Ontological Disputes and Stalemates: Learning the Pluralist Lesson
Several ontological debates seem to give rise to a stalemate: the competing theories have equivalent advantages and disadvantages, no tie-breaking considerations are in sight, so it is not possible to say which theory is the best, or is true. What is the lesson to be learned in these circumstances? In this paper, I suggest that stalemates in suitably mature ontological debates are compatible with the idea that all the involved theories are true. I then proceed to develop a form of truth pluralism, by invoking the notions of model and of model-world resemblance. This allows one to articulate pluralism in terms of correspondence truth in a novel way, which can appeal to theorists with both realist and anti-realist orientations.
Date / Time / Place
June 22nd / 16:30 / Aula 0A