DOI: 10.4324/9780415249126-N005-2
Version: v2,  Published online: 2019
Retrieved July 23, 2024, from

References and further reading

  • Ackrill, J.L. (1963) Aristotle: Categories and De Interpretatione, Oxford: Clarendon Press. (Defence of the ‘questions’ approach to Aristotle’s categories.)

  • Baumer, M. (1993) ‘Chasing Aristotle’s Categories Down the Tree of Grammar’, Journal of Philosophical Research 18: 341–449. (Defence of the ‘grammar’ approach to Aristotle’s categories.).

  • Carnap, R. (1931) ‘Überwindung der Metaphysik durch logische Analyse der Sprache’, Erkenntnis 2(1), 219–241; trans., ‘The Elimination of Metaphysics through Logical Analysis of Language’, in H. Adams and L. Searle (eds) Critical Theory since Plato, Boston: Thomson, 2005, 980–989. (Carnap’s explanation of how to dispel illusory problems of metaphysics through the analysis of language.)

  • Copi, I. (1971) The Theory of Logical Types, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (A concise introduction to the theory of types and the paradoxes that motivate it, for the general reader.)

  • Ganeri, J. (2001) Philosophy in Classical India, London: Routledge. (Chapter 3 provides a clear account of the Vaiśeṣika system of categories.)

  • Guarino, N. (2005) ‘Ontologies and Knowledge Bases: Towards a Terminological Clarification’, in N.J.I. Mars (ed.) Towards Very Large Knowledge Bases, Amsterdam: IOS Press, 25–32. (On the use of systems of ontological categories in artificial intelligence.)

  • Halbfass, W. (1992) On Being and What There Is: Classical Vaiśeṣika and the History of Indian Ontology, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. (Contains another good discussion of the Vaiśeṣika system of ontological categories.)

  • Isaacson, H. (1993) ‘Yogic Perception (yogipratyakṣa) in Early Vaiśeṣika’, Studien zur Indologie und Iranistik 18: 139–160. (On the Vaiśeṣika idea that meditatively trained perception can directly access the ontological categories.)

  • Katz, J.J. (1966) The Philosophy of Language, New York: Harper & Row. (An account of ontological categories in terms of a contemporary take on conceptual containment.)

  • Lakoff, G. (1987) Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (On psychological foundations of ontological distinctions.)

  • Longuenesse, B. (1998) ‘The Divisions of the Transcendental Logic and the Leading Thread’, in G. Mohr and M. Willascheck (eds) Immanuel Kant: Kritik der reinen Vernunft, Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. (On Kant’s theory of categories in the context of the Critique of Pure Reason.)

  • Lowe, E.J. (2001) The Possibility of Metaphysics: Substance, Identity and Time, Oxford: Clarendon Press. (A survey of metaphysics by one of the most important contemporary metaphysicians.)

  • Munn, K. and Smith, B. (eds) (2008) Applied Ontology: An Introduction, New York: Walter de Gruyter. (Discusses the role philosophical work on ontological categories can play in designing ontologies for information systems and knowledge representation.)

  • Wardy, R. (2000) Aristotle in China: Language, Categories, and Translation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Discussion of the idea of the language-relative nature of systems of ontological categories, includes some discussion of the Sapir-Whorf thesis.)

  • Westerhoff, J. (2005) Ontological Categories: Their Nature and Significance, Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Develops a relativistic account of ontological categories.)

Citing this article:
Westerhoff, Jan. Bibliography. Categories, 2019, doi:10.4324/9780415249126-N005-2. Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Taylor and Francis,
Copyright © 1998-2024 Routledge.

Related Articles