There is a growing movement towards construing some classic debates in ontology as meaningless, either because the answers seem obvious or the debates seem intractable. In this paper, I respond to this movement. The response has three components: First, the members of the two sides of the ontological debates that dismissivists have targeted are using different quantifiers. Second, the austere ontologist is using a more fundamental quantifier than her opponent. Third, the austere ontologist's more fundamental quantifier is a restriction of her opponent's quantifier. This response takes seriously the intuition that there is something wrong with the ontological disputes, but does not entail dismissivism.

中文翻译：

---

本体室中的量化

越来越多的运动倾向于将本体论中的一些经典辩论解释为毫无意义，要么是因为答案似乎很明显，要么因为辩论似乎难以处理。在本文中，我回应了这一运动。回应包含三个组成部分：首先，驳斥主义者所针对的本体论辩论的两个方面的成员使用不同的量词。其次，朴素的本体论者使用的量词比她的对手更基本。第三，朴素的本体论者更基本的量词是对她对手的量词的限制。这种回应认真对待本体论争议存在问题的直觉，但并不意味着不屑一顾。