In Defense of Parfit’s Ontology
Abstract Parfit (2011, 2017) denies that committing to the existence of reasons is ontologically costly. To motivate his denial, Mintz-Woo (2018) thinks Parfit forwards two arguments: the plural senses argument from elimination and the argument from empty ontology. Mintz-Woo believes he has “debunked” both arguments. In what follows, we do three things. First, we argue that his objections to the arguments fail or at best miss the point. Second, we argue that even if our independent responses fail, his responses meet an unfortunate dilemma. Lastly, we address his concerns about the relationship between Parfit’s ontology and truth.
Authors
- Evan Jack
- Mustafa Khuramy (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0133-2889)
Institutions
- Tulane University (US)
- University of Hertfordshire (GB)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Acta Analytica
- Published
- 2025-02-22
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s12136-025-00629-3
- Primary Topic
- Philosophy and Theoretical Science
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00