Nicholas Noyola
University of Lucerne
Brian Embry argues that Francisco Suarez’s seemingly contradictory statements about Entia Rationis are best understood within the framework of ontological pluralism. In response to the objection that ontological pluralism is unintelligible, Embry offers a Suarezian argument against the possibility of ontological monism. I argue that Embry makes the illicit assumption that ontological monists are committed to the univocal sense of the term “being”. Furthermore, Embry assumes the object-directedness of thought entails the existence of the object thought is directed toward. Finally, Embry sacrifices the Suarezian commitment to ontological monism to construct his proposal. I attempt to offer a neutralist reading of the Suarezian theses, one that does not sacrifice ontological monism and which shows how the Suarezian theses cohere nicely.
Chair: Emma Jaura
Time: September 8th, 16:00-16:30
Location: HS E.002
SOPhiA 2026 