ABSTRACT
A discussion of different types of skeptical doubts one may harbor concerning the notion of ground: “old-school” grounding skeptics question the intelligibility or coherence of the grounding idiom, while “second-generation” skeptics grant the intelligibility or coherence of the grounding idiom but question its theoretical usefulness. The latter are often particularly concerned with the apparent lack of unity exhibited by the grounding idiom or the apparent failure of this idiom to do its intended work of being able to capture or illuminate the notions of relative and/or absolute fundamentality.
