Ontological disagreements, reference, and charity: A challenge for Hirsch's deflationism

Eli Hirsch argues that certain ontological disputes involve a conflict between “ equivalent ” languages, and that the principle of charity compels each disputant to interpret the other as speaking truly in their own language. For Hirsch, a language ’ s semantics maps sentences (in context) onto sets of possible worlds but assigns no role to reference. I argue that this method leads to an overly uncharitable portrayal of the disputes at issue – whereby ontologists who speak “ equivalent ” languages can only argue about syntax. Lack of charity stems from the fact that this portrayal likely fails to uphold the self-conception of the disputants – and particularly what I will call “ the weak self-conception ” . As a result, Hirsch ’ s deflationism falls victim of the same principle of charity that informs it.