According to a radical account of quantum metaphysics that I label ‘high-dimensionalism’, ordinary objects are the ‘shadows’ of high-dimensional fundamental ontology (for example, Albert [2013], [unpublished-a]; Ney [2015]). Critics—especially Maudlin ([2007], [2010], [2019])—allege that high-dimensionalism cannot provide a satisfactory explanation of the manifest image. In this article, I examine the two main ideas behind these criticisms: that high-dimensionalist connections between fundamental and non-fundamental are (1) inscrutable, and (2) arbitrary. In response to the first, I argue that there is no metaphysically significant contrast regarding the scrutability of low- and high-dimensionalist connections. In response to the second, I argue that the arbitrariness of high-dimensionalist connections has been overstated, and what arbitrariness there is afflicts low-dimensionalist connections too. Thus, the debate should not be focused on whether high-dimensionalism can provide a satisfactory explanation of the manifest image—as it has been in recent literature—but rather on the broader question of whether there is a good all-things-considered reason to prefer low-dimensionalist theories.

中文翻译：

---

根深蒂固的阴影，没有根基的鬼魂

根据我标记为“高维主义”的量子形而上学的激进解释，普通对象是高维基本本体论的“影子”（例如，Albert [2013]，[unpublished-a]；Ney [2015]） . 批评者——尤其是 Maudlin（[2007]、[2010]、[2019]）——声称高维论无法对显像提供令人满意的解释。在本文中，我研究了这些批评背后的两个主要观点：基本面和非基本面之间的高维联系是（1）难以理解的，（2）任意的。作为对第一个的回应，我认为在低维和高维联系的可审查性方面没有形而上学的显着对比。针对第二个问题，我认为高维连接的任意性被夸大了，并且存在的任意性也困扰着低维主义的联系。因此，争论不应该集中在高维论是否可以对显像提供令人满意的解释——正如最近的文献中那样——而是更广泛的问题，即是否有一个充分考虑一切的理由偏爱低维理论。