Results for 'Ontological dependence'

1000+ found
Order:
  1. Ontological Dependence.Tuomas E. Tahko & E. J. Lowe - 2020 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Ontological dependence is a relation—or, more accurately, a family of relations—between entities or beings. For there are various ways in which one being may be said to depend upon one or more other beings, in a sense of “depend” that is distinctly metaphysical in character and that may be contrasted, thus, with various causal senses of this word. More specifically, a being may be said to depend, in such a sense, upon one or more other beings for its (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   117 citations  
  2. Ontological Dependence: An Opinionated Survey.Kathrin Koslicki - 2013 - In Benjamin Schnieder, Miguel Hoeltje & Alex Steinberg (eds.), Varieties of Dependence: Ontological Dependence, Grounding, Supervenience, Response-Dependence (Basic Philosophical Concepts). Philosophia Verlag. pp. 31-64.
    This essay provides an opinionated survey of some recent developments in the literature on ontological dependence. Some of the most popular definitions of ontological dependence are formulated in modal terms; others in non-modal terms (e.g., in terms of the explanatory connective, ‘because’, or in terms of a non-modal conception of essence); some (viz., the existential construals of ontological dependence) emphasise requirements that must be met in order for an entity to exist; others (viz., the (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   41 citations  
  3. Ontological Dependence.Fabrice Correia - 2008 - Philosophy Compass 3 (5):1013-1032.
    'Ontological dependence' is a term of philosophical jargon which stands for a rich family of properties and relations, often taken to be among the most fundamental ontological properties and relations. Notions of ontological dependence are usually thought of as 'carving reality at its ontological joints', and as marking certain forms of ontological 'non-self-sufficiency'. The use of notions of dependence goes back as far as Aristotle's characterization of substances, and these notions are still (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   94 citations  
  4. Ontological Dependence in a Spacetime-World.Jonathan Tallant - 2015 - Philosophical Studies 172 (11):3101-3118.
    Priority Monism, as defined by Jonathan Schaffer, has a number of components. It is the view that: the cosmos exists; the cosmos is a maximal actual concrete object, of which all actual concrete objects are parts; the cosmos is basic—there is no object upon which the cosmos depends, ontologically; ontological dependence is a primitive and unanalysable relation. In a recent attack, Lowe has offered a series of arguments to show that Monism fails. He offers up four tranches of (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  5. XIV—Ontological Dependence.Kit Fine - 1995 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 95 (1):269-290.
  6. Varieties of Ontological Dependence.Kathrin Koslicki - 2012 - In Fabrice Correia & Benjamin Schnieder (eds.), Metaphysical Grounding: Understanding the Structure of Reality. Cambridge University Press. pp. 186.
    A significant reorientation is currently under way in analytic metaphysics, away from an almost exclusive focus on questions of existence and towards a greater concentration on questions concerning the dependence of one type of phenomenon on another. Surprisingly, despite the central role dependence has played in philosophy since its inception, interest in a systematic study of this concept has only recently surged among contemporary metaphysicians. In this paper, I focus on a promising account of ontological dependence (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   83 citations  
  7. Ontological Dependence and Grounding in Aristotle.Phil Corkum - 2016 - Oxford Handbooks Online in Philosophy 1.
    The relation of ontological dependence or grounding, expressed by the terminology of separation and priority in substance, plays a central role in Aristotle’s Categories, Metaphysics, De Anima and elsewhere. The article discusses three current interpretations of this terminology. These are drawn along the lines of, respectively, modal-existential ontological dependence, essential ontological dependence, and grounding or metaphysical explanation. I provide an opinionated introduction to the topic, raising the main interpretative questions, laying out a few of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  8. Ontological Dependency.E. J. Lowe - 1994 - Philosophical Papers 23 (1):31-48.
  9. Ontological Dependence, Spatial Location, and Part Structure.Friederike Moltmann - 2019 - In Roberta Ferrario, Stefano Borgo, Laure Vieu & Claudio Masolo (eds.), Festschrift for Nicola Guarino. Amsterdam: IOS Publications.
