In this article, the author attempts to consider the lacuna of “applied” ontology as proposed by the Lancaster version of the actor-network theory within the framework of a broader philosophically funded approach of Graham Harman (complemented by Levi Bryant’s ideas). This is done in order to clarify the position of the Lancaster version of ANT, according to which the same object may have several ontological modes, being, nevertheless, the same “real” object. For the purposes of analysis, the classical works of A. Mol and J. Law in addition to the works of L. Wittgenstein, L. Bryant, and H. Harman are used. The author of the article concludes that the ontological reality of objects and the perception of single objects as discrete ones within the framework of the ANT Lancaster branch results from the fact that Mol and Law do not fit their research into the framework of broader ontologies. They create their own local ontologies instead. Nevertheless, this “ontological lack” can and should be improved to increase research fruitfulness and complexity.