Skip to main content

Inflated Ontology


This illustration is making its way around the more philosophical corners of the interwebs.

In case I've given you an illegible variant of it, here are the captions, in sequence:

1. Shop for a new tie
2. Make macaroni
3. Do cardio
4. Don't inflate your ontology
5. Don't do it.
6. Vacuum the rug.

The fifth cell includes an illustration of a unicorn and the square root of -1 as thoughts in the mind of the character doing various quotidian things.

The warning, then, is not to attribute reality either to imaginary beings or to imaginary numbers.

Leaving unicorns aside, I think there is something odd about the warning as it applies to numbers. The value of any number system, including the numbers we call real and those we call imaginary, consists entirely of its utility. So, for a pragmatist as to math, the square root of -1 stands on the same "ontological" footing as does -1, or as does 1.

But I do like the cute minimalism of the illustrations here. Take the philosophy as you find it.


Labels:

Comments

  1. Francisco MaiaSeptember 17, 2020 at 5:34 PM

    Interesting that I found this post as I searched for an explanation for that picture. What exactly does inflated ontology mean, mathematical pragmatism notwithstanding?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ChristopherSeptember 18, 2020 at 6:39 AM

      As you probably know, because you can google it: ontology is the branch of philosophy that analyzes concepts directly related to being.

      When people talk about "inflated" ontology, they mean that Being is a sort of currency, and their shouldn't be too much of it, that would cheapen it.

      So for example, a nominalist thinks that Lassie and Rin-Tin-Tin are real, but "Doghood" is not real, or not so much anyway. In a sense this is because the nominalist fears the consequences of inflating being by granting it to such abstractions.

      Delete
  2. ORHAN SEVDAJune 28, 2021 at 9:41 AM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  3. ALİ AZİZJuly 13, 2021 at 5:07 AM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousApril 28, 2022 at 2:42 PM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti
7 comments
Read more

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

  Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave.   First, Plato  is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability.  I  only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers
Post a Comment
Read more

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak
13 comments
Read more