Scientific explanation as a guide to ground
Ground is all the rage in contemporary metaphysics. But what is its nature? Some metaphysicians defend what we could call, following Skiles and Trogdon (Philos Stud 178(12):4083-4098, 2021), the inheritance view: it is because constitutive forms of metaphysical explanation are such-and-such that we...
| Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | article |
| Status: | Published version |
| Publication Date: | 2024 |
| Country: | España |
| Institution: | Varias* (Consorci de Biblioteques Universitáries de Catalunya, Centre de Serveis Científics i Acadèmics de Catalunya) |
| Repository: | Recercat. Dipósit de la Recerca de Catalunya |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:dnet:recercat____::b9362539591f7692e0dae793ef299af7 |
| Online Access: | https://hdl.handle.net/2445/228772 |
| Access Level: | Open access |
| Keyword: | Filosofia Grups fonamentals (Matemàtica) Metafísica Naturalisme Philosophy Fundamental groups (Mathematics) Metaphysics Naturalism |
| Summary: | Ground is all the rage in contemporary metaphysics. But what is its nature? Some metaphysicians defend what we could call, following Skiles and Trogdon (Philos Stud 178(12):4083-4098, 2021), the inheritance view: it is because constitutive forms of metaphysical explanation are such-and-such that we should believe that ground is soand-so. However, many putative instances of inheritance are not primarily motivated by scientific considerations. This limitation is harmless if one thinks that ground and science are best kept apart. Contrary to this view, we believe that ground is a highly serviceable tool for investigating metaphysical areas of science. In this paper, we defend a naturalistic version of the inheritance view which takes constitutive scientific explanation as a better guide to ground. After illustrating the approach and its merits, we discuss some implications of the emerging scientific conception for the theory of ground at large. |
|---|