Among the various proposals for quantum ontology, both wavefunction realists and the primitive ontologists have argued that their approach is to be preferred because it relies on intuitive notions: locality, separability and spatiotemporality. As such, these proposals should be seen as normative frameworks asserting that one should choose the fundamental ontology which preserves these intuitions, even if they disagree about their relative importance: wavefunction realists favor preserving locality and separability, while primitive ontologists advocate for spatiotemporality. In this paper, first I clarify the main tenets of wavefunction realism and the primitive ontology approach, arguing that seeing the latter as favoring constructive explanation makes sense of their requirement of a spatiotemporal ontology. Then I show how the aforementioned intuitive notions cannot all be kept in the quantum domain. Consequently, wavefunction realists rank locality and separability higher than spatiotemporality, while primitive ontologists do the opposite. I conclude that however, the choice of which notions to favor is not as arbitrary as it might seem. In fact, they are not independent: requiring locality and separability can soundly be justified by requiring spatiotemporality, and not the other way around. If so, the primitive ontology approach has a better justification of its intuitions than its rival wavefunction realist framework.

在量子本体论的各种提议中，波函数实在论者和原始本体论者都认为他们的方法是首选，因为它依赖于直觉概念：局域性、可分离性和时空性。因此，这些建议应该被视为规范框架，主张人们应该选择保留这些直觉的基本本体论，即使他们不同意它们的相对重要性：波函数实在论者赞成保留局部性和可分离性，而原始本体论主张时空性。在本文中，我首先阐明了波函数实在论和原始本体论方法的主要原则，认为将后者视为有利于建设性解释是有意义的，因为它们对时空本体论的要求是有意义的。然后我将展示上述直观概念如何不能全部保留在量子域中。因此，波函数实在论者将局域性和可分离性置于时空性之上，而原始本体论则相反。然而，我的结论是，选择支持哪些概念并不像看起来那么随意。事实上，它们并不是独立的：要求局部性和可分离性可以通过要求时空性来合理地证明，而不是相反。如果是这样，那么原始本体论方法比其竞争对手的波函数实在论框架更能证明其直觉。