Coincident Entities and Question-Begging Predicates: an Issue in Meta-Ontology

Metaphysica 14 (1):1-15 (2013)
Abstract
Meta-ontology (in van Inwagen's sense) concerns the methodology of ontology, and a controversial meta-ontological issue is to what extent ontology can rely on linguistic analysis while establishing the furniture of the world. This paper discusses an argument advanced by some ontologists (I call them unifiers) against supporters of or coincident entities (I call them multipliers) and its meta-ontological import. Multipliers resort to Leibniz's Law to establish that spatiotemporally coincident entities a and b are distinct, by pointing at a predicate F () made true by a and false by b . Unifiers try to put multipliers in front of a dilemma: in attempting to introduce metaphysical differences on the basis of semantic distinctions, multipliers either (a) rest on a fallacy of verbalism, entailed by a trade-off between a de dicto and a de re reading of modal claims, or (b) beg the question against unifiers by having to assume the distinction between a and b beforehand. I shall rise a tu quoque, showing that unifiers couldn't even distinguish material objects (or events) from the spatiotemporal regions they occupy unless they also resorted to linguistic distinctions. Their methodological aim to emancipate themselves from linguistic analysis in ontological businesses is therefore problematic
Keywords Meta-ontology  Sortalism  Coincident Entities
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s12133-012-0106-x
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
References found in this work BETA
Word and Object.W. V. Quine - 1960 - MIT Press.
Mereology.Achille C. Varzi - 2014 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Descriptions.Stephen Neale - 1990 - MIT Press.

View all 32 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Two Defenses of Common-Sense Ontology.Uriah Kriegel - 2011 - Dialectica 65 (2):177-204.
Musical Works: Ontology and Meta-Ontology.Julian Dodd - 2008 - Philosophy Compass 3 (6):1113-1134.
Yet Another Paper on the Supervenience Argument Against Coincident Entities.Theodore Sider - 2008 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 77 (3):613-624.
Advertisement for the Ontology for Medicine.Jeremy R. Simon - 2010 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 31 (5):333-346.
Ontological Anti-Realism.David J. Chalmers - 2009 - In David John Chalmers, David Manley & Ryan Wasserman (eds.), Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology. Oxford University Press.
The Anatomy of the Image: Toward an Applied Onto-Psychiatry.James M. Fielding & Dirk Marwede - 2012 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 18 (4):287-303.
Rule Following and Metaontology.T. Parent - 2015 - Journal of Philosophy 112 (5):247-265.
Non-Arbitrariness of Composition and Particularism.Matja Potrc - 2002 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 63 (1):197-215.
Buridan's Logic and the Ontology of Modes.Gyula Klima - 1999 - In Sten Ebbesen & Russsell L. Friedman (eds.), Medieval Analyses in Language and Cognition. Royal Danish Academy. pp. 473-496.
There Are No Things That Are Musical Works.Ross Cameron - 2008 - British Journal of Aesthetics 48 (3):295-314.

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2012-08-01

Total downloads

265 ( #11,730 of 2,151,990 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

44 ( #5,896 of 2,151,990 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums