Talk:World Hypotheses

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Philosophy: Literature / Metaphysics / Epistemology / Contemporary Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature
	Metaphysics
	Epistemology
	Contemporary philosophy

ontology as category[edit]

I added this category because the point of this particular book is understanding world views, which go to the heart of ontological questions. In other words, Pepper attempts to explain ontology through the use of his 'world views.' I'm not sure why ontology would be removed. In fact, some argue that metaphysics and ontology are roughly the same thing; to add one and remove the other seems contradictory. Briholt 01:35, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you read WP:CAT#Some general guidelines, you will see that pages are not usually put both in a subcategory and in a parent category. WPProject Philosophy doesn't keep to this rule for major pages, and there are obviously exceptions to it. To answer the question: The reason that I took it out of cat:ontology when I put it in cat:metaphysics lit is that the latter cat puts it in cat:metaphysics, and from what you have written that is what the book is about. If you think it is important that the article be included in cat:ontology, which is a sub-cat of cat:metaphysics, as well as in cat:metaphysics through being in cat:metaphysics lit, then just revert my revert.Anarchia 04:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation. That actually taught me something.Briholt (talk) 20:22, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]