Beyond What “Is” and What “Is-Not”

• FC maintains silence on matters pertaining to philosophical ontology.
• Functional contextualists might improve work with others by speakingontologically.
• We offer hypothetical examples of fruitful and non-fruitful ontological talk.
• Also, we include empirical examples of fruitful and non-fruitful ontologicaltalk.

Functional contextualism is a philosophy of science that maintains a notable silence on issues pertaining to philosophical ontology. Presumably, this is because ontological statements are not needed for successful working within functional contextualist scientific activities, such as behavioral research and practice. While this position is sound within the philosophical system of functional contextualism, it may appear bizarre to outside practitioners and scholars, with the effect of creating barriers to interdisciplinary collaboration. We propose that, as pragmatists, functional contextualists can adopt ontological language in particular contexts of interdisciplinary collaboration for the purposes of working more successfully with others. In this paper, we briefly describe this position and discuss hypothetical and real examples of potentially more-fruitful and less-fruitful examples of ontological speaking.