Bradley's regress and ungrounded dependence chains: A reply to Cameron

Dialectica 63 (3):333-341 (2009)
Abstract
A version of Bradley's regress can be endorsed in an effort to address the problem of the unity of states of affairs or facts, thereby arriving at a doctrine that I have called fact infinitism . A consequence of it is the denial of the thesis, WF, that all chains of ontological dependence are well-founded or grounded. Cameron has recently rejected fact infinitism by arguing that WF, albeit not necessarily true, is however contingently true. Here fact infinitism is supported by showing that Cameron's argument for the contingent truth of WF is unsuccessful.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 11,817
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
Fabrice Correia (2008). Ontological Dependence. Philosophy Compass 3 (5):1013-1032.
Julian Dodd (1999). Farewell to States of Affairs. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 77 (2):146 – 160.

View all 18 references

Citations of this work BETA
Anna-Sofia Maurin (2012). Bradley's Regress. Philosophy Compass 7 (11):794-807.
Similar books and articles
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-09-18

Total downloads

74 ( #20,155 of 1,099,868 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

8 ( #33,366 of 1,099,868 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.