Categorias

Apostolado da Oração

Pesquisa

Fundamental Ontology and Esoteric Metaphysics: How to Settle the Question

Fundamental Ontology and Esoteric Metaphysics: How to Settle the Question

Thomas Hofweber, “Fundamental Ontology and Esoteric Metaphysics: How to Settle the Question,” Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia 80, no. 4 (2024): 753–82, https://doi.org/10.17990/RPF/2024_80_4_0753.

Mais detalhes

À venda À venda!
10,00 €

128040753

Disponível apenas on-line

  • Fundamental Ontology and Esoteric Metaphysics: How to settle the Question

    Item Type Journal Article
    Author Thomas Hofweber
    Abstract How can we settle whether key metaphysical questions should properly be stated by relying on a substantial notion of metaphysical priority, like grounding or being metaphysically more fundamental than? Relatedly, how can we settle whether ontology should properly be seen as the disciple that studies either what there is or else only what there is fundamentally? Which way of thinking about ontology brings out its proper metaphysical significance? One challenge to giving notions like grounding or fundamentality key roles in metaphysics is that these notions are insufficiently clear, and that metaphysics tied to them turns into esoteric metaphysics. To make progress on these issues I propose a particular challenge—the cognitive function challenge—that needs to be met for metaphysics based on a substantial notion of priority not to turn into objectionable esoteric metaphysics. I also outline some reasons why other approaches that aim to establish such notions as legitimate for metaphysics fall short and how the cognitive function challenge might be met.
    Date 2024
    Language English
    Rights © 2024 Aletheia - Associação Científica e Cultural
    Volume 80
    Pages 753-782
    Publication Revista Portuguesa de Filosofia
    DOI 10.17990/RPF/2024_80_4_0753
    Issue 4
    Date Added 12/6/2024, 8:32:45 PM
    Modified 12/6/2024, 10:02:35 PM

    Tags:

    • cognitive function challenge, esoteric metaphysics, fundamentality, grounding, metaphysical priority, ontology.

    Notes:

    • Audi, Paul. “A Clarification and Defense of the Notion of Grounding.” In Metaphysical Grounding: Understanding the Structure of Reality, edited by Fabrice Correia and Benjamin Schnieder, 122–138. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.

      Bennett, Karen. Making Things Up. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.

      Berker, Selim. “The Unity of Grounding.” Mind 127, no. 507 (2018): 729–777.

      Correia, Fabrice, and Benjamin Schnieder. “Grounding: An Opinionated Introduction.” In Metaphysical Grounding: Understanding the Structure of Reality, edited by Fabrice Correia and Benjamin Schnieder, 1–36. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.

      Daly, Chris. “Skepticism about Grounding.” In Metaphysical Grounding: Understanding the Structure of Reality, edited by Fabrice Correia and Benjamin Schnieder, 81–100. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.

      Dasgupta, Shamik. “Realism and the Absence of Value.” Philosophical Review 127, no. 3 (2018): 279–322.

      Einheuser, Iris. “Counterconventional Conditionals.” Philosophical Studies 127, no. 3 (2006): 459–482.

      Fine, Kit. “The Question of Realism.” Philosophers’ Imprint 1, no. 1 (2001): 1–30.

      Fine, Kit. “Tense and Reality.” In Modality and Tense, 261–320. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.

      Hofweber, Thomas. “Ambitious, yet Modest, Metaphysics.” In Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology, edited by David Chalmers, David Manley, and Ryan Wasserman, 269–289. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.

      Hofweber, Thomas. Ontology and the Ambitions of Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.

      Hofweber, Thomas. Review of Making Things Up, by Karen Bennett. Philosophical Review 128, no. 2 (2019): 237–240.

      Hofweber, Thomas. Idealism and the Harmony of Thought and Reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press, forthcoming.

      Incurvati, Luca. “How to Be a Minimalist about Sets.” Philosophical Studies 159, no. 1 (2012): 69–87.

      Koslicki, Kathrin. “The Coarse-Grainedness of Ground.” Oxford Studies in Metaethics 9 (2015): 306–344.

      Koslicki, Kathrin. “Skeptical Doubts.” In The Routledge Handbook of Metaphysical Grounding, edited by Michael J. Raven, chapter 11. New York: Routledge, 2019.

      Kovacs, David. “Grounding and the Argument from Explanatoriness.” Philosophical Studies 174, no. 12 (2017): 2927–2952.

      Lange, Marc. “Grounds and Explanation in Mathematics.” Philosophers’ Imprint 19, no. 33 (2019): 1–18.

      Raven, Michael. “In Defense of Ground.” Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90, no. 4 (2011): 687–701.

      Schaffer, Jonathan. “On What Grounds What.” In Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology, edited by David Chalmers, David Manley, and Ryan Wasserman, 347–383. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.

      Schaffer, Jonathan. “Grounding in the Image of Causation.” Philosophical Studies 173 (2016): 49–100.

      Trogdon, Kelly. “An Introduction to Grounding.” In Varieties of Dependence: Ontological Dependence, Grounding, Supervenience, Response-Dependence, edited by Miguel Hoeltje, Benjamin Schnieder, and Alex Steinberg, 97–122. Frankfurt: Philosophia Verlag, 2013.

      Wigglesworth, John. “Set-Theoretic Dependence.” Australasian Journal of Logic 12, no. 3 (2015): 159–176.

      Wilson, Jessica M. “No Work for a Theory of Grounding.” Inquiry 57, no. 5–6 (2014): 535–579.

Carrinho  

Sem produtos

Envio 0,00 €
Total 0,00 €

Carrinho Encomendar

PayPal

Pesquisa