 If \(x\) is grounded in \(y\) and \(y\) in \(z\), [and so on ad infinitum] and all that we are seeking for is an explanation of how or why \(x\) exists (as the thing that it is), an explanation of how or why \(y\) exists, and so on ad infinitum, the regress is benign. Why? Because where \(z\) explains \(y\) and \(y\) explains \(x\) our explanans and explanandum are not of the same form. In order to explain facts about my existence, we can make recourse to the existence of—or facts of the existence of—my parents, my vital organs, etc. In order to explain these facts, we make recourse to further facts, and so on. At each stage, we have a satisfactory explanation of that for which we are seeking one . . .