Armchair Metaphysics Revisited: The Three Grades of Involvement in Conceptual Analysis

Abstract

Atomic theory gives an account of the nature of the chair I am sitting on. According to that account, my chair is a ‘gappy’ object. It is made up of items that are very widely spaced, comparatively speaking. Should I conclude that my chair is not solid? It depends on what is meant by ‘solid’. If ‘solid’ means being everywhere dense, the answer is yes. If ‘solid’ means resisting the intrusion of other objects (including my body, in this case), the answer is no. The answer is no, because atomic theory explains how the gappy objects it postulates are able to resist intrusion by other gappy objects in terms of the nature of the bonds between the atoms that make up my chair. Or, to say all this in the language of concepts, the answer depends on the correct analysis of the concept of solidity, where by the concept of solidity I mean what it takes for something to be solid.