Concept

Infinite regress

Overview

Infinite regress is a philosophical concept to describe a series of entities. Each entity in the series depends on its predecessor, following a recursive principle. For example, the epistemic regress is a series of beliefs in which the justification of each belief depends on the justification of the belief that comes before it.

An infinite regress argument is an argument against a theory based on the fact that this theory leads to an infinite regress. For such an argument to be successful, it must demonstrate not just that the theory in question entails an infinite regress but also that this regress is vicious. There are different ways in which a regress can be vicious. The most serious form of viciousness involves a contradiction in the form of metaphysical impossibility. Other forms occur when the infinite regress is responsible for the theory in question being implausible or for its failure to solve the problem it was formulated to solve.

Traditionally, it was often assumed without much argument that each infinite regress is vicious but this assumption has been put into question in contemporary philosophy. While some philosophers have explicitly defended theories with infinite regresses, the more common strategy has been to reformulate the theory in question in a way that avoids the regress. One such strategy is foundationalism, which posits that there is a first element in the series from which all the other elements arise but which is not itself explained this way. Another way is coherentism, which is based on a holistic explanation that usually sees the entities in question not as a linear series but as an interconnected network.

Infinite regress arguments have been made in various areas of philosophy. Famous examples include the cosmological argument and Bradley's regress.

Overview adapted from Wikipedia (CC BY-SA 4.0; see the article history for authors).

Possible passages

Found by search and not yet checked by a person; they may only mention the idea in passing.

We may, of course, in turn subsume it under some further major premise, but an infinite regress is impossible, and on this track we are finally left hanging in the air. For _practical_ purposes the unquestioned principle may be taken as signifying mutual concession or agreement--it denotes that as a matter of fact its truth is not called in question by the parties concerned.
John Dewey, Essays in Experimental Logic
States what Infinite regress is; opens on Infinite regress.
Read the chapter · Open in the reader
Temporalisation is realisation. Temporalisation is not another continuous process. It is an atomic succession. Thus time is atomic (_i.e._, epochal), though what is temporalised is divisible. This doctrine follows from the doctrine of events, and of the nature of enduring objects. In the next chapter we must consider its relevance to the quantum theory of recent science.
Alfred North Whitehead, Science and the modern world
States what Infinite regress is; names Infinite regress.
Read the chapter · Open in the reader
At the same time, turning to Cebes, he said: Are you at all disconcerted, Cebes, at our friend’s objection?
Plato, The dialogues of Plato in five volumes, Vol. 2
States what Infinite regress is; the author is tied to Infinite regress in the knowledge graph.
Read the chapter · Open in the reader

Infinite regress

Overview

Possible passages

Philosophers who discussed Infinite regress

Related ideas

Place in the tradition