Ontology Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.Anti-spam check. Do not fill this in! === Flat vs polycategorical vs hierarchical === One way to divide ontologies is by the number of basic categories they use. ''Monocategorical'' or ''one-category ontologies'' hold that there is only one basic category while ''polycategorical ontologies'' imply that there are several distinct basic categories.<ref name="Inwagen"/><ref>{{cite book |last=Paul |first=L. A. |title=Being, Freedom, and Method: Themes From the Philosophy of Peter van Inwagen |date=2017 |publisher=Oxford University Press |chapter-url=https://philpapers.org/rec/PAUAOC-4 |via=PhilPapers |chapter=A One Category Ontology|pages=32β62 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240128093746/https://philpapers.org/rec/PAUAOC-4 |archive-date= Jan 28, 2024 }}</ref><ref name="Thomasson2">{{cite web |last=Thomasson |first=Amie |title=Categories |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/categories/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=27 December 2020 |date=2019 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.today/20150708032808/http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/categories/ |archive-date= 8 Jul 2015 }}</ref> Another way to divide ontologies is through the notion of ontological hierarchy. Hierarchical ontologies assert that some entities exist on a more fundamental level and that other entities depend on them. Flat ontologies, on the other hand, deny such a privileged status to any entities.<ref>{{cite book |last=Brassier |first=Ray |title=Under Influence β Philosophical Festival Drift (2014) |date=2015 |publisher=Omnia |pages=64β80 |url=https://philpapers.org/rec/BRADAF |chapter=Deleveling: Against 'Flat Ontologies'}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Epstein |first=Brian |title=Social Ontology |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/social-ontology/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |access-date=27 November 2020 |date=2018}}</ref> Jonathan Schaffer provides an overview of these positions by distinguishing between ''flat'' ontologies (non-hierarchical), ''sorted'' ontologies (polycategorical non-hierarchical) and ''ordered'' ontologies (polycategorical hierarchical).<ref name=Schaffer>{{cite book |author=[[Jonathan Schaffer]] |chapter=On What Grounds What Metametaphysics |title=Metametaphysics |chapter-url=http://www.jonathanschaffer.org/grounds.pdf |editor=Chalmers |editor2=Manley |editor3=Wasserman |isbn=978-0199546046 |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2009 |pages=347β383 }}</ref> ''Flat'' ontologies are only interested in the difference between existence and non-existence. They are ''flat'' because each flat ontology can be represented by a simple set containing all the entities to which this ontology is committed. An influential exposition<ref>{{cite journal |last=Quine |first=Willard V. |title=On What There Is |journal=Review of Metaphysics |date=1948 |volume=2 |issue=1 |pages=21β38 |url=https://philpapers.org/rec/QUIOWT-11}}</ref> of this approach comes from [[Willard Van Orman Quine]], which is why it has been referred to as the [[Meta-ontology#Quinean approach|Quinean]] approach to [[meta-ontology]].<ref name=Schaffer/><ref>{{cite web |last=Bricker |first=Phillip |title=Ontological Commitment |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ontological-commitment/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |date=2016}}</ref> This outlook does not deny that the existing entities can be further subdivided and may stand in various relations to each other. These issues are questions for the more specific sciences, but they do not belong to ontology in the Quinean sense. ''Polycategorical'' ontologies are concerned with the categories of being. Each polycategorical ontology posits a number of categories. These categories are exclusive and exhaustive: every existing entity belongs to exactly one category.<ref name=Schaffer/> A recent example of a polycategorical ontology is [[E. J. Lowe (philosopher)|E. J. Lowe]]'s four-category-ontology.<ref name=Lowe>{{cite book |last1=Lowe |first1=E. J. |title=The Four-Category Ontology: A Metaphysical Foundation for Natural Science |publisher=Clarendon Press |isbn=978-0199254392 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=s7ISDAAAQBAJ |language=en |chapter=2. The Four-Category Ontology and its Rivals|year=2006 }}</ref> The four categories are object, kind, mode, and attribute. The fourfold structure is based on two distinctions. The first distinction is between substantial entities (objects and kinds) and non-substantial entities (modes and attributes). The second distinction is between particular entities (objects and modes) and universal entities (kinds and attributes). Reality is built up through the interplay of entities belonging to different categories: particular entities instantiate universal entities, and non-substantial entities characterize substantial entities.<ref name=Lowe/><ref>{{cite web |last=Miller |first=J. T. M. |title=Lowe, Edward Jonathan |url=https://iep.utm.edu/lowe-ej/ |website=Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy}}</ref> ''Hierarchical'' ontologies are interested in the degree of fundamentality of the entities they posit. Their main goal is to figure out which entities are fundamental and how the non-fundamental entities depend on them. The concept of fundamentality is usually defined in terms of [[Grounding (metaphysics)|metaphysical grounding]].<ref>{{cite web |last=Tahko |first=Tuomas E. |title=Fundamentality |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fundamentality/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |date=2018}}</ref> Fundamental entities are different from non-fundamental entities because they are not grounded in other entities.<ref name=Schaffer/><ref>{{cite journal |last=Mehta |first=Neil |title=Can Grounding Characterize Fundamentality? |journal=Analysis |date=2017 |volume=77 |issue=1 |pages=74β79 |doi=10.1093/analys/anx044 |url=https://philpapers.org/rec/NEICGC}}</ref> For example, it is sometimes held that elementary particles are more fundamental than the macroscopic objects (like chairs and tables) they compose. This is a claim about the grounding-relation between microscopic and macroscopic objects. Schaffer's priority monism is a recent form of a hierarchical ontology. He holds that on the most fundamental level there exists only one thing: the world as a whole. This thesis does not deny our common-sense intuition that the distinct objects we encounter in our everyday affairs like cars or other people exist. It only denies that these objects have the most fundamental form of existence.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Schaffer |first=Jonathan |title=Monism: The Priority of the Whole |journal=The Philosophical Review |date=1 January 2010 |volume=119 |issue=1 |pages=31β76 |doi=10.1215/00318108-2009-025 |url=https://read.dukeupress.edu/the-philosophical-review/article-abstract/119/1/31/2871/Monism-The-Priority-of-the-Whole |language=en |issn=0031-8108}}</ref> An example of a ''hierarchical'' ontology in [[Continental philosophy]] comes from [[Nicolai Hartmann]]. He asserts that reality is made up of four [[Integrative level|levels]]: the inanimate, the biological, the psychological, and the spiritual.<ref name="Poli">{{cite web |last=Poli |first=Roberto |title=Nicolai Hartmann |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nicolai-hartmann/#LeveReal |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |date=2017}}</ref> These levels form a hierarchy in the sense that the higher levels depend on the lower levels while the lower levels are indifferent to the higher levels.<ref name="Hartmann">{{cite book |last=Hartmann |first=Nicolai |title=New Ways of Ontology |publisher=Transaction Publishers |isbn=978-1412847049 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4PyJfVZn-rcC |language=en |chapter=9 Dependence and Autonomy in the Hierarchy of Strata|year= 2012 }}</ref> Summary: Please note that all contributions to Christianpedia may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here. You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see Christianpedia:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission! Cancel Editing help (opens in new window) Discuss this page