Is it Possible to do Without the Fundamental?

This article argues that one of the main arguments against metaphysical infinitism—the argument from vicious infinite regress—is unsuccessful. I suggest that a proper interpretation of the argument takes the charge against infinitism to be one of metaphysical insufficiency: without the fundamental f...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Author: Kortabarria Areitio, Markel
Format: Article
Status:Published version
Publication date:2025
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____::91b3bbd39b121b6a7af8ee4caeab5d66
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/2445/228680
Access Level:Open access
Keyword:Filosofia
Grups fonamentals (Matemàtica)
Metafísica
Philosophy
Fundamental groups (Mathematics)
Metaphysics
Description
Summary:This article argues that one of the main arguments against metaphysical infinitism—the argument from vicious infinite regress—is unsuccessful. I suggest that a proper interpretation of the argument takes the charge against infinitism to be one of metaphysical insufficiency: without the fundamental facts fully grounding the rest of reality, derivative facts lack the necessary grounding base for their obtaining. I disambiguate the insufficiency claim by examining it from two different perspectives on the regress: the local perspective, which focuses on the obtaining of the individual derivative facts, and the global perspective, which focuses on the obtaining of the entire collection of derivative facts. For each perspective, I argue that the reasons for believing that infinitism cannot provide sufficient grounds are problematic.