<p>Bradley’s regress has long been a serious problem for realists about relations; it aims to show that for a relation to obtain between an n-tuple of entities, an infinite number of relations have to obtain first, thus rendering relational facts like e.g. the fact that John loves Mary, impossible. In this paper I will be considering two recent approaches to addressing the regress, namely D.W. Mertz and Anna Maurin’s approach. I’ll try to show why both attempts ultimately fail at what they set out to do, each trading the regress it was supposed to solve for another regress of equal severity. In the end, I will try to highlight what I take to be a helpful takeaway from their failure.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

How (not) to Solve Bradley’s Regress: a Critique of D.W. Mertz and Anna Maurin’s Solutions

  • Jason Krontiras

摘要

Bradley’s regress has long been a serious problem for realists about relations; it aims to show that for a relation to obtain between an n-tuple of entities, an infinite number of relations have to obtain first, thus rendering relational facts like e.g. the fact that John loves Mary, impossible. In this paper I will be considering two recent approaches to addressing the regress, namely D.W. Mertz and Anna Maurin’s approach. I’ll try to show why both attempts ultimately fail at what they set out to do, each trading the regress it was supposed to solve for another regress of equal severity. In the end, I will try to highlight what I take to be a helpful takeaway from their failure.