CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 20Philosophy and Theoretical ScienceEpistemology, Ethics, and MetaphysicsPhilosophy and History of Science

What is Wrong with Self-Grounding?

Open access
Kovacs, David Mark·2018·Erkenntnis
DOI 10.1007/s10670-017-9934-y
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10670-017-9934-y

Cites

81 of 81 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Denying the orthodox view of grounding as a strict partial order is incompatible with grounding's theoretical roles.

    “While it is beyond the purview of this article to defend the asymmetry of grounding, I'll simply note that denying the orthodox view of grounding as a strict partial order is incompatible with grounding's theoretical roles.”

    From Grounding panentheism (2026) · cites this paper as Kovacs 2018

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

7 of the 88 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Crane, T. (2001). Elements of mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  2. deRosset, L. (2013b). Grounding explanations. Philosophers’ Imprint, 13(7), 1–26.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Kovacs, D. M.
Affiliations
Tel Aviv University (IL)
Corresponding author
Kovacs, David Mark
Venue
Erkenntnis
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2017-09-15
Volume
83
Issue
6
Pages
1157-1180
ISSN
  • 0165-0106 (ISSN-L)
  • 1572-8420
DOI
10.1007/s10670-017-9934-y
OpenAlex
W2755690358
Cited by
20
References
88
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2
FWCI
2.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
Locations
  • Erkenntnis (publishedVersion)
  • PhilPapers (PhilPapers Foundation) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Philosophy and History of Science
Keywords
grounding, self-grounding, irreflexivity, metaphysics, redundancy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review