Bradley's regress and ungrounded dependence chains: a reply to Cameron

A version of Bradley’s regress can be endorsed in an effort to address the problem f the unity of states of affairs or facts, thereby arriving to a doctrine that has been called fact infinitism. A consequence of it is the denial of the thesis, WF, that all chains of ontological dependence are well-founded or grounded. Cameron has recently rejected fact infinitism by arguing that WF, albeit not necessarily true, is however contingently true. Here fact infinitism is supported by showing that Cameron’s argument for the contingent truth of WF is unsuccessful.