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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Quine's criterion grounds ontological commitment in the bound variables of our best scientific theories, which are themselves subject to empirical revision.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The same ontological commitment can be expressed using different bound variables through logical paraphrase, so variables don't uniquely determine what exists.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Many uncontroversial existents (properties, numbers, abstract objects) may not appear as bound variables in our best current scientific theories.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Empirical revisability of theories doesn't establish that ontology itself should shift—we might revise our descriptions while ontology remains stable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Bound variables in quantified statements directly express what a theory claims exists, making them a reliable indicator of ontological commitment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Tying ontology to empirically revisable theories prevents metaphysical speculation untethered from evidence and scientific practice.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This criterion provides an objective, syntactic method for comparing ontological claims across different theories without vague interpretation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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