Grounding Relations Are Not Unified: Aquinas and Heil versus Schaffer.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Jonathan Schaffer, among others, has argued that metaphysics should deal primarily with relations of "grounding." I will follow John Heil in arguing that this view of metaphysics is problematic, for it draws on ambiguous notions of grounding and fundamentality that are unilluminating as metaphysical explanations. I take Heil's objections to presuppose that "grounding" relations do not form a natural class, where a natural class is one where some member of that class has (analytic or contingent a posteriori) priority among others and explains order among other members in the class. To strengthen Heil's criticism that "grounding" is a non-natural class of relations, I will draw on an unlikely ally. Thomas Aquinas's "analogy of being" doctrine, if accurate, offers reasons that no categorical relations (like grounding relations) form a natural class.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)57-64
Number of pages8
JournalInternational Philosophical Quarterly
Volume59
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Mar 2019

User-Defined Keywords

  • WELL-being
  • ONTOLOGY
  • METAPHYSICS

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Grounding Relations Are Not Unified: Aquinas and Heil versus Schaffer.'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this