• camuswetdream
    7
    Hello good friends,

    Do you think that Quine maintains the same view of ontology in “A Logistical Approach to the Ontological Problem,” “On What There Is,” and “Ontic Decision”? Or does he change his conception over the progression of his writing?

  • Moliere
    4.7k
    Hrm. I guess the semester has started up again, hasn't it?

    :D
  • camuswetdream
    7
    no idea whatcha talking about friend ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)....Yeah us undergrads are getting slaughtered in a particular analytic phil course.
  • Wayfarer
    22.4k
    That's definitely an assignment. Neat ASCI art, though.
  • Moliere
    4.7k
    It can help to write out some thoughts. Why not give it a try?

    People will be more amenable to conversing with a post of substance and exchanging ideas if not in the form of an obvious class essay question. (And, hey, if you're actually reading the articles and discussing them, you wouldn't even be cheating -- just getting feedback).
  • quineAccepted Answer
    119
    Check out SEP (http://plato.stanford.edu) entry on Quine.

    Basically, Quine divides existent things into two sorts: physical objects and mathematical objects. Quine made an emphasis on theories of reference than on theories of meaning. It is important for Quine to see how quantifiers quantify over variables. Quine says, "To be is to be the value of a variable." Mathematical objects, especially sets, are accepted because of their usefulness. Sets can include various physical objects. For example, the set of chairs includes chairs as physical objects.
    Any question?
  • camuswetdream
    7
    I made a more conversational post. Sorry, didn't mean for this to come off as a hw assignment.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.