Relational and substantival ontologies, and the nature and the role of primitives in ontological theories
Erkenntnis 73 (1):101 - 121 (2010)
|Abstract||Several metaphysical debates have typically been modeled as oppositions between a relationist approach and a substantivalist approach. Such debates include the Bundle Theory and the Substratum Theory about ordinary material objects, the Bundle (Humean) Theory and the Substance (Cartesian) Theory of the Self, and Relationism and Substantivalism about time. In all three debates, the substantivalist side typically insists that in order to provide a good treatment of the subject-matter of the theory (time, Self, material objects), it is necessary to postulate the existence of a certain kind of substance, while the other side, the relationist one, characteristically feels that this is an unnecessary expense and that one can get the job done in an ontologically cheaper way just with inter-related properties or events. In this paper I shall defend the view that there is much less of a disagreement between relational ontologies and substantival ontologies than it is usually thought. I believe that, when carefully examined, the two sides of the debate are not that different from each other, in all three cases of pairs of views mentioned above. As we will see, both the relational side and the substantival side work in the same way, suffer from and answer the same objections, and are structurally extremely similar. It will be an important question—one that I shall discuss in detail, and that is indeed the main point of interest for me in this paper—whether this means that the two sides of the debate are somehow ‘equivalent’ or not, and what ‘equivalent’ could mean.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Carl Hoefer (1998). Absolute Versus Relational Spacetime: For Better or Worse, the Debate Goes On. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (3):451-467.
Jiri Benovsky (2009). The Self : A Humean Bundle and/or a Cartesian Substance ? European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 5 (1):7 - 19.
Edward Slowik, Spacetime, Structural Realism, and the Substantival/Relational Debate: An Ontological Investigation From the Perspective of Structural Realism in the Philosophy of Mathematics.
Jiri Benovsky (2008). The Bundle Theory and the Substratum Theory: Deadly Enemies or Twin Brothers? Philosophical Studies 141 (2):175 - 190.
Robert Rynasiewicz (1992). Rings, Holes and Substantivalism: On the Program of Leibniz Algebras. Philosophy of Science 59 (4):572-589.
Edward Slowik (2009). Newton's Metaphysics of Space: A “Tertium Quid” Betwixt Substantivalism and Relationism, or Merely a “God of the (Rational Mechanical) Gaps”? Perspectives on Science 17 (4):pp. 429-456.
D. Dieks (2001). Space and Time in Particle and Field Physics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 32 (2):217-241.
Jiri Benovsky (2011). The Relationist and Substantivalist Theories of Time: Foes or Friends? European Journal of Philosophy 19 (4):491-506.
Added to index2010-03-13
Total downloads59 ( #19,742 of 722,877 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #14,866 of 722,877 )
How can I increase my downloads?