Ontological Reduction.

1975 ◽  
Vol 84 (3) ◽  
pp. 439
Author(s):  
Harold Hodes ◽  
Reinhardt Grossman

2003 ◽  
Vol 56 (3) ◽  
pp. 613-651 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lodi Nauta

AbstractAt first glance, Lorenzo Valla has much in common with William of Ockham. Both see language as the key to an understanding of the world, criticizing realist ontologies which admit of various abstract entities. Modern scholars have therefore often argued that Valla's transformation of medieval metaphysics and logic is nominalist in spirit and continues Ockhamist nominalism. The article criticizes this widely held interpretation. At closer inspection, Valla's views on ontology and semantics are very different from Ockham's. Apart from the obvious differences in cultural background, they show widely different approaches, methods, and arguments at a more philosophical level.





2011 ◽  
pp. 330-332
Author(s):  
Volker Halbach


2018 ◽  
Vol 95 (4) ◽  
pp. 520-540
Author(s):  
Mohsen Zamani

There are two main theories of ontological commitment: the quantifier view, and the truthmaker view. Since there are some truths that apparently commit us to certain entities, but actually do not, any ontological commitment theory must also contain an ontological reduction theory. Advocates of the quantifier view propose the paraphrasing method of reduction, while some advocates of the truthmaker view propose the supervenience method. In this paper, after a brief discussion of the quantifier view, the author proposes a modified version of truthmaker-based ontology, and shows that a plausible account of the supervenience method can be deduced from his version. He then shows that the supervenience method could explain why the paraphrasing method is successful. The author also argues that according to the truthmaker view we must accept composite objects as something over and above the particles which constitute them.



2012 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 261-286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Holmgren ◽  
Leemon McHenry ◽  


Author(s):  
Abu Rizvi

In a review of Asset Accumulation and Economic Activity by James Tobin, Hyman Minsky outlined three types of macroeconomic approaches after John Maynard Keynes: the neoclassical synthesis, the New Classical approach, and fundamentalist Keynesian scholarship. Each of the three streams of thought identified by Minsky had trouble finding acceptance. Regarding the fundamentalist Keynesians, Minsky’s third group, this chapter suggests why mainstream economists tended to ignore them, attributing this neglect to a form of dogmatism. The bulk of this chapter, though, focuses on criticism leveled against the two other approaches quite directly, namely, that they had inadequate microfoundations. Unless otherwise stated, the microfoundations referred to in this chapter concern the aggregate manifestations of the general equilibrium (of the Arrow-Debreu type) of maximizing individual agents. Also discussed are the arbitrariness of aggregate demand and its implications, the Sonnenschein-Mantel-Debreu theory, and ontological reduction and explanatory reduction.



1975 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 582
Author(s):  
Eric B. Dayton ◽  
Reinhardt Grossmann


1975 ◽  
Vol 25 (101) ◽  
pp. 373
Author(s):  
J. R. Cameron ◽  
Reinhardt Grossmann


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document