Meta-Ontology after Quine and Carnap

This doctoral research examines the development of contemporary meta-ontology in the wake of the influential philosophical contributions of Willard Van Orman Quine and Rudolf Carnap. Their differing approaches fundamentally transformed the nature of ontological inquiry within analytic philosophy and continue to shape debates concerning the meaning, method and legitimacy of ontology.

Quine argued that ontological commitment is determined by the entities quantified over in our best scientific theories, thereby grounding ontology within the framework of naturalized ontology and formal logic. Carnap, by contrast, maintained that many ontological disputes arise from the adoption of different linguistic or conceptual frameworks, distinguishing between internal questions posed within a framework and external questions concerning the choice of framework itself. Together, their views shifted the focus of ontology from traditional metaphysical speculation toward questions of language, logic, scientific practice and conceptual analysis.

Building upon these foundational perspectives, this dissertation investigates how contemporary philosophers have responded to the challenges posed by Quine and Carnap. It examines the principal meta-ontological positions; including realist, deflationary, and Neo-Carnapian approaches and analyses how each interprets the nature of ontological commitment and the possibility of objective ontological knowledge. Particular attention is given to the continuing debate over whether ontology can provide objective answers to questions of existence or whether ontological claims are ultimately dependent upon linguistic, conceptual, or pragmatic frameworks.

The central focus of this thesis is to examine how contemporary meta-ontology has developed in response to Quine's criterion of ontological commitment and Carnap's framework approach. By critically evaluating realist, deflationary and Neo-Carnapian perspectives, the dissertation aims to clarify the nature of ontological commitment and assess the continuing possibility of systematic ontology within contemporary analytic philosophy.

Research Concerns

• The status and legitimacy of ontological inquiry in analytic philosophy following the critiques of metaphysics developed by Quine and Carnap.
• The implications of Quine's criterion of ontological commitment and Carnap's distinction between internal and external questions for understanding the nature and methodology of ontology.
• The viability of systematic metaphysics after the linguistic turn and the emergence of contemporary meta-ontology.
• The extent to which contemporary realist, deflationary, and Neo-Carnapian approaches provide coherent accounts of ontological commitment and the nature of existence.

Research Questions

1. What conception of ontological commitment emerges from Quine's naturalized approach to ontology?
2. How does Carnap's distinction between internal and external questions reshape the nature of ontological inquiry?
3. In what sense can systematic metaphysics remain viable after the linguistic turn?
4. How do contemporary realist, deflationary, and Neo-Carnapian approaches respond to the challenges posed by Quine and Carnap?
5. To what extent does contemporary meta-ontology provide a coherent account of ontological commitment and the nature of existence?

Methodology

This research adopts an analytical philosophical methodology grounded in conceptual analysis, historical interpretation and critical evaluation of philosophical arguments. The study examines the primary works of Quine and Carnap alongside contemporary contributions to meta-ontology in order to assess their respective conceptions of ontology and ontological commitment.

The research employs comparative analysis to evaluate the strengths and limitations of Quinean, Carnapian, realist, deflationary and Neo-Carnapian approaches. Particular emphasis is placed on conceptual clarification, logical analysis and the examination of competing accounts of ontological commitment, linguistic frameworks and metaphysical methodology. Rather than advancing empirical claims, the dissertation seeks to assess the coherence, explanatory power and philosophical significance of contemporary meta-ontological theories through rigorous critical argumentation.

Literature

1. Carnap, Rudolf. Empiricism, Semantics, and Ontology. Revue Internationale de Philosophie 4 (1950): 20–40.
2. Quine, W. V. O. Word and Object. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1960.
3. Blatti, Stephan, and Sandra Lapointe (eds.). Ontology after Carnap. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.
4. Thomasson, Amie L. Ontology Made Easy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.
5. Sider, Theodore. Writing the Book of the World. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.
6. Hofweber, Thomas. Ontology and the Ambitions of Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.

Supervisor

Ao. Univ.-Prof. Dr. Christian KANZIAN

Institute of Christian Philosophy

PhD student

Mag. Sifil Joseph

Sifil.Joseph@student.uibk.ac.at