Objects and Their Instances

Abstract

Metaphysical systems that embrace a distinction between universals and particulars often assume that ordinary objects must be particulars if they exist at all. I suggest that this assumption, however natural it may seem, deserves more scrutiny than it has received. Canonical paradoxes already place pressure on the claim that individuals like Mount Everest cannot have multiple instances at a time, but even stronger paradoxes are possible. In the three essays that comprise this dissertation, I consider how to evaluate common "ordinary object" paradoxes, how to create exotic variants that represent more robust problems, and how the existence of such problems may provide evidence for the usefulness of treating ordinary objects as quasi-particulars, rather than genuine particulars. Paradoxes about objects reveal inconsistencies in our ordinary conceptual schemes, and in my view, an acceptable way to restore consistency is to shift the boundary between universals and particulars.