Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    All ontological differences are categorial articulations ... — Carmelics
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Ontological pluralism is warranted: all entities, whatever their type, demand the same careful ontological scrutiny.

    All ontological differences are categorial articulations of being, not differences between being and non-being.

    Modality & Possibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Parts and wholes are both authentic aspects of being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Independent and dependent entities are similarly aspects of being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Physical, biological, psychological and spiritual types of being are all manifestations of being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Meinong's theory of objects establishes that non-existent objects (golden mountains, round squares) have genuine Sosein (character) without Sein (being).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If non-existent objects possess determinate properties, then the difference between being and non-being is itself ontologically significant, not merely a categorial distinction within being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Hartmann's collapse of all differences into categorial articulations of being therefore illicitly excludes a domain his own realist commitments cannot explain away.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aquinas's real distinction between esse (act of existing) and essentia entails that essence is genuinely conceivable apart from existence, making non-being a coherent contrast class to being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If essences can be understood as indifferent to existence — as Avicenna and Scotus also argued — then the difference between instantiated and uninstantiated natures is not a difference within being but a difference between being and its absence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Hartmann's claim that all ontological differences are categorial therefore presupposes the very univocity of being that the Scholastic esse-essentia tradition was specifically designed to reject.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Modality & Possibility

    Connections

    1 topic

    Truth & Knowledge5 linked

    Related

    Aquinas's real distinction between esse (act of existing) and essentia entails t...Hartmann's claim that all ontological differences are categorial therefore presu...Hartmann's collapse of all differences into categorial articulations of being th...If essences can be understood as indifferent to existence — as Avicenna and Scot...
    +6 moreShow less
    If non-existent objects possess determinate properties, then the difference betw...Independent and dependent entities are similarly aspects of being.Meinong's theory of objects establishes that non-existent objects (golden mounta...None of these types is 'more being' than any other.Parts and wholes are both authentic aspects of being.Physical, biological, psychological and spiritual types of being are all manifes...

    Similar

    All ontological differences are categorial articulations of being rath...99%There is an ontological difference between a body undergoing translati...79%The notion of difference does not imply the notion of non-identity.78%The disagreement between platonism and fictionalism is ontological, no...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: nicolai-hartmann
    View source passageHide passage
    Hartmann claims in Ontology: Laying the Foundations (1935) that the book “form[s] the prelude to an ontology that I have been working on for two decades,” and that “[a] new critical ontology has become possible. The task is to make it a reality” (v). The book paved the way for a systematic treatment of ontology by introducing (1) the difference between modes of being (the modalities of possibility, necessity and actuality), spheres of being (real and ideal), and ways of being (Dasein and Sosein)
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit