Abstract
According to Thomasson’s Easy Ontology, all existential questions have straightforward answers and are solvable by conceptual and empirical work. So there is no need for traditional metaphysics to solve them. First, I give some counterexamples to this thesis from incomplete and undecidable theories. Then I discuss some possible responses, I consider a wider sense of conceptual analysis and argue that even in this sense Easy ontology is not able to resolve the problem and must sacrifice either easiness or answerability. Finally, I will argue that although traditional metaphysics does not make the undecidable sentences answerable, it can still make sense of them and helps us to understand why there are unanswerable questions at all.
References
Berto, Francesco. 2007. How to Sell a Contradiction: Studies in Logic 6. London: College Publications.Search in Google Scholar
Boolos, G. S., J. P. Burgess, and R. C Jeffrey. 2007. Computability and Logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511804076Search in Google Scholar
Carnap, Rudolph. 1950/1956. “Empiricism, Semantics, and Ontology.” In Meaning and Necessity. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
Frege, Gottlob. 1884. The Foundations of Arithmetic: A Logico-Mathematical Enquiry into the Concept of Number. Translated by J. L. Austin. Oxford: Blackwell, 1974.Search in Google Scholar
Gödel, Kurt. 1931. On Formally Undecidable Propositions of Principia Mathematica and Related Systems. In The Undecidable,edited by M. Davis, Hewlett, N. Y: Raven Press, pp. 4–38.Search in Google Scholar
Hale, Bob, and Crispin Wright. 2001. The Reason’s Proper Study: Essays towards a Neo-Fregean Philosophy of Mathematics. Oxford: Clarendon.Search in Google Scholar
Loveland, D., R. Hodel, and S. Sterrett. 2014. Three Views of Logic: Mathematics, Philosophy and Computer Science. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400848751Search in Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. 1951. “On Carnap’s Views on Ontology.” Philosophical Studies 2 (5): 65–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02199422.Search in Google Scholar
Schiffer, Stephen. 1996. “Language-Created Language-independent Entities.” Philosophical Topics 24 (1): 149–67. https://doi.org/10.5840/philtopics199624117.Search in Google Scholar
Shapiro, Stewart. 2000. “The Status of Logic.” In New Essays on the Apriori, edited by Paul Boghossian, and Christopher Peacocke. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Sider, Theodore. 2011. Writing the Book of the World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199697908.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Thomasson, Amie L. 2015. Ontology Made Easy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199385119.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Thomasson, Amie L. 2008. “Existence Questions.” Philosophical Studies 141: 63–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-008-9263-8.Search in Google Scholar
Thomasson, Amie L. 2009a. “Answerable and Unanswerable Questions.” In Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology, edited by David Chalmers, Wasserman Ryan, and David Manley. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199546046.003.0015Search in Google Scholar
Thomasson, Amie L. 2009b. “The Easy Approach to Ontology.” Axiomathes 19 (1): 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10516-008-9057-9.Search in Google Scholar
Tieszen, Richard. 2011. After Gödel. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199606207.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
