Full Idea
For philosophers interested in explanation - of what accounts for what - it is largely through the notion of ontological ground that such questions are to be pursued. Ground, if you like, stands to philosophy as cause stands to science.
Gist of Idea
Philosophical explanation is largely by ground (just as cause is used in science)
Source
Kit Fine (Guide to Ground [2012], 1.02)
Book Reference
'Metaphysical Grounding', ed/tr. Correia,F/Schnieder,B [CUP 2012], p.40
A Reaction
Why does the ground have to be 'ontological'? It isn't the existence of the snow that makes me cold, but the fact that I am lying in it. Better to talk of 'factual' ground (or 'determinative' ground), and then causal grounds are a subset of those?