Philosophia Mathematica 15 (3):271-290 (2007)
|Abstract||For Quine, the ontological commitments of a discourse are what fall under its (objectual) quantifiers. The recent literature, however, is beginning to move away from this picture. There are direct challenges to Quine's criterion, and there are also attempts to provide alternatives. Azzouni suggests that the ontological commitments of a discourse should be determined by an existence predicate instead. The availability of this alternative forces an adjudication between Qune's criterion and the predicate approach to ontological commitment. I argue that to adjudicate between these criteria for ontological commitment, we need first to adjudicate between criteria for what exists. My thanks to Jody Azzouni and an anonymous referee for helpful suggestions.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||No categories specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Lieven Decock (2004). Inception of Quine's Ontology. History and Philosophy of Logic 25 (2):111-129.
Peter Hinst (1983). Quines Ontologiekriterium. Erkenntnis 19 (1-3):193 - 215.
Gabriele Contessa (2006). Constructive Empiricism, Observability, and Three Kinds of Ontological Commitment. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 37 (4):454–468.
Yvonne Raley (2009). Deflating Existence Away? A Critique of Azzouni's Nominalism. Philosophia Mathematica 17 (1):73-83.
David Manley (2009). When Best Theories Go Bad. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 78 (2):392-405.
A. Pampapathy Rao (1971). Quine's Criterion of Ontological Commitment. Simla,Indian Institute of Advanced Study.
Jamin Asay (2010). How to Express Ontological Commitment in the Vernacular. Philosophia Mathematica 18 (3):293-310.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads62 ( #15,163 of 549,699 )
Recent downloads (6 months)10 ( #6,931 of 549,699 )
How can I increase my downloads?