“Infinite Regress: Virtue or Vice?”, in: Hommage à Wlodek, T. Rønnow-Rasmussen, B. Petersson, J. Josefsson, and D. Egonsson, eds.

Abstract: This paper discusses the nature of so-called infinite regress arguments and claims that, what distinguishes a vicious from a benign regress in the context of such an argument is a matter of the direction of dependence between the different stages of the regress. As this direction is in part dependent on which question each step in the regress is supposed to supply an answer to, this makes viciousness in a certain sense context-dependent; a fact that explains how the resemblance regress, if generated in a trope-theoretical context is benign, whereas, if generated in the context of a classic nominalist theory (a theory of the kind at which Russell originally aimed this regress argument), it is vicious.

The paper can be found here.