Explanation Good, Grounding Bad

IF 1.1 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY MONIST Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1093/monist/onad011
Chris Daly
{"title":"Explanation Good, Grounding Bad","authors":"Chris Daly","doi":"10.1093/monist/onad011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Grounding is not required for explanation in metaphysics, and, more generally, in philosophy. An account independent of grounding is available. Grounding claims do not provide the explanations that they are alleged to. The case for displacing supervenience in favour of grounding is mistaken. Grounding is a zombie idea: it staggers on in philosophical culture despite being thoroughly discredited.","PeriodicalId":47322,"journal":{"name":"MONIST","volume":"75 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MONIST","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/monist/onad011","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Grounding is not required for explanation in metaphysics, and, more generally, in philosophy. An account independent of grounding is available. Grounding claims do not provide the explanations that they are alleged to. The case for displacing supervenience in favour of grounding is mistaken. Grounding is a zombie idea: it staggers on in philosophical culture despite being thoroughly discredited.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
解释:好,接地不好
在形而上学中,或者更一般地说,在哲学中,解释不需要抽象的基础。有独立于接地的帐号。“接地气”的说法并不能提供它们所声称的解释。用脚踏实地取代监管的观点是错误的。“接地气”是一个僵尸概念:它在哲学文化中摇摇晃晃地存在着,尽管它已经完全不可信了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
MONIST
MONIST PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
34
期刊最新文献
Disingenuous Infallibilism Knowledge-First Inferential Evidence: A Response to Dunn How Infallibilists Can Have It All How Not to Be a Fallibilist Really Knowing: A Collocational Argument for an Infallibilist Sense of ‘Know’
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1