David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Studies 141 (1):21 - 42 (2008)
There are two doctrines for which Quine is particularly well known: the doctrine of ontological commitment and the inscrutability thesis—the thesis that reference and quantification are inscrutable. At first glance, the two doctrines are squarely at odds. If there is no fact of the matter as to what our expressions refer to, then it would appear that no determinate commitments can be read off of our best theories. We argue here that the appearance of a clash between the two doctrines is illusory. The reason that there is no real conflict is not simply that in determining our theories’ ontological commitments we naturally rely on our home language but also (and more importantly) that ontological commitment is not intimately tied to objectual quantification and a reference-first approach to language. Or so we will argue. We conclude with a new inscrutability argument which rests on the observation that the notion of objectual quantification, when properly cashed out, deflates.
|Keywords||Ontological commitment Inscrutability Quine Substitutional quantification Objectual quantification Rational requirement|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
D. M. Armstrong (2004). Truth and Truthmakers. Cambridge University Press.
Berit Brogaard (2007). Number Words and Ontological Commitment. Philosophical Quarterly 57 (226):1–20.
Berit Brogaard & Joe Salerno (2008). Counterfactuals and Context. Analysis 68 (297):39–46.
John Broome, Requirements. Hommage à Wlodek; 60 Philosophical Papers Dedicated to Wlodek Rabinowicz.
Citations of this work BETA
Ross P. Cameron (2010). How to Have a Radically Minimal Ontology. Philosophical Studies 151 (2):249 - 264.
George Duke (2012). Abstract Singular Terms and Thin Reference. Theoria 78 (4):276-292.
Similar books and articles
Maria E. Reicher (2002). Ontological Commitment and Contextual Semantics. Grazer Philosophische Studien 63 (1):141-155.
David Manley (2009). When Best Theories Go Bad. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 78 (2):392-405.
Matti Eklund (2007). The Ontological Significance of Inscrutability. Philosophical Topics 35 (1-2):115-134.
Gabriele Contessa (2006). Constructive Empiricism, Observability, and Three Kinds of Ontological Commitment. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 37 (4):454–468.
Nikolaj Jang Lee Linding Pedersen & Marcus Rossberg (2010). Open-Endedness, Schemas and Ontological Commitment. Noûs 44 (2):329-339.
Yvonne Raley (2007). Ontology, Commitment, and Quine's Criterion. Philosophia Mathematica 15 (3):271-290.
Jamin Asay (2010). How to Express Ontological Commitment in the Vernacular. Philosophia Mathematica 18 (3):293-310.
Howard Peacock (2011). Two Kinds of Ontological Commitment. Philosophical Quarterly 61 (242):79-104.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads93 ( #11,836 of 1,096,455 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #22,450 of 1,096,455 )
How can I increase my downloads?