Carnap’ s view on ontology had not yet rallied that Quine attacked it; and this has caused a dispute between two philosophers for more than half a century. The question remains: which one was/is right? In this article after reviewing Carnap’ s view, I have recounted Quine’ s critiques, here and there, to his stands under three titles. It is shown how Carnap’ s view can be justified from these three critiques. Then, after considering that Quine has identified the position of the difference incorrectly, but not the different position, I have explained, In the midst of arbitration between two philosophers, although Carnap and Quine, both, do maintain ontological relativity, the former believes in ‘ general relativity’ , and the latter in ‘ special relativity’ . From another point of view, although two philosopher do maintain ontological skepticism, the former is ‘ second level skeptic’ , and the latter is ‘ first level skeptic’ . In the other words. I have shown how in ontological approach of two philosophers “ the reason for the agreement is the same for disagreement” . Among these complexities the conclusion is taken that any unilateral arbitration, on strict agreement or disagreement, will be wrong.