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 of ontological commitment applies only to indispensable quantification, not merely convenient theoretical shorthand.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The distinction between 'indispensable' and 'convenient' is too vague to guide ontological commitment reliably in practice.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a theory systematically requires quantification over Xs to achieve its best formulation, that constitutes indispensability regardless of intent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Rejecting convenient quantifications as non-committing risks hiding real ontological assumptions in notational choices and paraphrases.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Ontological commitment should track genuine theoretical necessity, not linguistic convenience or notational flexibility.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.We can reformulate many convenient quantifications (e.g., abstract objects) into nominalist paraphrases without loss of empirical content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Conflating indispensable and merely convenient quantification inflates our ontology beyond what explanatory success requires.
      ?

      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.