Философия и метафизика

Автор: Юрий
Опубликовано: 1632 дня назад (24 июня 2013)
Редактировалось: 2 раза — последний 24 июня 2013
0
Голосов: 0

ЛЕКЦИИ С АНАЛИТИЧЕСКОЙ ФИЛОСОФИИ В КИЕВЕ


При содействии фонда Джона Темплтона состоится цикл открытых лекций по аналитической философии.


24 июня

10.00 - 11.20 Майкл Лакс «Что такое компонентная онтология?» (Michael Loux WHAT IS CONSTITUENT ONTOLOGY?)

11.45 - 13.05 Андрей Баумейстер «Томистична традиция и аналитическая философия: Украинский контекст»


25 июня

10.00 - 11.20 Майкл Лакс «Метафизика в аналитической традиции» (METAPHYSICS IN ANALYTICAL TRADITION)

11.45 - 13.05 Мирослав Попович «От аналитически философии к антропологии»


Мероприятия будут проходить в Институте философии имени Г.С. Сковороды НАН Украины (ул. Трехсвятительская 4, ком. 318)

* Профессор Лакс проведет лекции на английском языке. Украинский перевод будет доступен.

Майкл Лакс - профессор университета Нотр Дэйм [Notre Dame] (Индиана, США). Известен своими работами по аналитической метафизики, а также исследованиями философии Аристотеля. Особую популярность получил его учебник по метафизике Metaphysics: A Contemporary Introduction

Philosophical Perspectives, 25, Metaphysics, 2011

RELATIONAL vs. CONSTITUENT ONTOLOGIES

Peter van Inwagen

The University of Notre Dame

In a companion piece to this essay, an essay entitled “What is an Ontological

Category?”,1

I have tried to give an account of the concept of an ontological

category, and I have suggested that ontology is the discipline that attempts to

answer Quine’s “ontological question” — ‘What is there?’ — in terms of a system

of ontological categories. And I have suggested that an ontology is any given such

attempt at an answer.2

Very roughly speaking, in that essay I have defended the

view that there are natural classes — classes whose boundaries are not simply

matters of arbitrary convention — and I have contended that the ontological

categories are natural classes that are in a certain sense very “high” or very

comprehensive.

In the present essay, I’m going simply to assume that we have some sort

of intuitive grasp of these concepts — “natural class”, “ontological category,”

“ontology” (mass term), and “ontology” (count-noun).

I will begin by presenting a classification of ontologies. (This classification ignores the fact that one way to divide ontologies is into “Meinongian” and “NonMeinongian” ontologies. In the sequel, I will proceed on the assumption that

existence and being are the same thing and that everything exists/is. I leave for

another occasion the task of setting out a more general classification of ontologies, a classification that takes into account the fact that the Meinongian/nonMeinongian opposition is at least as important for the taxonomy of ontologies

as is the relational/constituent opposition that is the focus of the present

essay.)

The major division my proposed classification recognizes is a division of

ontologies into monocategorial and polycategorial ontologies. A monocategorial

ontology is an ontology that implies that there is only one primary ontological

category — that there is only one ontological category that is not a subcategory

of any other ontological category,—and that everything belongs to that category.3

That is to say, a monocategorial ontology implies that the universal class is an

ontological category. A polycategorial ontology, of course, implies that there are

two or more primary categories.4

PHILOSOPHICAL PERSPECTIVES 

Встреча в ПХ на подоле | харакири кришнаизм

Нет комментариев. Ваш будет первым!