Abstract
The aim of this paper is to offer two novel solutions to two perennial problems of categorial ontology, namely, the problem of the categorial structure: how are the categories related to one another? And the problem of categorial completeness: how is the completeness of a proposed list of categories justified? First, I argue that a system of categories should have a structure such that there is a most basic category that is a bearer of all other categories and that has what I shall call “combinatorial conditions”. To do so, I compare this approach to categorial structure with the approaches given by substantialist (Heil 2012), mereological (Betti 2016), factualist (Armstrong 1997), and geo (Tambassi 2018) ontologies. Second, I argue that the problem of categorial completeness is only a problem for certain ontologies. In this connection, I explore views on categorial completeness proposed by substantialists and geo-ontologists. Lastly, I conclude that factualism does a better job of accounting for categorial structure and categorial completeness than other categorial ontologies.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aquinas, T. (1856). “Sententia Libri Metaphysicae”. In www.corpusthomisticum.org/iopera.html.
Aristotle, (1963). “Categories”. In Categories and De Interpretatione. Oxford: Clarendon Press (edited and translated by J. L. Ackrill).
Armstrong, D. M. (1997). A world of states of affairs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Betti, A. (2016). Against facts. Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Britus, R. (1981). “Quaestiones super Librum Praedicamentorum” (§viii). In Cahiers de l'institut du moyen-âge grec et latin, 39(1981), 88–96.
Cumpa, J. (2018a). ‘Are properties particular, universal, or neither?’ American Philosophical Quarterly, 55(2), 165–174.
Cumpa, J., (2018b). ‘A naturalist ontology of instantiation,’ Ratio 31/2, 2018a, 155–164.
Hartmann, N. (1953). New ways of ontology, Henry Regnery Company.
Heil, J. (2012). The world as we find it. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kant, I. (1965). Critique of the pure reason. (N. Kemp Smith translation). London: St. Martin’s Press.
Lowe, E. J. (2005). The four-category ontology: a metaphysical foundation for natural science. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Parmenides, (1984). “On nature”. In D. Gallop (ed.), Parmenides of Elea: fragments (Text and Translation). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Plato. (1997). Sophist. In M. J. Cooper (Ed.), Plato: complete works. Hackett: Indianapolis.
Plotinus, (1968). “On the genera of being”. In Enneads ( Greek text with English translation by A.H. Armstrong). Cambridge: Loeb Classical Library.
Porphyry (1880). “In Aristotelis Categorias”. In Busse, A. (ed.), Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca, Vol. iv.i.
Ryle, G. (1938). “Categories”. In Collected papers, 2 Vols., Hutchinson & Co, Vol. II, pp. 170–184.
Simplicius, (1907). “In Aristotelis Categorias Commentarium”. In Kalbfleisch, C. (ed.), Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca, Vol. Viii.
Tambassi, T. (2018). ‘What kind of ontological categories for geo-ontologies?’. Acta Analitica. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12136-018-0370-7.
Wittgenstein, L. (1922). Tractatus Logico–Philosophicus. Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Acknowledgements
This article has been made possible thanks to the support provided by the Talent Attraction Program (Project ID: 2016-T1/HUM-1263) from the Consejería de Educación e Investigación de la Comunidad de Madrid.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Cumpa, J. Structure and Completeness: A Defense of Factualism in Categorial Ontology. Acta Anal 34, 145–153 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12136-019-00380-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12136-019-00380-6