Disregarding the 'Hole Argument'
arXiv:1412.5289
Abstract
Jim Weatherall has suggested that Einstein's hole argument, as presented by Earman and Norton (1987), is based on a misleading use of mathematics. I argue on the contrary that Weatherall demands an implausible restriction on how mathematics is used. The hole argument, on the other hand, is in no new danger at all.
19 pages, 4 figures