more on this theme     |     more from this thinker

Single Idea 8459

[filed under theme 7. Existence / D. Theories of Reality / 11. Ontological Commitment / d. Commitment of theories ]

Full Idea

In fiction, 'Once upon a time there was an F who...' obviously does not make an ontological commitment, so Quine says the question of which ontology we accept must be dealt with in terms of the role an ontology plays in a scientific worldview.

Gist of Idea

Fictional quantification has no ontology, so we study ontology through scientific theories

Source

report of Willard Quine (On What There Is [1948]) by Alex Orenstein - W.V. Quine Ch.3

Book Ref

Orenstein,Alex: 'W.V. Quine' [Princeton 2002], p.47

A Reaction

This seems to invite questions about the ontology of people who don't espouse a scientific worldview. If your understanding of the outside world and of the past is created for you by storytellers, you won't be a Quinean.

The 29 ideas from 'On What There Is'

8455 Canonical notation needs quantification, variables and predicates, but not names [Quine, by Orenstein]
8456 Quine extended Russell's defining away of definite descriptions, to also define away names [Quine, by Orenstein]
10241 For Quine, there is only one way to exist [Quine, by Shapiro]
4064 The idea of a thing and the idea of existence are two sides of the same coin [Quine, by Crane]
19277 Quine rests existence on bound variables, because he thinks singular terms can be analysed away [Quine, by Hale]
12210 Quine's ontology is wrong; his question is scientific, and his answer is partly philosophical [Fine,K on Quine]
8459 Fictional quantification has no ontology, so we study ontology through scientific theories [Quine, by Orenstein]
16261 If commitment rests on first-order logic, we obviously lose the ontology concerning predication [Maudlin on Quine]
4443 Quine has argued that predicates do not have any ontological commitment [Quine, by Armstrong]
1619 There is an attempt to give a verificationist account of meaning, without the error of reducing everything to sensations [Dennett on Quine]
19159 Quine relates predicates to their objects, by being 'true of' them [Quine, by Davidson]
8856 Quine's indispensability argument said arguments for abstracta were a posteriori [Quine, by Yablo]
7698 If to be is to be the value of a variable, we must already know the values available [Jacquette on Quine]
15402 There is no entity called 'redness', and that some things are red is ultimate and irreducible [Quine]
1617 The word 'meaning' is only useful when talking about significance or about synonymy [Quine]
1609 I do not believe there is some abstract entity called a 'meaning' which we can 'have' [Quine]
1611 Names can be converted to descriptions, and Russell showed how to eliminate those [Quine]
1610 To be is to be the value of a variable, which amounts to being in the range of reference of a pronoun [Quine]
1615 Intuitionism says classes are invented, and abstract entities are constructed from specified ingredients [Quine]
1614 Conceptualism holds that there are universals but they are mind-made [Quine]
1612 Realism, conceptualism and nominalism in medieval universals reappear in maths as logicism, intuitionism and formalism [Quine]
1613 Logicists cheerfully accept reference to bound variables and all sorts of abstract entities [Quine]
1616 Formalism says maths is built of meaningless notations; these build into rules which have meaning [Quine]
1618 We study bound variables not to know reality, but to know what reality language asserts [Quine]
8496 What actually exists does not, of course, depend on language [Quine]
8497 An ontology is like a scientific theory; we accept the simplest scheme that fits disorderly experiences [Quine]
8498 Treating scattered sensations as single objects simplifies our understanding of experience [Quine]
18209 We can never translate our whole language of objects into phenomenalism [Quine]
12443 Can an unactualized possible have self-identity, and be distinct from other possibles? [Quine]