Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter May 2, 2015

Do Ontological Categories Exist?

  • Aaron M. Griffith EMAIL logo
From the journal Metaphysica


This paper concerns the ontological status of ontological categories (e.g., universal, particular, substance, property, relation, kind, object, etc.). I consider E. J. Lowe’s argument for the view that ontological categories do not exist and point out that it has some undesirable consequences for his realist ontology. I go on to argue that the main premise in Lowe’s argument – that ontological categories cannot be categorized – is false and then develop a conception of ontological categories as formal ontological kinds.


Armstrong, D. M. 1997. A World of States of Affairs. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511583308Search in Google Scholar

Koslicki, K. 2012. “Varieties of Ontological Dependence.” In Metaphysical Grounding, edited by F.Corriea, and B.Schnieder, 186213. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139149136.008Search in Google Scholar

Lowe, E. J. 2007. “Metaphysics as the Science of Essence,” Métaphysique contemporaine: propriétés, mondes possibles, et personnes, ed. E.Garcia & F.Nef, Paris: J. Vrin, 85–117.Search in Google Scholar

Lowe, E. J. 1999. “Abstraction, Properties, and Immanent Realism.” Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy2:195205.10.5840/wcp201999226Search in Google Scholar

Lowe, E. J. 2001. The Possibility of Metaphysics. New York: Clarendon Press.10.1093/0199244995.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Lowe, E. J. 2006. The Four-Category Ontology: A Metaphysical Foundation for Natural Science. New York: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lowe, E. J. 2010. “Ontological Dependence.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by E. N.Zalta, in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2015-5-2
Published in Print: 2015-5-25

©2015 by De Gruyter

Downloaded on 21.2.2024 from
Scroll to top button