The Explosion of Being

Ideological Kinds in Theory Choice

Bibliographic Data

ID3134068
AuthorsPeter Finocchiaro (0000-0003-4060-7061, Wuhan University, PRC, corresponding author)
Year2019
Volume69
Issue276
Pages486-510
Publication date2019-07-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueThe Philosophical Quarterly (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0031-8094 • E-ISSN: 1467-9213
PublisherOxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1093/pq/pqz005
OpenAlexW2913579832
LanguageEN
Citations received11
References cited30

In this paper, I develop a novel account of ideological kinds. I first present some conceptual territory regarding the use of Occam’s Razor in minimizing ontological commitments. I then present the analogous device for minimizing ideological commitments, what I call the Comb. I argue that metaphysicians ought to use both or none at all. This means that those who endorse a principle of ontological parsimony ought to also endorse some principle of ideological parsimony, where we ought to prefer the metaphysical theory that employs less ideology. In support of one such principle, I propose a novel account of ideological kinds. I individuate ideological kinds based on the satisfaction of two conditions: interdefinability and sameness of syntactic category. Ultimately, I think this account is the best available. It does, however, produce surprising results. For instance, my account shows that quantifier pluralism is ideologically parsimonious. I end by replying to some objections.

Epistemology · Ideology · Metaphysics · occam · Occam's razor · Philosophy of language · Pluralism (philosophy) · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Computer Science · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · Law · Philosophy · Philosophy and History of Science · Philosophy and Theoretical Science

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub