The Explosion of Being: Ideological Kinds in Theory Choice

Finocchiaro, Peter

doi:10.1093/pq/pqz005

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…I prefer my linguistic characterization, for reasons I state in Finocchiaro (2021, 961-63). I do say much more in Finocchiaro (2019a). See, also, Cowling (2013) and Lewis (1986).…”

Section: Four Different Approaches To Parsimonymentioning

confidence: 91%

Puzzle About Parsimony

Finocchiaro¹

2022

Dialectica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, I argue for the instability of an increasingly popular position about how metaphysicians ought to regard parsimony. This instability is rooted in an unrecognized tension between two claims. First, we as metaphysicians ought to minimize the number of ontological kinds we posit. Second, it is not the case that we ought to minimize the number of ideological expressions we employ, especially when those expressions are of the same ideological kind (e.g. the compositional predicates "is a part of" and "overlaps"). I argue that the two claims are in tension with one other. At the very least, minimizing the number of ontological kinds posited entails minimizing the number of expressions employed---more specifically, the "ontologically committing" predicates. But, plausibly, the tension runs deeper than that. I suggest that minimizing the number of ontological kinds just is a specific way of minimizing the number of ideological expressions employed in stating a theory. The two activities target the same aspect of reality, the world's metaphysical structure. I end by evaluating three different responses to this puzzle. Ultimately, I suggest that metaphysicians should treat the minimization of the number of ideological expressions as more important than it currently is treated.

show abstract

“…I prefer my linguistic characterization, for reasons I state in Finocchiaro (2021, 961-63). I do say much more in Finocchiaro (2019a). See, also, Cowling (2013) and Lewis (1986).…”

Section: Four Different Approaches To Parsimonymentioning

confidence: 91%

Puzzle About Parsimony

Finocchiaro¹

2022

Dialectica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…See, among many others,Williamson (2007),Ladyman et al (2007),Thomasson (2007),Thomasson (2015), Huemer (2009),Chalmers et al (2009),Ladyman (2012),Paul (2012),Ross et al (2013),Kriegel (2013),Willard (2013Willard ( , 2014,Blatti and Lapointe (2016),Benovsky (2016),Cappelen et al (2016), Brenner (2017,Chakravartty (2017),Saatsi (2017),Beebee (2018),Bradley (2018a, b),Finocchiaro (2019),Finocchiaro (2021),Barber (2020),Bryant (2020), andSider (2020).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Theoretical virtues and the methodological analogy between science and metaphysics

Brenner

2023

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Metaphysicians often claim that some metaphysical theory should (or shouldn't) be believed because it exhibits (or fails to exhibit) theoretical virtues such as simplicity. Metaphysicians also sometimes claim that the legitimacy of these sorts of appeals to theoretical virtues are vindicated by the similar appeals to theoretical virtues which scientists make in scientific theory choice. One objection to this methodological move is to claim that the metaphysician misdescribes the role that theoretical virtues play within science. In this paper I defend the metaphysician's use of theoretical virtues against this objection.

show abstract

“… See Turner (2016) for an attempt to make sense of a quantifier-free fundamental metaphysics. For more careful discussions of ideological parsimony and ideological kinds, seeCowling (2013);Finocchiaro (2019). For an alternative approach, seeRubio (2022).Interestingly, on Rubio's approach, presentism is expressively weaker than fourdimensionalism and is therefore not less ideologically parsimonious.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal quantifier relativism

Finocchiaro

2023

Inquiry

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, I introduce a quantifier-pluralist theory of time, temporal quantifier relativism. Temporal quantifier relativism includes a restricted quantifier for every instantaneous moment of time. Though it flies in the face of orthodoxy, it compares favourably to rival theories of time. To demonstrate this, I first develop the basic syntax and semantics of temporal quantifier relativism. I then compare the theory to its rivals on three issues: the passage of time, the analysis of change, and temporal ontology.

show abstract

The Explosion of Being: Ideological Kinds in Theory Choice

Cited by 8 publications

References 26 publications

Puzzle About Parsimony

Puzzle About Parsimony

Theoretical virtues and the methodological analogy between science and metaphysics

Temporal quantifier relativism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About