On the adequacy of requirements for foundational ontologies

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
In this very issue, Augusto (2022) formulates two requirements upon which to evaluate the adequacy of a foundational ontology. Specifically, the ontological categories: (i) should be understood as the most general kinds of things and (ii) are organized in a non-overlapping finite hierarchy. On the basis of such constraints, he claims that most existing foundational ontologies engineered in the context of Applied Ontology, including the UFO-B ontology, are inadequate. In this article, first we show that his objection against UFO-B can be dissipated by pointing to a trivial terminological confusion. We then argue that his two constraints are not plausible. Then, we show that the disagreement between our point of view and Augusto’s framework is not restricted to those two constraints but extends over the notion of conceptualization of reality.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
GUIOTA
Upload history
First archival date: 2022-03-28
Latest version: 2 (2022-03-30)
View other versions
Added to PP
2022-03-28

Downloads
190 (#38,484)

6 months
190 (#2,546)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?