Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Separatists about grounding explanation owe an account of... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Causation
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Separatists about grounding explanation owe an account of how the link between grounding and grounding explanation prevents the metaphysical and explanatory elements from coming apart.

    CausationTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Separatism is the thesis that grounding and grounding explanation are distinct, yet grounding explanations are backed by instances of grounding.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If grounding and grounding explanation are distinct yet linked, that link must be explained to preserve the coherence of metaphysical explanation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Separatists like Raven (2015) can hold that grounding facts themselves ground grounding explanations, dissolving the gap via a further grounding relation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the link between grounding and grounding explanation is itself a grounding relation, no separate account of coherence is required beyond the separatist's own resources.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Fine's (2012) operator-based approach treats grounding as a primitive sentential connective, not a relation, making the explanatory dimension internal to its logical form.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If grounding is not a relation but a logical primitive encoding explanatory structure, the separatist demand for a bridging account misconstrues the nature of the relevant entity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    CausationTruth & Knowledge

    Key Terms

    Coming apart(logic and philosophy of explanation)
    Becoming disconnected or no longer matching up with each other; in this case, when the actual foundation of something no longer matches how we explain it.
    Grounding explanation(Contrasted with grounding as a metaphysical relation)
    A form of metaphysical explanation in which facts about what grounds what back or underwrite explanatory claims, modeled in part on the quasi-causal structure of causal explanation.
    Separatists about grounding explanation(metaphysics and philosophy of explanation)
    Philosophers who believe that the reason something happens (grounding) is separate from the explanation we give for why it happens (grounding explanation)—like how the actual cause of a fire might be different from how we explain it to someone.
    grounding(Drawn from contemporary metaphysics; proposed as potentially applicable to understanding the foundations of legality.)
    A metaphysical relation in which some entities or facts are more foundational than others, providing a hierarchical structure of the world.
    metaphysical(Ayer's Logical Positivist usage)
    Language that purports to refer beyond the physical world and lacks empirical consequences, which Ayer classifies as not literally significant

    Related

    Fine's (2012) operator-based approach treats grounding as a primitive sentential...If grounding and grounding explanation are distinct yet linked, that link must b...If grounding is not a relation but a logical primitive encoding explanatory stru...If the link between grounding and grounding explanation is itself a grounding re...
    +2 moreShow less
    Separatism is the thesis that grounding and grounding explanation are distinct, ...Separatists like Raven (2015) can hold that grounding facts themselves ground gr...

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: metaphysical-explanation
    View source passageHide passage
    Following Raven (2015), who applies the terminology to grounding and grounding explanations in particular, approaches to this fundamental question might be classified with regard to whether they take a “unionist” or “separatist” line. Standardly, unionism about grounding and grounding explanation is the thesis that they are one: to be grounded just is to be metaphysically explained in a distinctive way (e.g., Dasgupta 2014; Jenkins 2013; Litland 2013, 2017; Raven 2012; Rosen 2010; Thompson 2016)
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Similar

    Unionists about grounding and grounding explanation owe an account of ...97%If grounding and grounding explanation are distinct yet linked, that l...96%If grounding and grounding explanation are identical, then the metaphy...94%Separatists about grounding explanation face an analogous challenge re...91%
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit