard (a1) and Nelson Goodman (a2)
  • DOI:
  • Published online: 01 March 2014

An individual or whole we understand to be whatever is represented in any given discourse by signs belonging to the lowest logical type of which that discourse makes use. What is conceived as an individual and what as a class is thus relative to the discourse within which the conception occurs. One task of applied logic is to determine which entities are to be construed as individuals and which as classes when the purpose is the development of a comprehensive systematic discourse.

The concept of an individual and that of a class may be regarded as different devices for distinguishing one segment of the total universe from all that remains. In both cases, the differentiated segment is potentially divisible, and may even be physically discontinuous. The difference in the concepts lies in this: that to conceive a segment as a whole or individual offers no suggestion as to what these subdivisions, if any, must be, whereas to conceive a segment as a class imposes a definite scheme of subdivision—into subclasses and members.

The relations of segments of the universe are treated in traditional logistic at two places, first in its theorems concerning the identity and diversity of individuals, and second in its calculus of membership and class-inclusion. But further relations of segments and of classes frequently demand consideration. For example, what is the relation of the class of windows to the class of buildings? No member of either class is a member of the other, nor are any of the segments isolated by the one concept identical with segments isolated by the other. Yet the classes themselves have a very definite relation in that each window is a part of some building. We cannot express this fact in the language of a logistic which lacks a part-whole relation between individuals unless, by making use of some special physical theory, we raise the logical type of each window and each building to the level of a class—say a class of atoms—such that any class of atoms that is a window will be included (class-inclusion) in some class that is a building. Such an unfortunate dependence of logical formulation upon the discovery and adoption of a special physical theory, or even upon the presumption that such a suitable theory could in every case be discovered in the course of time, indicates serious deficiencies in the ordinary logistic. Furthermore, a raising of type like that illustrated above is often precluded in a constructional system by other considerations governing the choice of primitive ideas.

Hide All

A somewhat elaborated version of a paper read in Cambridge, Mass., before a joint meeting of the Association for Symbolic Logic and the American Philosophical Association, Eastern Division, on December 28, 1936.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

The Journal of Symbolic Logic
  • ISSN: 0022-4812
  • EISSN: 1943-5886
  • URL: /core/journals/journal-of-symbolic-logic
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *