Do people say

English sentences with ontology in context,

299 exact matches

We should be committed to the ontology of objects/entities that support our best scientific theories, mathematical and logical objects/entities included (which I argue would be the metaphysical "scaffolding" of material reality).
source: Redditshow contexthide context

The secret is a more robust ontology.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Dictionary
ontology (noun)

  • The branch of metaphysics that addresses the nature or essential characteristics of being and of things that exist; the study of being qua being.
  • The theory of a particular philosopher or school of thou...
  • The theory of a particular philosopher or school of thought concerning the fundamental types of entity in the universe.
  • A logical system involving theory of classes, developed by Stanislaw Lesniewski (1886-1939).
  • A structure of concepts or entities within a domain, organized by relationships; a system model.
source: Wiktionary

ontology

  • What it means for something to exist.
source: Urban Dictionary

show more

So I guess philosophy to me is a network of ideas, where ontology, epistemology, metaphysics, ethics, etc are all floating around interacting with each other in different ways.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

), but it also seems as though ethics can influence the way we do epistemology or metaphysics, or ontology, etc.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

And the thing is, keeping with the Aristotelian modality, once you fully isolate everything and put it in its right place it's ready to receive the "product" imprint so when the OOO/SR folk talk about flat ontology they are not kidding.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Without critical thinking on the methodological level, latent ontologies and epistemologies parade as scientific results.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Does it extract concepts and match them against an ontology?
source: Redditshow contexthide context

However, as few Christian apologeticists are concerned with philosophy, specifically ontology, this discussion is rarely addressed.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

This is also related to larger philosophical discussions of ontology.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

It looks like TMSU effectively gives you a storage system with multiple ontologies.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Are there perhaps different safety properties (such as atomically inserting or removing a file from multiple ontologies) that TMSU offers that can't be provided in conventional POSIX filesystems?
source: Redditshow contexthide context

The ontology of the wavefunction is still an exceptionally important topic in the philosophy of physics.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

So I can still attach some importance to the question of the wavefunction's ontology even though we can't actually measure it directly.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

In the same way it's not clear that our conscious experience of time is unimportant to the ontology of time itself.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

If you're trying to determine the ontology or phenomenology of something, reputation is worth shit.
source: Reddit Warningshow contexthide context

If we have to commit to intrinsic properties, then an ontology purely of 'structure' might not do.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Mixed with philosophy, cosmology, and ontology.
source: Reddit

Without an ontology or list of foods that are "clean", it's not easy to connect it to the literature.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

That the "crush" point for a real triangle in the real world has primacy in ontology over the objects of Plato's third space.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Ontology vs teleology
source: Reddit

Unless the ontology of such claims is laid out, I’m going to remain skeptical.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Perspectivism, ontology, politics, Ethics, society, and life in general.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

This is a really basic level philosophy of language concept, we allow people to disagree or argue over the properties of an object without positing infinite new objects into our ontology every time such disagreement arises.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

My reply to that is that this notion of ontology seems useless because, probably, everything in some sense exists; it just takes the right universe.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

In fact, while the language can at times seem overly analytic, I think the concepts Floridi is dealing with are all pretty continentally oriented (simulation, virtuality, ontology, etc.).
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Naturally I have clarified the issue of Yogacarin ontology by showing you the article of a scholar who corrects this misunderstanding.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

They make no ontological statements - rather, they taught that our attempt to understand ontology through rational reasoning is the cause of our suffering (i.e.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Our attempt to understand ontology?
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Buddhism is not an ontological view so there is no "attempt" to understand ontology as if there is some sort of pre-existent reality that the mind falls short of comprehending.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

You're using the language of radicals - talking about how the language of "rights" situates struggles in a liberal conversation, talking about how different forms of oppression reinforce each other - but the almost surreal thing to me is that you're doing this in order to dismiss people who aren't willing to postpone their struggle until they find themselves in an anarchist society to be quiet and wait their turn, and dismissing people who speak out beforehand as social justice warriors, using the language (and agreeing with the ontology - "look, sjws, they're real and are to be mocked!")
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Neural nets... Hmm... All the search features of the Mneumonese editor are done using a clean, real number-free ontology.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Have you already understood the limitations of a material ontology?
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Ontology: A is A.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

As far as understanding the limits of material ontology, I come from the side of having also studied a lot of eastern philosophy, so it's kind of second nature to me at this point.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

As to your question, Schneider's work on political entrepreneurship, Colin Hay's political ontology of the state, Kenneth Waltz's Theory of International Politics, Clausewitz's On War, Bartol's Criminal Behavior: A psychosocial approach, the Analytical Narrative Project by Bates et al, and Layne's Kant or Can't are all works aspects of which could be incorporated into anarcho-capitalist "sociology" without causing a regressive theoretical paradigm shift.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Moral Ontology is concerned with the existence of moral values and obligations - where did they come from?
source: Redditshow contexthide context

I certainly don't understand the term "subjective ontology".
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Ontology by definition is about the nature of objects.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Religious metaphysics and ontology can be logically self-consistent, but it is not remotely the best philosophical stance to take given known scientific facts.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Your example of Newtonian physics (or "Classical Mechanics", more specifically) still being used today is a good one; however, just because a physical theory can be very successful when applied to certain distance scales does not imply that its ontology is correct.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Indeed, I would argue Orr is the opposiite of the failing existentialist because he is not subject to society rather being within himself Orr is the character that provides the route and insight into an ontology.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

An ontology of self being a tautology.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Isn't this similar to the concept of "ontology"?
source: Redditshow contexthide context

So when you study your own mind, you understand how the mind creates this "mental ontology".
source: Redditshow contexthide context

And I don't want to go down those rabbit holes until we're arguing ontology or something else 100 degrees removed from the problem.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Since the original point was you confusing very basic aspects of ontology and your confusion would just be completely silly to a mereological nihilist, this is just again trivially false.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

It's your ontology that's sloppy.
source: Redditshow contexthide context

Also, it's easier to explain quantitative research to nervous administrators over object-oriented ontology, and the old Uni atmosphere that allowed theory to flourish has kind of disappeared.
source: Redditshow contexthide context