[Serious] Thomism: Then & Now

[vulcanlogician]

Belacqua's examples are perfectly sound but the stakes are pretty low for pots and chairs. Does it mean something to be human as opposed to a mixture of carbon, water and trace elements? If humanity is a convenient fiction then so are rights, values, and intelligence. Mereological nihilism fails, not because of those very real defeciencies, but because it is self-defeating. If there arent things then  words mean nothing. IMHO that is not a serious position.

I'm sympathetic to what you've said here. We can't have "selective mereological nihilism" that refutes hylomorphism but then goes on to say there are things like chairs, human rights, etc. But at the same time, I don't think Angrboda is doing this. Angrboda finds mereological nihilism compelling in regards to chairs, human rights and everything else... (at least when we have our philosopher's caps on-- which is fine).

As to the charge that mereological nihilism contradicts itself-- ie "mereological nihilism is a theory with a "form," makes metaphysical truth-claims about reality, when in fact, according to mereological nihilism, no metaphysical truth claims can be made."-- I think the mereological nihilist can answer these charges. "Sure, mereological nihilism is false just like all other metaphysical claims. It's just bears the best 1:1 resemblance with reality. If any claim is true, it's true. And if no claims are true, it's also true... at least 'true enough.'"