Emptying a Paradox of Ground

Journal of Philosophical Logic 47 (4):631-648 (2018)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Sometimes a fact can play a role in a grounding explanation, but the particular content of that fact make no difference to the explanation—any fact would do in its place. I call these facts vacuous grounds. I show that applying the distinction between-vacuous grounds allows us to give a principled solution to Kit Fine and Stephen Kramer’s paradox of ground. This paradox shows that on minimal assumptions about grounding and minimal assumptions about logic, we can show that grounding is reflexive, contra the intuitive character of grounds. I argue that we should never have accepted that grounding is irreflexive in the first place; the intuitions that support the irreflexive intuition plausibly only require that grounding be non-vacuously irreflexive. Fine and Kramer’s paradox relies, essentially, on a case of vacuous grounding and is thus no problem for this account.
Categories
ISBN(s)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
WOOEAP-5
Revision history
Archival date: 2017-09-24
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Modal Logic as Metaphysics.Williamson, Timothy
On What Grounds What.Schaffer, Jonathan

View all 31 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2017-07-10

Total views
90 ( #28,088 of 43,016 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
25 ( #24,345 of 43,016 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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