|Abstract||Fictionalism in ontology is a mixed bag. Here I focus on three main variants—which I label after the names of Pascal, Berkeley, and Hume—and consider their relative strengths and weaknesses with special reference to the ontology that comes with common sense. The first variant is just a version of the epistemic Wager, applied across the board. For all we know—says the Pascalian—our ordinary common-sense ontology may be a fiction. However, what goes on in that fiction matters a lot to us. Indeed, that’s all that matters, so let us pretend the fiction is true and let’s continue to plan our lives accordingly. The second variant builds instead on a semantic intuition|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||No categories specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Matti Eklund (2005). Fiction, Indifference, and Ontology. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 71 (3):557–579.
Uriah Kriegel (2011). Two Defenses of Common-Sense Ontology. Dialectica 65 (2):177-204.
Matti Eklund (2005). Fiction, Indifference, and Ontology. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 71 (3):557-579.
T. Parent (2013). In the Mental Fiction, Mental Fictionalism is Fictitious. The Monist 96 (4).
Jason Stanley (2001). Hermeneutic Fictionalism. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 25 (1):36–71.
Nadeem J. Z. Hussain (2004). The Return of Moral Fictionalism. Philosophical Perspectives 18 (1):149–188.
Eli Hirsch (2010). Quantifier Variance and Realism: Essays in Metaontology. Oxford University Press.
Roberta de Monticelli (2003). On Ontology. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 3 (2):171-186.
Barry Smith & Chris Welty (2002). Ontology: Towards a New Synthesis. In Formal Ontology in Information Systems. ACM Press.
Chris John Daly (2008). Fictionalism and the Attitudes. Philosophical Studies 139 (3):423 - 440.
Added to index2012-06-15
Total downloads11 ( #99,523 of 549,087 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #25,722 of 549,087 )
How can I increase my downloads?