Instead, if what we say or believe about reality matches the ontologically objective way reality is, then we have truth, no matter our level of certainty or consensus or how we arrived at it.
Heidegger feared that modern technology imbues humankind with such power that when they ontologically treat or consider beings–be they technological, beings of nature, or even other humans–our sense of power and our scientific knowledge cause us to see them first (and often exclusively) as raw materials for systems of production and consumption or simply as resources for our personal benefit.
Thorndike’s view of education is rooted in a foundationalist metaphysics which maintains that the self and the world are ontologically discreet and causally related.
In chapter 3, Campbell deftly explains how food became a marker of social and cultural capital as the new nobility rose among the ranks and how science (in the form of health manuals), the church (in the form of Christine doctrine), and the state (in the form of sumptuary laws and other regulations) provided the necessary scaffolding for food to be perceived as ontologically tied to social class status.
Even as the world’s environment is dying, humans have retreated into the Oasis (Ontologically Anthropocentric Sensory Immersive Simulation), an all-encompassing virtual reality where social interaction and commerce occurs.
Huemer’s objections here are astute and to the point, arguing that transfinite arithmetic is founded on the ontologically suspect theory of sets, and that a mathematical formalization of a paradox does not in itself do anything to resolve the paradox.
The result of correlationist thinking, so the argument goes, leaves humans stuck in an epistemological cul-de-sac, eternally wondering about our own thoughts and existences without being able to think ontologically about the larger world outside of those thoughts and existences.
As previous stated, learning analytics will change education epistemologically, ontologically, systemically, and politically, and there is likely nothing that can be done to prevent these changes.
Laing (1960/1965) maintained that the experience of dialogue with another led the way for an individual to become recognized as a person, or as Laing described, an ontologically secure person.
In this book B., a longtime student of Whitehead and an original thinker in his own right, seeks to establish a new conceptual relationship between science and religion by approaching reality as ontologically relational.
“Genealogical” arguments work in various ways against Brahmins’ claims to special status on the basis of their ancestry, noting, for instance, the impossibility of proving claims of caste purity reaching back through multiple generations and the contradiction involved in asserting that all creatures originate from a single being (e.g., Prajapati) yet are divisible into ontologically distinct classes.