The Failure Theory

  • Jan Willem WielandEmail author
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Philosophy book series (BRIEFSPHILOSOPH)


In this chapter, it is explained for what purposes an infinite regress argument can be used, and how an infinite regress argument should be evaluated, according to the Failure Theory.


Philosophy Infinite Regress Argument Schema Vicious Failure Reason 


  1. Aristotle. Physics. Trans. R. P. Hardie and R. K. Gaye 1930. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  2. Armstrong, D.M. 1974. Infinite regress arguments and the problem of universals. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 52: 191–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Armstrong, D.M. 1978. Realism and nominalism. In Universals and scientific realism. Vol. 1. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
  4. Black, O. 1996. Infinite regress arguments and infinite regresses. Acta Analytica 16: 95–124.Google Scholar
  5. Bliss, R.L. 2013. Viciousness and the structure of reality. Philosophical Studies 166: 399–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Day, T.J. 1986. Infinite regress arguments. Some metaphysical and epistemological problems. Ph.D. Dissertation, Indiana University.Google Scholar
  7. Day, T.J. 1987. Infinite regress arguments. Philosophical Papers 16: 155–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dowden, B. 2013. The infinite. In The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.Google Scholar
  9. Feldman, R. 1993. Reason and argument, 2nd ed. 1999. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  10. Gamut, L.T.F. 1982. Introduction to logic. In Logic, language and meaning. Vol. 1. Trans. 1991. Chicago: UCP.Google Scholar
  11. Gillett, C. 2003. Infinitism redux? A response to Klein. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 66: 709–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Huggett, N. 2002. Zeno’s paradoxes. In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. E.N. Zalta.Google Scholar
  13. Johnson, O. 1978. Skepticism and cognitivism. Berkeley: CUP.Google Scholar
  14. Johnstone, Jr. H.W. 1996. The rejection of infinite postponement as a philosophical argument. Journal of Speculative Philosophy 10: 92–104.Google Scholar
  15. Maurin, A.-S. 2007. Infinite regress: virtue or vice? In Hommage à Wlodek, eds. T. Rønnow-Rasmussen et al., 1–26. Lund University.Google Scholar
  16. Maurin, A.-S. 2013. Infinite regress arguments. In Johanssonian investigations, eds. C. Svennerlind et al., 421–438. Heusenstamm: Ontos.Google Scholar
  17. Nolt, J., D. Rohatyn and A. Varzi 1988. Theory and problems of logic. 2nd ed. 1998. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  18. Passmore, J. 1961. Philosophical reasoning. 2nd ed. 1970. New York: Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
  19. Rankin, K.W. 1969. The duplicity of Plato’s third man. Mind 78: 178–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rescher, N. 2010. Infinite regress. The theory and history of a prominent mode of philosophical argumentation. New Brunswick: Transaction.Google Scholar
  21. Rodriguez-Pereyra, G. 2002. Resemblance nominalism. A solution to the problem of universals. Oxford: Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rosenberg, J.F. 1978. The practice of philosophy. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  23. Ruben, D.-H. 1990. Explaining explanation. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Russell, B. 1903. The principles of mathematics. 2nd ed. 1937. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  25. Sanford, D.H. 1984. Infinite regress arguments. In Principles of philosophical reasoning, ed. J.H. Fetzer, 93–117. Totowa: Rowman & Allanheld.Google Scholar
  26. Schlesinger, G.N. 1983. Metaphysics. Methods and problems. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  27. Wieland, J.W. 2012. And so on. Two theories of regress arguments in philosophy. PhD dissertation, Ghent University.Google Scholar
  28. Wieland, J.W. 2013a. Infinite regress arguments. Acta Analytica 28: 95–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wieland, J.W. 2013b. Strong and weak regress arguments. Logique & Analyse 224: 439–461.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.VU University AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations