Grounding is claimed to offer a promising characterization of the fundamental as that which is ungrounded. Detractors of this view argue that there can be fundamental and yet mutually grounded entities. Such a possibility undermines the definition of the fundamental as the ungrounded. I aim to show, however, that the possibility of fundamental mutually grounded entities does not force us to renounce the prospects of characterizing fundamentality in terms of grounding. To accomplish this aim, I defend a grounding-based view that accommodates fundamental mutually grounded entities straightforwardly. My definition of fundamentality is similar to, but importantly different from, one that Karen Bennett discusses. I conclude by resisting two objections raised by Jessica Wilson against the Bennettian framework that also target the proposed view.

中文翻译：

---

基础而扎实

据称，接地提供了一个有希望的基本特性，即未接地的特性。这种观点的批评者认为，可能存在基本的但相互关联的实体。这种可能性破坏了基本面作为无根据的定义。然而，我的目的是表明，基本的互为基础的实体的可能性并不迫使我们放弃根据基础来表征基本性的前景。为了实现这一目标，我捍卫一种基于基础的观点，该观点直接适应基本的相互基础的实体。我对基本性的定义与 Karen Bennett 讨论的相似，但重要的是不同。最后，我驳斥了杰西卡·威尔逊 (Jessica Wilson) 对 Bennettian 框架提出的两个反对意见，这些反对意见也针对提议的观点。