Della Rocca’s Relations Regress and Bradley’s Relations Regresses

IF 0.3 3区 文学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Kevin Morris
{"title":"Della Rocca’s Relations Regress and Bradley’s Relations Regresses","authors":"Kevin Morris","doi":"10.1007/s12136-023-00578-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In his recent <i>The Parmenidean Ascent</i>, Michael Della Rocca develops a regress-theoretic case, reminiscent of F. H. Bradley’s famous argument in <i>Appearance and Reality</i>, against the intelligibility of relations and in favor of a monistic conception of reality. I argue that Della Rocca illicitly supposes that “internal” relations — in one sense of that word — lead to a “chain” regress, a regress of relations relating relations and relata. In contrast, I contend that if “internal” or grounded relations lead to a regress at all, it is a kind of “fission” regress within the relata themselves, and that a chain regress for relations only arises, if at all, for so-called “external” relations, relations not grounded in their relata. In this way, I contend that Della Rocca pursues a regress for so-called “internal” or grounded relations that only arise, if at all, for so-called “external” relations, relations not grounded in their relata. I compare Della Rocca’s case against relations with Bradley’s reasoning in <i>Appearance and Reality</i> and suggest in this context that Bradley may, perhaps, have the upper hand.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44390,"journal":{"name":"Acta Analytica-International Periodical for Philosophy in the Analytical Tradition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Analytica-International Periodical for Philosophy in the Analytical Tradition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12136-023-00578-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In his recent The Parmenidean Ascent, Michael Della Rocca develops a regress-theoretic case, reminiscent of F. H. Bradley’s famous argument in Appearance and Reality, against the intelligibility of relations and in favor of a monistic conception of reality. I argue that Della Rocca illicitly supposes that “internal” relations — in one sense of that word — lead to a “chain” regress, a regress of relations relating relations and relata. In contrast, I contend that if “internal” or grounded relations lead to a regress at all, it is a kind of “fission” regress within the relata themselves, and that a chain regress for relations only arises, if at all, for so-called “external” relations, relations not grounded in their relata. In this way, I contend that Della Rocca pursues a regress for so-called “internal” or grounded relations that only arise, if at all, for so-called “external” relations, relations not grounded in their relata. I compare Della Rocca’s case against relations with Bradley’s reasoning in Appearance and Reality and suggest in this context that Bradley may, perhaps, have the upper hand.

Abstract Image

德拉罗卡的关系回归和布拉德利的关系回归
迈克尔-德拉-罗卡在他最近出版的《帕门尼德的上升》中,提出了一个回归理论的案例,让人想起弗-H-布拉德利在《表象与现实》中的著名论证,反对关系的可理解性,支持现实的一元论概念。我认为,德拉-罗卡非法地假定 "内部 "关系--在这个词的一种意义上--会导致 "链式 "倒退,即关系与关系之间的倒退。与此相反,我认为,如果 "内部 "关系或基础关系导致倒退的话,那也是一种在关系本身内部的 "裂变 "倒退,而关系的链式倒退只出现在所谓的 "外部 "关系中,即不在其关系中的关系。因此,我认为德拉-罗卡追求的是所谓 "内部 "关系或基础关系的回归,而这种回归只有在所谓 "外部 "关系中才会出现(如果有的话),这种关系不是建立在它们的关系中的。我将德拉-罗卡反对关系的论证与布拉德利在《表象与现实》中的推理进行了比较,并就此提出布拉德利或许占了上风。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Acta Analytica is an international journal for philosophy in the analytical tradition covering a variety of philosophical topics including philosophical logic, metaphysics, epistemology, philosophy of science and philosophy of mind. Special attention is devoted to cognitive science. The journal aims to promote a rigorous, argument-based approach in philosophy. Acta Analytica is a peer reviewed journal, published quarterly, with authors from all over the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信