Philosophy Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Ontological relativity: One cannot be certain that others structure the world ontologically (divide into objects) as we do, since this cannot be determined empirically. (See H. Lauener Quine, 1982, p. 153). According to Quine, however, the problem is only interesting for infinite domains, since one could specify the objects in the form of lists for finite domains. (See W.V.O. Quine, “Ontologische Relativität”, 2003, p. 78)._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Michael Esfeld on Ontological Relativity - Dictionary of Arguments
I 116 Ontological Relativity/Quine: in the native language we can avoid indeterminacy if we understand the meanings literally. >Literal meaning, >Language dependence, >Indefiniteness, >Theories, >Ontology, >Translation._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Es I M. Esfeld Holismus Frankfurt/M 2002 |
||
> Counter arguments against Esfeld
> Counter arguments in relation to Ontological Relativity
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2024-04-27