Benardete Paradoxes, Causal Finitism, and the Unsatisfiable Pair Diagnosis

IF 1.8 1区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
MIND Pub Date : 2024-11-27 DOI:10.1093/mind/fzae057
Joseph C Schmid, Alex Malpass
{"title":"Benardete Paradoxes, Causal Finitism, and the Unsatisfiable Pair Diagnosis","authors":"Joseph C Schmid, Alex Malpass","doi":"10.1093/mind/fzae057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We examine two competing solutions to Benardete paradoxes: causal finitism, according to which nothing can have infinitely many causes, and the unsatisfiable pair diagnosis (UPD), according to which such paradoxes are logically impossible and no metaphysical thesis need be adopted to avoid them. We argue that the UPD enjoys notable theoretical advantages over causal finitism. Causal finitists, however, have levelled two main objections to the UPD. First, they urge that the UPD requires positing a ‘mysterious force’ that prevents paradoxes from arising. Since such a force is implausible, the UPD is in trouble. Second, they employ recombination or patchwork principles to argue that paradoxical situations would be possible if causal finitism were false. Since such situations are not possible, causal finitism is true, and so a substantive metaphysical thesis is needed to avoid the paradoxes. We argue that the UPD proponent can successfully respond to these objections.","PeriodicalId":48124,"journal":{"name":"MIND","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MIND","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzae057","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We examine two competing solutions to Benardete paradoxes: causal finitism, according to which nothing can have infinitely many causes, and the unsatisfiable pair diagnosis (UPD), according to which such paradoxes are logically impossible and no metaphysical thesis need be adopted to avoid them. We argue that the UPD enjoys notable theoretical advantages over causal finitism. Causal finitists, however, have levelled two main objections to the UPD. First, they urge that the UPD requires positing a ‘mysterious force’ that prevents paradoxes from arising. Since such a force is implausible, the UPD is in trouble. Second, they employ recombination or patchwork principles to argue that paradoxical situations would be possible if causal finitism were false. Since such situations are not possible, causal finitism is true, and so a substantive metaphysical thesis is needed to avoid the paradoxes. We argue that the UPD proponent can successfully respond to these objections.
贝纳德悖论、因果有限论与不可满足配对诊断
我们研究了贝纳德特悖论的两个相互竞争的解决方案:因果有限论,根据该理论,任何事物都不可能有无限多的原因,以及不可满足对诊断(UPD),根据该理论,这些悖论在逻辑上是不可能的,不需要采用形而上学的论点来避免它们。我们认为UPD相对于因果有限论具有显著的理论优势。然而,因果有限论者对统一发展民主党提出了两个主要的反对意见。首先,他们敦促UPD需要假设一种“神秘的力量”来防止悖论的产生。由于这样的力量是不可信的,UPD陷入了困境。其次,他们采用重组或拼凑原则来论证,如果因果有限主义是错误的,矛盾的情况是可能的。由于这种情况是不可能的,因果有限主义是正确的,因此需要一个实质性的形而上学命题来避免悖论。我们认为,UPD的支持者可以成功地回应这些反对意见。
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
MIND
MIND PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
5.60%
发文量
47
期刊介绍: Mind has long been a leading journal in philosophy. For well over 100 years it has presented the best of cutting edge thought from epistemology, metaphysics, philosophy of language, philosophy of logic, and philosophy of mind. Mind continues its tradition of excellence today. Mind has always enjoyed a strong reputation for the high standards established by its editors and receives around 350 submissions each year. The editor seeks advice from a large number of expert referees, including members of the network of Associate Editors and his international advisers. Mind is published quarterly.
×
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