Full Idea
The use of general terms does not commit us to admitting a corresponding abstract entity into our ontology, but an abstract singular term, including the law of putting equals for equals, flatly commits us to an abstract entity named by the term.
Gist of Idea
General terms don't commit us ontologically, but singular terms with substitution do
Source
Willard Quine (Identity, Ostension, and Hypostasis [1950], 4)
Book Reference
Quine,Willard: 'From a Logical Point of View' [Harper and Row 1963], p.76
A Reaction
Does this mean that in 'for the sake of the children', I have to believe in 'sakes' if I can find a synonym which will substitute for it?