OK: I’m going to take my pluralistic ontology / ontological pluralism as cognitive – an outcropping of what they categorized as a reading comprehension issue / poor comprehender. Seeing several answers as equally correct is creativity not a flaw.
So: any reference to ontological pluralism and indeed ontology in general I can treat as cognitive. Each ontology I will treat as monotonic hierarchies culminating in a nameless superordinate BUT the submembers are not confined to that superordinate of a particular taxonomy. Ok. Good that will clean a few things up too.