In metaphysics, the fundamental is standardly equated with that which has no explana- tion – with that which is, in other words, ‘brute’. But this doctrine of brutalism is in tension with physicists’ ambitions to not only describe but also explain why the fundamental is as it is. The tension would ease were science taken to be incapable of furnishing the sort of explanations that brutalism is concerned with, given that these are understood to be dis- tinctively ‘metaphysical’ in character. But to assume this is to assume a sharp demarcation between physics and metaphysics that surely cannot be taken for granted. This paper sets out to examine the standing of brutalism from the perspective of contem- porary fundamental physics, together with theories of explanation drawn from philosophy of science and metaphysics. Focusing on what fundamental kinds the world instantiates and how physicists go about determining them, I argue that a partial explanation, in Hempel’s sense, may be given of this fundamental feature. Moreover, since this partial explanation issues, at least in part, from stipulations as to the essential nature of the kinds involved, I claim that it has as much right to be regarded as a metaphysical explanation as do grounding explanations. As such, my conclusion will be that the doctrine of brutalism can no longer be regarded as tenable: at least modulo certain plausible essentialist assumptions, it is no longer the case that no explanation can be given of the fundamental.

中文翻译：

---

反对野蛮原教旨主义

在形而上学中，基本原理通常等同于没有解释的东西——换句话说，就是“蛮横”的东西。但是，这种野蛮主义的学说与物理学家的野心相冲突，他们不仅要描述而且要解释为什么基本原理是这样的。如果科学被认为无法提供野蛮主义所关注的那种解释，那么紧张局势就会缓和，因为这些解释被理解为具有独特的“形而上学”特征。但是假设这是物理和形而上学之间的明显分界，这肯定不能被认为是理所当然的。本文着手从当代基础物理学的角度，以及从科学哲学和形而上学中得出的解释理论，来考察野兽派的立场。着眼于世界实例化了哪些基本类型以及物理学家如何确定它们，我认为在 Hempel 的意义上，可以对这个基本特征给出部分解释。此外，由于这种部分解释至少部分来自对所涉及种类的本质性质的规定，我声称它与基础解释一样有权利被视为形而上学解释。因此，我的结论将是，野蛮主义的学说不再被视为站得住脚：至少以某些看似合理的本质主义假设为模，不再是无法对基本原理给出解释的情况。由于这种部分解释至少部分来自对所涉及种类的本质性质的规定，我声称它与基础解释一样有权利被视为形而上学解释。因此，我的结论将是，野蛮主义的学说不再被视为站得住脚：至少以某些看似合理的本质主义假设为模，不再是无法对基本原理给出解释的情况。由于这种部分解释至少部分来自对所涉及种类的本质性质的规定，我声称它与基础解释一样有权利被视为形而上学解释。因此，我的结论将是，野蛮主义的学说不再被视为站得住脚：至少以某些看似合理的本质主义假设为模，不再是无法对基本原理给出解释的情况。