    This paper discusses attributively limited concrete objects such as disturbances (holes, folds, scratches etc), tropes, and attitudinal objects, which lack the sort of spatial location or part structures expected of them as concrete objects. The paper proposes an account in terms of (quasi-Fregean) abstraction, which has so far been applied only to abstract objects.
    Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  10. The Deflationary Theory of Ontological Dependence.David Mark Kovacs - 2018 - Philosophical Quarterly 68 (272):481-502.
    When an entity ontologically depends on another entity, the former ‘presupposes’ or ‘requires’ the latter in some metaphysical sense. This paper defends a novel view, Dependence Deflationism, according to which ontological dependence is what I call an aggregative cluster concept: a concept which can be understood, but not fully analysed, as a ‘weighted total’ of constructive and modal relations. The view has several benefits: it accounts for clear cases of ontological dependence as well as the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  11. Grounding and Ontological Dependence.Henrik Rydéhn - 2018 - Synthese 198 (Suppl 6):1231-1256.
    Recent metaphysics has seen a surge of interest in grounding—a relation of non-causal determination underlying a distinctive kind of explanation common in philosophy. In this article, I investigate the connection between grounding and another phenomenon of great interest to metaphysics: ontological dependence. There are interesting parallels between the two phenomena: for example, both are commonly invoked through the use of “dependence” terminology, and there is a great deal of overlap in the motivations typically appealed to when introducing (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  12. Aristotle on Ontological Dependence.Phil Corkum - 2008 - Phronesis 53 (1):65 - 92.
    Aristotle holds that individual substances are ontologically independent from nonsubstances and universal substances but that non-substances and universal substances are ontologically dependent on substances. There is then an asymmetry between individual substances and other kinds of beings with respect to ontological dependence. Under what could plausibly be called the standard interpretation, the ontological independence ascribed to individual substances and denied of non-substances and universal substances is a capacity for independent existence. There is, however, a tension between this (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   38 citations  
  13. Soft Facts and Ontological Dependence.Patrick Todd - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 164 (3):829-844.
    In the literature on free will, fatalism, and determinism, a distinction is commonly made between temporally intrinsic (‘hard’) and temporally relational (‘soft’) facts at times; determinism, for instance, is the thesis that the temporally intrinsic state of the world at some given past time, together with the laws, entails a unique future (relative to that time). Further, it is commonly supposed by incompatibilists that only the ‘hard facts’ about the past are fixed and beyond our control, whereas the ‘soft facts’ (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  14. Explanatory Asymmetries, Ground, and Ontological Dependence.Lina Jansson - 2017 - Erkenntnis 82 (1):17-44.
    The notions of ground and ontological dependence have made a prominent resurgence in much of contemporary metaphysics. However, objections have been raised. On the one hand, objections have been raised to the need for distinctively metaphysical notions of ground and ontological dependence. On the other, objections have been raised to the usefulness of adding ground and ontological dependence to the existing store of other metaphysical notions. Even the logical properties of ground and ontological (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  15. Varieties of Dependence: Ontological Dependence, Grounding, Supervenience, Response-Dependence (Basic Philosophical Concepts).Benjamin Schnieder, Miguel Hoeltje & Alex Steinberg (eds.) - 2013 - Philosophia Verlag.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  16. Ontologically Dependent Entities.Roderick M. Chisholm - 1994 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 54 (3):499-507.
  17.  50
    Numbers as Ontologically Dependent Objects Hume’s Principle Revisited.Robert Schwartzkopff - 2011 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 82 (1):353-373.
    Adherents of Ockham’s fundamental razor contend that considerations of ontological parsimony pertain primarily to fundamental objects. Derivative objects, on the other hand, are thought to be quite unobjectionable. One way to understand the fundamental vs. derivative distinction is in terms of the Aristotelian distinction between ontologically independent and dependent objects. In this paper I will defend the thesis that every natural number greater than 0 is an ontologically dependent object thereby exempting the natural numbers from Ockham’s fundamental razor.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  18.  4
    Ontologically Dependent Entities.Roderick M. Chisholm - 1994 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 54 (3):499-507.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  19. Categories and Ontological Dependence.Daniel Nolan - 2011 - The Monist 94 (2):277-301.
  20.  17
    Ontological Dependence and Fundamentality.Ricardo Mena - 2018 - Ideas Y Valores 67 (166):115-134.
    RESUMEN Se examina una de las maneras más naturales e intuitivas de entender las nociones de entidad fundamental y dependencia ontológica. Se argumenta que quienes adoptan estas nociones enfrentan serios problemas y se recomienda abandonarlas, lo que no quiere decir que no haya otra forma plausible de entender estos conceptos. ABSTRACT The paper examines one of the most natural and intuitive ways of understanding the notions of fundamental entity and ontological dependence, It argues that those who adopt these (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21. Ontological Dependence and the Metaphysics of Individual Substances, 1540–1716.Andreas Blank - 2015 - Munich, Germany: Philosophia.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  22.  42
    Spheres of Being and the Network of Ontological Dependencies.Roberto Poli - 2010 - Polish Journal of Philosophy 4 (2):171-182.
    Ontological categories form a network of ties of dependence. In this regard, the richest source of distinctions consists in the medieval discussion on the divisions of being. After a preliminary examination of some of those divisions, the paper pays attention to Roman Ingarden’s criteria for classifying the various types of ontological dependence. The following are the main conclusions that can be drawn from this exercise. Ingarden suggests that (1) the most general principles framing the categories of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  23. Counterfactuals of Ontological Dependence.Sam Baron - forthcoming - Journal of the American Philosophical Association.
    A great deal has been written about 'would' counterfactuals of causal dependence. Comparatively little has been said regarding 'would' counterfactuals of ontological dependence. The standard Lewis-Stalnaker semantics is inadequate for handling such counterfactuals. That's because some of these counterfactuals are counterpossibles, and the standard Lewis-Stalnaker semantics trivializes for counterpossibles. Fortunately, there is a straightforward extension of the Lewis-Stalnaker semantics available that handles counterpossibles: simply take Lewis's closeness relation that orders possible worlds and unleash it across impossible worlds. (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  24. Fundamental Yet Ontologically Dependent.Joaquim Giannotti - manuscript
    The notion of fundamentality is supposed to play an important role in philosophical inquiry and scientific theorising. Yet there is no consensus on how to formulate it in precise terms. According to a promising view, fundamentality is a form of ontological independence. This view has the merit of capturing a natural connection between fundamentality and ontological dependence. However, it has been recently argued that it is possible that there are fundamental and yet ontologically dependent entities; therefore, we (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25.  60
    Leibniz’s Theory of Conditions: A Framework for Ontological Dependence.Stefano Di Bella - 2005 - The Leibniz Review 15:67-93.
    The aim of this paper is to trace in Leibniz’s drafts the sketched outline of a conceptual framework he organized around the key concept of ‘requisite’. We are faced with the project of a semi-formal theory of conditions, whose logical skeleton can have a lot of different interpretations. In particular, it is well suited to capture some crucial relations of ontological dependence. Firstly the area of ‘mediate requisites’ is explored - where causal and temporal relations are dealt with (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  26. Phusis, Opposites and Ontological Dependence in Heraclitus.Richard Neels - 2018 - History of Philosophy Quarterly 35 (3):199-217.
    The earliest recorded philosophical use of the term "phusis" occurs in the fragments of Heraclitus (most notably at B1 and B123). Phusis, in the non-philosophical writings relevant to Heraclitus’s time (e.g. from Homer to Aeschylus and Pindar), was generally used to characterize the external physical appearance of something. Heraclitus, on the other hand, seems to have used the term in the completely opposite manner: an object’s phusis is hidden (kruptesthai) and greater (kreissōn) than the external appearance (B123 and B54). Despite (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27.  19
    Remarks on Ontological Dependence in Set Theory.Thomas Macaulay Ferguson - 2016 - Australasian Journal of Logic 13 (3).
    In a recent paper, John Wigglesworth explicates the notion of a set's being grounded in or ontologically depending on its members by the modal statement that in any world, that a set exists in that world entails that its members exist as well. After suggesting that variable-domain S5 captures an appropriate account of metaphysical necessity, Wigglesworth purports to prove that in any set theory satisfying the axiom Extensionality this condition holds, that is, that sets ontologically depend on their members with (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28.  71
    Goal-Dependence in Ontology.David Danks - 2015 - Synthese 192 (11):3601-3616.
    Our best sciences are frequently held to be one way, perhaps the optimal way, to learn about the world’s higher-level ontology and structure. I first argue that which scientific theory is “best” depends in part on our goals or purposes. As a result, it is theoretically possible to have two scientific theories of the same domain, where each theory is best for some goal, but where the two theories posit incompatible ontologies. That is, it is possible for us to have (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  29.  36
    Armstrong’s Supervenience and Ontological Dependence.Francesco Orilia - 2016 - In Francesco Federico Calemi (ed.), Metaphysics and Scientific Realism: Essays in Honour of David Malet Armstrong. De Gruyter. pp. 233-252.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  30. Identificatory and Ontological Dependencies.Tadeusz Szubka - 1991 - Roczniki Filozoficzne 39 (1):335.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  31. The Ontological Properties of Social Roles in Multi-Agent Systems: Definitional Dependence, Powers and Roles Playing Roles. [REVIEW]Guido Boella & Leendert van der Torre - 2007 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 15 (3):201-221.
    In this paper we address the problem of defining social roles in multi-agent systems. Social roles provide the basic structure of social institutions and organizations. We start from the properties attributed to roles both in the multi-agent systems and the Object Oriented community, and we use them in an ontological analysis of the notion of social role. We identify three main properties of social roles. First, they are definitionally dependent on the institution they belong to, i.e. the definition of (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  32.  78
    Response‐Dependence, Noumenalism, and Ontological Mystery.Nathaniel Goldberg - 2009 - European Journal of Philosophy 17 (4):469-488.
    Philip Pettit has argued that all semantically basic terms are learned in response to ostended examples and all non-basic terms are defined via them. Michael Smith and Daniel Stoljar maintain that this “global response-dependence” entails noumenalism, the thesis that reality possesses an unknowable, intrinsic nature. Surprisingly Pettit acknowledges this, contending instead that his noumenalism, like Kant’s, can be construed ontologically or epistemically. Moreover, Pettit insists, construing his noumenalism epistemically renders it unproblematic. The article shows that construing noumenalism epistemically prevents (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  33.  97
    Dependence Relationships Between Gene Ontology Terms Based on TIGR Gene Product Annotations.Anand Kumar, Barry Smith & Christian Borgelt - 2004 - Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Computational Terminology 2004:31-38.
    The Gene Ontology is an important tool for the representation and processing of information about gene products and functions. It provides controlled vocabularies for the designations of cellular components, molecular functions, and biological processes used in the annotation of genes and gene products. These constitute three separate ontologies, of cellular components), molecular functions and biological processes, respectively. The question we address here is: how are the terms in these three separate ontologies related to each other? We use statistical methods and (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  34.  73
    The Ontology of Intentionality I: The Dependence Ontological Account of Order: Mediate and Immediate Moments and Pieces of Dependent and Independent Objects.Gilbert T. Null - 2007 - Husserl Studies 23 (1):33-69.
    This is the first of three essays which use Edmund Husserl's dependence ontology to formulate a non-Diodorean and non-Kantian temporal semantics for two-valued, first-order predicate modal languages suitable for expressing ontologies of experience (like physics and cognitive science). This essay's primary desideratum is to formulate an adequate dependence-ontological account of order. To do so it uses primitive (proper) part and (weak) foundation relations to formulate seven axioms and 28 definitions as a basis for Husserl's dependence (...) theory of relating moments. The essay distinguishes between dependence v. independence, pieces v. moments, mediate v. immediate pieces and moments, maximal v. non-maximal pieces, founded v. unfounded qualities, integrative v. disintegrative dependence, and defines the concepts of the completion of an object, the adumbrational equivalence relation of objects, moments of unity which unify objects, and relating moments which relate objects. The eight theorems [CUT90]-[CUT97] show that relating moments of unity provide an adequate account of order in terms of primitive (proper) part and (weak) foundation relations. (shrink)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  35. Husserl on the World as an Ontologically Dependent Correlate of the Transcendental Subject.Ion Constantin - 2012 - Linguistic and Philosophical Investigations 11:103-108.
  36.  25
    Two in Nature - One in Substratum: An Aristotelian Metaphysical Model for Ontologically Dependent Entities.Anna Marmodoro - 2019 - Dissertation, University of Edinburgh
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  37.  16
    What Other Worlds Have to Say About Ontological Dependence: Is There Life in the Logical Thesis?Hunter McEwan - 1990 - Educational Theory 40 (3):381-390.
  38. Does the Cosmological Argument Depend on the Ontological?William F. Vallicella - 2000 - Faith and Philosophy 17 (4):441-458.
    Does the cosmological argument (CA) depend on the ontological (OA)? That depends. If the OA is an argument “from mere concepts,” then no; if the OA is an argument from possibility, then yes. That is my main thesis. Along the way, I explore a number of subsidiary themes, among them, the nature of proof in metaphysics, and what Kant calls the “mystery of absolute necessity.”.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  39. Symmetric Dependence.Elizabeth Barnes - 2018 - In Ricki Leigh Bliss & Graham Priest (eds.), Reality and Its Structure. Oxford, UK: pp. 50-69.
    Metaphysical orthodoxy maintains that the relation of ontological dependence is irreflexive, asymmetric, and transitive. The goal of this paper is to challenge that orthodoxy by arguing that ontological dependence should be understood as non- symmetric, rather than asymmetric. If we give up the asymmetry of dependence, interesting things follow for what we can say about metaphysical explanation— particularly for the prospects of explanatory holism.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   54 citations  
  40. Roman Ingarden’s Ontology: Existential Dependence, Substances, Ideas, and Other Things Empiricists Do Not Like.Daniel von Wachter - 2005 - In A. Chrudzimski (ed.), Existence, Culture, and Persons: The Ontology of Roman Ingarden. Ontos Verlag. pp. 55-82.
    About the ontology of the Polish philosopher Roman Ingarden, as presented in his treatise 'The Controversy about the Existence of the World'.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  41. Kant on the Dependency of the Cosmological Argument on the Ontological Argument.Donald P. Smith - 2003 - European Journal of Philosophy 11 (2):206–218.
    Immanuel Kant’s well known and thoroughly discussed criticism of the cosmological argument, hereafter ‘CA’, is that it presupposes or depends upon the cogency of the ontological argument, hereafter ‘OA’. Call this criticism ‘the Dependency Thesis’. It is fair to say that the received view on the matter is that Kant failed to establish the Dependency Thesis.1 In what follows, I argue that the received view is mistaken. I begin by rehearsing the standard objection to what is typically taken to (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  42.  35
    The Dependence of Descartes' Ontological Proof: Upon the Doctrine of Causa Sui.Robert C. Miner - 2002 - Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 58 (4):873 - 886.
    Can God be the efficient cause of himself (causa sui,)? It is well known that Descartes answers this question in the affirmative, but it is considerably less clear why. The main contention of the essay is that Descartes advances the causa sui doctrine because he came to think that the ontological proof of Meditation V required it. We argue these contentions through a close analysis of Descartes' initial articulation of causa sui in response to Caterus, followed by attention to (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  43. Object-Dependence.Avram Hiller - 2013 - Essays in Philosophy 14 (1):33-55.
    There has been much work on ontological dependence in recent literature. However, relatively little of it has been dedicated to the ways in which individual physical objects may depend on other distinct, non-overlapping objects. This paper gives several examples of such object-dependence and distinguishes between different types of it. The paper also introduces and refines the notion of an n-tet. N-tets (typically) occur when there are object-dependence relations between n objects. I claim that the identity (or, (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  44.  66
    The Ontology of Intentionality II: Dependence Ontology as Prolegomenon to Noetic Modal Semantics.Gilbert T. Null - 2007 - Husserl Studies 23 (2):119-159.
    This is the second in a sequence of three essays which axiomatize and apply Edmund Husserl's dependence ontology of parts and wholes as a non-Diodorean, non-Kantian temporal semantics for first-order predicate modal languages. The Ontology of Intentionality I introduced enough of Husserl's dependence-ontology of parts and wholes to formulate his account of order as effected by relating moments of unity, and The Ontology of Intentionality II extends that axiomatic dependence-ontology far enough to enable its semantic application. Formalizing (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  45. In Virtue Of: Determination, Dependence, and Metaphysically Opaque Grounding.Henrik Rydéhn - 2019 - Dissertation, Uppsala University
    This dissertation investigates grounding, the relation of non-causal determination whereby one fact obtains in virtue of some other fact or facts. Although considerations of grounding have been central throughout Western philosophy, the last 15-20 years have seen a renaissance of systematic work on grounding in analytic philosophy. The aim of the dissertation is to contribute to our understanding of the nature of grounding and its relation to other central phenomena in metaphysics. -/- Chapter 1 of the dissertation provides a brief (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  46. Ontological Priority, Fundamentality and Monism.Matteo Morganti - 2009 - Dialectica 63 (3):271-288.
    In recent work, the interrelated questions of whether there is a fundamental level to reality, whether ontological dependence must have an ultimate ground, and whether the monist thesis should be endorsed that the whole universe is ontologically prior to its parts have been explored with renewed interest. Jonathan Schaffer has provided arguments in favour of 'priority monism' in a series of articles (2003, 2004, 2007a, 2007b, forthcoming). In this paper, these arguments are analysed, and it is claimed that (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   43 citations  
  47.  57
    Thought Experiments, Ontology, and Concept-Dependent Truthmakers.Howard Robinson - 2004 - The Monist 87 (4):537-553.
    Thought experiments are usually employed by philosophers as a tool in conceptual analysis. We pose ourselves questions such as “Would it be the same F if p?” or “Would it count as knowledge if q,” where p and q state some bizarre circumstances that are unlikely actually to occur and may even be beyond current technical possibility. The answers we are inclined to give to such questions are held to throw light on the nature of our concepts of, in these (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  48. Aristotle on Ontological Priority.Hikmet Unlu - 2020 - Acta Philosophica 1 (29):137-158.
    There are several passages in the Metaphysics where Aristotle explains ontological priority in terms of ontological dependence, but there are others where he seems to adopt a teleological conception of ontological priority. It is sometimes maintained that the latter priority too must be construed in terms of the former, or that the priorities in question are not both endorsed (or simultaneously endorsed) by Aristotle. The goal of this paper is to show otherwise; I argue that what (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  49. Dependence, Justification and Explanation: Must Reality Be Well-Founded?Matteo Morganti - 2015 - Erkenntnis 80 (3):555-572.
    This paper is about metaphysical ‘infinitism’, the view that there are, or could be, infinite chains of ontological dependence. Its main aim is to show that, contrary to widespread opinion, metaphysical infinitism is a coherent position. On the basis of this, it is then additionally argued that metaphysical infinitism need not fare worse than the more canonical ‘foundationalist’ alternatives when it comes to formulating metaphysical explanations. In the course of the discussion, a rather unexplored parallel with the debate (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  50.  36
    Gestalt, Equivalency, and Functional Dependency. Kurt Grelling’s Formal Ontology.Arkadiusz Chrudzimski - 2013 - In Nikolay Milkov & Volker Peckhaus (eds.), The Berlin Group and the Philosophy of Logical Empiricism. Springer. pp. 245--261.
    In his ontological works Kurt Grelling tries to give a rigorous analysis of the foundations of the so-called Gestalt-psychology. Gestalten are peculiar emergent qualities, ontologically dependent on their foundations, but nonetheless non reducible to them. Grelling shows that this concept, as used in psychology and ontology, is often ambiguous. He distinguishes two important meanings in which the word “Gestalt” is used: Gestalten as structural aspects available to transposition and Gestalten as causally self-regulating wholes. Gestalten in the first meaning are, (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
1 — 50 / 1000