Is There Really Any “Merely Verbal” Ontological Dispute?

Abstract Contemporary debates on metaontology focus on discussions between two main positions: realism and deflationism. Ontological realism claims to deal with an independent objective reality, while deflationism downgrades the seriousness of ontology. From a position close to deflationism, E. Hirsch suggests that certain debates in ontology are not substantive but “merely verbal”. From a proper deflationist position, however, it seems doubtful that any ontological dispute can be merely linguistic without further consequences. The aim of this article is to argue that no ontological debate can remain purely verbal. For this purpose, a brief introduction to Hirsch’s ideas will be presented, followed by three different arguments against “merely verbal” disputes: semantic, epistemic and ontological.