Ontological Category Systems: Notes on the Foundations of their Epistemic Architectures

Abstract This paper argues that ontological category systems (OCS) should be assessed against explicit target criteria. To compare the highly diverse OCS, we focus on the epistemic issue of the category problem, not on the ontological one, and examine the system architecture at the bicategorical level. From existing systems we extract mutual exclusiveness , exhaustiveness , and generalness , and add a neglected criterion: recursiveness – the requirement that, at the most general level, the categories also categorize themselves, thereby conceptually closing the system. On this basis we motivate the most defensible number of categories and re-evaluate the traditional divide between universals and particulars in a slightly revised form. The resulting framework clarifies how OCS can remain maximally general while retaining classificatory power and shows why systems that exceed two top-level categories trade generalness for individuation without clear gain.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Metaphysica
Published
2025-10-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1515/mp-2024-0048
Primary Topic
Philosophy and Theoretical Science
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Ontological Category Systems: Notes on the Foundations of their Epistemic Architectures

Norman Meisinger
Metaphysica
Philosophy and Theoretical Science
article

Ontological Category Systems: Notes on the Foundations of their Epistemic Architectures

Norman Meisinger
article en

Abstract

Abstract This paper argues that ontological category systems (OCS) should be assessed against explicit target criteria. To compare the highly diverse OCS, we focus on the epistemic issue of the category problem, not on the ontological one, and examine the system architecture at the bicategorical level. From existing systems we extract mutual exclusiveness , exhaustiveness , and generalness , and add a neglected criterion: recursiveness – the requirement that, at the most general level, the categories also categorize themselves, thereby conceptually closing the system. On this basis we motivate the most defensible number of categories and re-evaluate the traditional divide between universals and particulars in a slightly revised form. The resulting framework clarifies how OCS can remain maximally general while retaining classificatory power and shows why systems that exceed two top-level categories trade generalness for individuation without clear gain.

Metaphysica
University of Bern (CH)
Openalex Percentile: Top 68%
Philosophy and Theoretical Science
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.