 One of the most intriguing features of the debate about relations and differential application is that there is no single sense in which the different views we have considered seek to “explain” or “account” for differential application. They all run on different explanatory settings. Some think there is a genuine problem to do with the capacity of relations to differentially apply which needs to be explained by any successful theory of relations. Hence, because he thinks there is a genuine problem here, Hochberg claims that the question which any adequate theory of relations must answer “is about how the order is ontologically grounded in facts” (Hochberg 2001: 178). But others think that there isn’t a problem of differential application at all, much less one that requires an ontological analysis of relations or facts. This means that the debate cannot be reduced to simply an exchange of opinions about which view explains the most at the least cost.