Philosophy of the Social Sciences 49 (3):171-189 (2019)

Richard Lauer
St. Lawrence University
In this article I examine “Ontology Matters!” (OM!) arguments. OM! arguments conclude that ontology can contribute to empirical success in social science. First, I capture the common form between different OM! arguments. Second, I describe quantifier variance as discussed in metaontology. Third, I apply quantifier variance to the common form of OM! arguments. I then present two ways in which ontology is prior to social science methodology, one realist and one pragmatic. I argue that a pragmatic interpretation of ontology’s priority gives proponents of realist OM! arguments a special burden that they must meet to render their argument successful.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1177/0048393119840328
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,132
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

View all 29 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Social Ontology De-Dramatized.Daniel Little - 2020 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 51 (1):13-23.
Ontological Investigations of a Pragmatic Kind? A Reply to Lauer.Simon Lohse - 2020 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 51 (1):3-12.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Comment on Naturalizing Critical Realist Social Ontology.Petri Ylikoski - 2015 - Journal of Social Ontology 1 (2):333-340.
Précis of Naturalizing Critical Realist Social Ontology.Tuukka Kaidesoja - 2015 - Journal of Social Ontology 1 (2):321–326.
Critical Theory and Processual Social Ontology.Emmanuel Renault - 2016 - Journal of Social Ontology 2 (1):17–32.


Added to PP index

Total views
48 ( #224,370 of 2,454,700 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #303,745 of 2,454,700 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes