Gilles Kassel

In this article, we reassess Twardowski's scientific legacy on the basis of an ontological analysis of his theory of conceptual representation and judgement that breaks with commonly established analyses. In 1903, in his 'The Essence of Concepts', Twardowski posits the concept as part of acts of ‘non-intuitive’ representations. We attribute to the concept the role of bringing to consciousness an object endowed with properties, enabling the subject to think about an arbitrary object. The existence of this immanent thought object, coupled with the fact that the concept is also an object of representation, leads us to bring to light a coherent set of notions concerning judgement, namely that of represented judgement and that of carried judgement. Among the objects thought about, we specify the nature of the affair, distinct from the thing, conferring on the subject a knowledge of evolutions in the world. Finally, to fully characterize Twardowski's ontological psychologism, we mention the nature of the social construct that he attributes to the thought object.

In this article, we pursue the definition of an ontological framework and a species of ontologies called “epistemic ontologies” by focusing on the complex entities, physical and mental, that populate the world. These entities unify other entities on which they unilaterally existentially depend. These complex entities include states of affairs (in the physical sphere) and propositions and events (in the mental sphere). To account for their unity, we appeal to the ontological figure of ‘connection’, in reference to Gustav Bergmann's notion of nexus. On the physical side, we identify different kinds of connections, namely connections of particular qualities to their carrier object, and connections of objects and processes to each other. We conjecture that physical states of affairs are exclusively connections. On the mental side, we equate relations with the conceptual constituents of our knowledge of the world, whose role is to put together entities. We conjecture that there are no physical relations.

In this article, we advocate the use of “epistemic” ontologies, i.e., systems of categories representing our knowledge of the world, rather than the world directly. We first expose a metaphysical framework based on a dual mental and physical realism, which underpins the development of these epistemic ontologies. To this end, we refer to the theories of intentionality and representation established within the school of Franz Brentano at the turn of the 20th century and choose to rehabilitate the notion of a ‘representation object’, as theorized by Kasimir Twardowski. We therefore propose that the categories of epistemic ontologies correspond to ‘general representation objects’. Secondly, we apply these proposals to the treatment of technical artefacts, material qualities of objects and events (notably as a continuation of our previous work on events). This leads us to sketch out a foundational epistemic ontology.

Here, we defend the thesis whereby the event plays a main role of sense in the meaning of certain sentences. This thesis is based on the one hand on recent work in the metaphysics of so-called “happening” entities, which has led to a distinction between concrete physical processes and abstract events, the latter being conceived as psychological constructs accounting for stabilities or changes in the world. Furthermore, we look back at the work on intentionality carried out in the Brentanian school at the turn of the 20th century and we relate abstract events to the mental states of affairs studied by Twardowski but which were then neglected by contemporary philosophers of language. Abstract events, thus characterized, have the contingent property of occurring, when facts obtain and realize them. We suggest that the facts in question correspond to Wittgensteinian states of affairs.

In this essay, we aim to help clarify the nature of so-called 'occurrences' by attributing distinct modes of existence and persistence to processes and events. In doing so, we break with the perdurantism claimed by DOLCE’s authors and we distance ourselves from mereological analyzes like those recently conducted by Guarino to distinguish between 'processes' and 'episodes'. In line with the works of Stout and Galton, we first bring closer (physical) processes and objects in their way of enduring by proposing for processes a notion of dynamic presence (contrasting with a static presence for objects). Then, on the events side, we attribute to them the status of abstract entities by identifying them with objects of thought (by individual and collective subjects), and this allows us to distinguish for themselves between existence and occurrence. We therefore identify them with psychological (or even social) endurants, which may contingently occur.

Here, I lay the foundations of a high-level ontology of particulars whose structuring principles differ radically from the 'continuant' vs. 'occurrent' distinction traditionally adopted in applied ontology. These principles are derived from a new analysis of the ontology of “occurring” or “happening” entities. Firstly, my analysis integrates recent work on the ontology of processes, which brings them closer to objects in their mode of existence and persistence by assimilating them to continuant particulars. Secondly, my analysis distinguishes clearly between processes and events, in order to make the latter abstract objects of thought (alongside propositions). Lastly, I open my ontological inventory to properties and facts, the existence of which is commonly admitted. By giving specific roles to these primitives, the framework allows one to account for static and dynamic aspects of the physical world and for the way that subjects conceive its history: facts account for the life of substances (physical objects and processes), whereas events enable cognitive subjects to account for the life story of substances.

This article presents a formal ontology which accounts for the general nature of artefacts. The objective is to help structure application ontologies in areas where specific artefacts are present - in other words, virtually any area of activity. The conceptualization relies on recent philosophical and psychological research on artefacts, having resulted in a largely consensual theoretical basis. Furthermore, this ontology of artefacts extends the foundational DOLCE ontology and supplements its axiomatization. The conceptual primitives are as follows: artificial entity, intentional production of entities, (state of) capacity, capacity to play a role in actions of a given type, function and functional object. These primitives enable artefacts in general to be characterized as intentionally and successfully produced entities, and isolate an important subclass of “technical” artefacts to which a function is ascribed. Lastly, we emphasize the novelty of this ontology by comparing it with other works with similar objectives.