Fiat and Bona Fide Boundaries

There is a basic distinction, in the realm of spatial boundaries, between bona fide boundaries on the one hand, and fiat boundaries on the other. The former are just the physical boundaries of old. The latter are exemplified especially by boundaries induced through human demarcation, for example, in the geographic domain. The classical metaphysical problems connected with the notions of adjacency, contact, separation, and division can be resolved in an intuitive way by recognizing this two-sorted ontology of boundaries. Bona fide boundaries yield a notion of contact that is effectively modeled by classical topology; the analogue of contact involving fiat boundaries calls, however, for a different account, based on the intuition that fiat boundaries do not support the open/closed distinction on which classical topology is based. In the presence of this twosorted ontology it then transpires that mereotopology-typology erected on a mereological basis-is more than a trivial formal variant of classical point-set topology.

[1]  Daniel R. Montello,et al.  Spatial Information Theory A Theoretical Basis for GIS , 1995, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[2]  Fabio Pianesi,et al.  Events, topology and temporal relations , 1996 .

[3]  A. Cohn,et al.  A connection based approach to common-sense topological description and reasoning , 1996 .

[4]  Burnham Terrell,et al.  Philosophical Investigations on Space, Time and the Continuum , 1989 .

[5]  F. Brentano,et al.  Philosophische Untersuchungen zu Raum, Zeit und Kontinuum , 1976 .

[6]  Barry Smith,et al.  The structures of the common-sense world , 1995 .

[7]  Robert C. Moore,et al.  Formal Theories of the Commonsense World , 1985 .

[8]  Anthony G. Cohn,et al.  Connection Relations in Mereotopology , 1998, ECAI.

[9]  P. Simons Parts: A Study in Ontology , 1991 .

[10]  Achille C. Varzi,et al.  Holes and Other Superficialities , 1994 .

[11]  W. Mays,et al.  Process and Reality , 1978 .

[12]  Roberto Casati,et al.  Parts and Places: The Structures of Spatial Representation , 1999 .

[13]  F. Brentano,et al.  Philosophical investigations on space, time and the continuum , 1988 .

[14]  F. Brentano Psychologie vom empirischen Standpunkt , 1925 .

[15]  Laure Vieu,et al.  Toward a Geometry of Common Sense: A Semantics and a Complete Axiomatization of Mereotopology , 1995, IJCAI.

[16]  Barry Smith Ontology and the logistic analysis of reality , 1993 .

[17]  Achille C. Varzi,et al.  The structure of spatial localization , 1996 .

[18]  F. Brentano,et al.  The Theory of Categories , 1981 .

[19]  Roberto Casati,et al.  Parts And Places , 1999 .

[20]  Roderick M. Chisholm,et al.  BOUNDARIES AS DEPENDENT PARTICULARS , 1983 .

[21]  Achille C. Varzi Boundaries, Continuity, and Contact , 1997 .

[22]  A. Whitehead Process and reality : an essay in cosmology , 1978 .

[23]  Bernard Bolzano Paradoxes of the infinite , 1950 .

[24]  R. Jackendoff Parts and boundaries , 1991, Cognition.

[25]  K.,et al.  Characteristica Universalis , 1990 .

[26]  Achille C. Varzi Parts, Wholes, and Part-Whole Relations: The Prospects of Mereotopology , 1996, Data Knowl. Eng..

[27]  Barry Smith,et al.  On Drawing Lines on a Map , 1995, COSIT.