PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 10, 2026Analysis0 citations

Grounding Physicalism and Opaque Grounding

View Full Paper
KJKevin Jia

Key Points

  • This research addresses challenges to grounding physicalism, focusing on the defense offered by Jonathan Schaffer.
  • Analyzes Schaffer’s examples of opaque grounding
  • Evaluates the adequacy of these examples in supporting grounding physicalism
  • Identifies that Schaffer’s examples of opaque grounding are contested or misclassified
  • Challenges the inductive support for grounding physicalism from these examples

Abstract

Abstract A growingly popular development of physicalism, grounding physicalism, holds that phenomenal facts are grounded in physical facts. A main selling point of this view – largely due to Jonathan Schaffer – is its apparent ability to swiftly handle well-known anti-physicalist objections that infer an ontological gap from an explanatory gap. According to Schaffer, grounding physicalists can reject this inference by noting that it often fails in other cases of grounding. That is, they can observe that explanatory gaps are ubiquitous in grounding (i.e., grounding is generally opaque), such that the one between the phenomenal and the physical is merely a special instance of a broader unproblematic pattern. In this paper, I raise a novel challenge for Schaffer’s defense of grounding physicalism. I argue that the examples of opaque grounding to which he appeals are either of the wrong kinds or highly contested. As such, they provide little inductive support for grounding physicalism.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Kevin Jia (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a00225bc8f74e3340f9d295https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/anag029
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper