Online collection of papers by Devitt, Dretske, Guarino, Hochberg, Jackson, Petitot, Searle, Tye, Varzi and other leading thinkers on philosophy and the foundations of cognitive Science. Topics dealt with include: Wittgenstein and Cognitive Science, Content and Object, Logic and Foundations, Language and Linguistics, and Ontology and Mereology.

Foundational ontologies, central constructs in ontological investigations and engineering alike, are based on ontological categories. Firstly proposed by Aristotle as the very ur- elements from which the whole of reality can be derived, they are not easy to identify, let alone partition and/or hierarchize; in particular, the question of their number poses serious challenges. The late medieval philosopher Dietrich of Freiberg wrote around 1286 a tutorial that can help us today with this exceedingly difficult task. In this paper, I discuss (...) ontological categories and their importance for foundational ontologies from both the contemporary perspective and the original Aristotelian viewpoint, I provide the translation from the Latin into English of Dietrich's De origine II with an introductory elaboration, and I extract a foundational ontology–that is in fact a single-category one–from this text rooted in Dietrich's specification of types of subjecthood and his conception of intentionality as causal operation. (shrink)

An important divide in the free will literature—one that is arguably almost as common as the distinction between compatibilism and incompatibilism—concerns the distinction between event and substance causation. As the story typically goes, event-causalists maintain that an action is free only if it is caused by appropriate mental events, and agent-causalists maintain that an action is free only if it is caused directly by a substance (the agent). This paper argues that this dichotomy is a false one. It does this (...) by introducing a new view called Causal Pluralism, which maintains that free will is compatible with both event and substance causation. Furthermore, it is argued that agent-causalists have good reason to adopt Causal Pluralism, and also that that the view has interesting implications for the free will dialectic. (shrink)

Quine claimed that to be is is to be a value of a bound variable. In the paper we assume that this claim contains an important philosophical insight and investigate its background. It is argued that there are two dimensions involved in Quine’s slogan: (i) the distinction between existing and non-existing objects and (ii) the question of the systematic ambiguity of being that can be traced back to Aristotle. At the first sight it is tempting to construe Quine’s criterion according (...) to the first dimension. In this light it appears as an anti-Meinongian device and the Russelian roots of Quine’s philosophy make this interpretation prima facie plausible. However, it is argued that it is the anti-Aristotelian line which is dominant in Quine’s philosophy, and which is ontologically much more interesting. (shrink)

[ES] Desde una perspectiva ontológica tradicional, y con la declarada intención de alejarse del relativismo contemporáneo, el presente escrito busca establecer algunos principios básicos para mantener la posición de la metafísica como el estudio sistemático de la realidad como un todo, y de la ontología como la ciencia del ser, sustentada en una teoría de categorías. Estas categorías están diferenciadas por las características distintivas de existencia e identidad de sus respectivos miembros, tomándose como «categorías ontológicas fundamentales» aquellas en donde sus (...) miembros tienen condiciones para estas características de existencia e identidad que no sean especificables en una forma exhaustiva, en términos de dependencia ontológica, entre esos miembros y los miembros de otras categorías ontológicas. Este escrito hace entonces una revisión de las diferentes teorías de categorías ontológicas, y sus respectivas interpretaciones de cuántas y cuáles categorías deben ser reconocidas. [EN] From a traditional ontological perspective, and with the declared intention to move away from contemporary relativism, this paper aims to establish some basic principles to maintain the position of Metaphysics as the systematic study of reality as a whole, and Ontology as the science of being, based on a theory of categories. These categories are differentiated by the distinctive features of existence and identity of their respective members, taking as «fundamental ontological categories» those where its members have conditions for these characteristics of existence and identity that are not exhaustively specifiable, in terms of ontological dependence, between those members and members of other ontological categories. This paper then makes a revision of the different theories of ontological categories, and their respective interpretations of how many and which categories should be recognized. (shrink)