Boring Infinite Descent

Metaphilosophy 45 (2):257-269 (2014)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
In formal ontology, infinite regresses are generally considered a bad sign. One debate where such regresses come into play is the debate about fundamentality. Arguments in favour of some type of fundamentalism are many, but they generally share the idea that infinite chains of ontological dependence must be ruled out. Some motivations for this view are assessed in this article, with the conclusion that such infinite chains may not always be vicious. Indeed, there may even be room for a type of fundamentalism combined with infinite descent as long as this descent is “boring,” that is, the same structure repeats ad infinitum. A start is made in the article towards a systematic account of this type of infinite descent. The philosophical prospects and scientific tenability of the account are briefly evaluated using an example from physics
PhilPapers/Archive ID
TAHBID
Revision history
First archival date: 2015-11-21
Latest version: 3 (2017-02-22)
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
By Our Bootstraps.Bennett, Karen

View all 17 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Ground.Raven, Michael J.
Ontological Dependence.Tahko, Tuomas E. & Lowe, E. J.

View all 11 citations / Add more citations

Added to PP index
2014-02-28

Total views
450 ( #5,214 of 38,034 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
31 ( #12,259 of 38,034 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.