2015
DOI: 10.1007/s10992-015-9376-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Well Founding Grounding Grounding

Abstract: Those who wish to claim that all facts about grounding are themselves grounded ("the meta-grounding thesis") must defend against the charge that such a claim leads to infinite regress and violates the well-foundedness of ground. In this paper, we defend. First, we explore three distinct but related notions of "well-founded", which are often conflated, and three corresponding notions of infinite regress. We explore the entailment relations between these notions. We conclude that the meta-grounding thesis need n… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
35
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 60 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
35
0
Order By: Relevance
“…one that quantifies over building relations: the complete set at a world is the set whose members build, in one way or another, everything else. (Bennett 2017, 110) 9 There are a variety of ''well-foundedness'' conditions in the vicinity here, but differences among them do not matter for present purposes (Dixon 2016b;Rabin and Rabern 2016). It is not clear what should count as fundamental in the sense of all-grounding in a world of infinite descent. 10 Perhaps the most plausible thing to say is that the notion is not defined relative to such a world.…”
Section: Two Conceptions Of the Fundamentalmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…one that quantifies over building relations: the complete set at a world is the set whose members build, in one way or another, everything else. (Bennett 2017, 110) 9 There are a variety of ''well-foundedness'' conditions in the vicinity here, but differences among them do not matter for present purposes (Dixon 2016b;Rabin and Rabern 2016). It is not clear what should count as fundamental in the sense of all-grounding in a world of infinite descent. 10 Perhaps the most plausible thing to say is that the notion is not defined relative to such a world.…”
Section: Two Conceptions Of the Fundamentalmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Schaffer 2009;Dixon 2016;Rabin and Rabern 2016). In fact, I believe grounding might be non-well-founded, indefinitely descending (see e.g.…”
Section: Pannormismmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…12 This is how Schaffer (2010a) seems to understand concrete foundationalism. 13 For related discussion, see Bliss (2013), Dixon (2016), Rabin and Rabern (2016), Tahko (Forthcoming), and Trogdon (Forthcoming).…”
Section: Acknowledgmentsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For related discussion, see Bliss (), Dixon (), Rabin and Rabern (), Tahko (Forthcoming), and Trogdon (Forthcoming). …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%