Ted Sider defends mereological nihilism against the possibility of gunk. He argues that if we accept modal Humeanism, then the possibility of gunk poses no threat to nihilism. This paper argues that Sider's argument fails because nihilism remains vulnerable to the possibility of gunk, even under modal Humeanism. Section 2 explains modal Humeanism in detail. Section 3 presents Sider's argument that nihilism is unaffected by the possibility of gunk. Section 4 provides a counterargument. Section 5 …
Read moreTed Sider defends mereological nihilism against the possibility of gunk. He argues that if we accept modal Humeanism, then the possibility of gunk poses no threat to nihilism. This paper argues that Sider's argument fails because nihilism remains vulnerable to the possibility of gunk, even under modal Humeanism. Section 2 explains modal Humeanism in detail. Section 3 presents Sider's argument that nihilism is unaffected by the possibility of gunk. Section 4 provides a counterargument. Section 5 anticipates potential objections and responds to them.
