Psychology Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Ontological Commitment: A theory is bound to the acceptance of objects if it were wrong without the existence of these objects. It may be, however, that parts of the theory do not have to contain the object, then the ontological commitment for the whole theory is omitted. (See H. Lauener Quine, 1982, p. 130)._____________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 |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Stephen Schiffer on Ontological Commitment - Dictionary of Arguments
I 236f Properties/attributes/existence/"there are"/quantification/2nd order logic/Schiffer: (Quine 1966(1), p 164 (German)): even in Quine: e.g. "Is valid" is a verb that can be added to the name of a sentence, and an attribute of the named sentence. >Names of sentences. Schiffer: no one would say that Quine thus enters into an ontological commitment. Solution: it is understood as substitutional quantification. >Substitutional quantification. 1.W.V.O. Quine (1966). Ways of paradox. New York: Random._____________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. |
Schi I St. Schiffer Remnants of Meaning Cambridge 1987 |
||
> Counter arguments against Schiffer
> Counter arguments in relation to Ontological Commitment
