more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
If the grounding relation is not metaphysical (such as normative or natural grounding), there is no need for there to be an explanation of its holding in terms of the essentialist nature of the items involved.
Gist of Idea
Only metaphysical grounding must be explained by essence
Source
Kit Fine (Guide to Ground [2012], 1.11)
Book Ref
'Metaphysical Grounding', ed/tr. Correia,F/Schnieder,B [CUP 2012], p.77
A Reaction
He accepts that some things have partial grounds in different areas of reality.
| 17262 | Aristotle's formal and material 'becauses' [aitiai] arguably involve grounding [Aristotle, by Correia/Schnieder] |
| 17265 | Philosophical proofs in mathematics establish truths, and also show their grounds [Bolzano, by Correia/Schnieder] |
| 14268 | Maybe bottom-up grounding shows constitution, and top-down grounding shows essence [Fine,K] |
| 17274 | Philosophical explanation is largely by ground (just as cause is used in science) [Fine,K] |
| 17290 | Only metaphysical grounding must be explained by essence [Fine,K] |
| 17727 | We can learn about the world by studying the grounding of our concepts [Jenkins] |
| 17296 | We must accept grounding, for our important explanations [Audi,P] |
| 17268 | Grounding is metaphysical and explanation epistemic, so keep them apart [Correia/Schnieder] |