According to directionalism, non-symmetric relations are distinct from their converses. Kit Fine (2000a) argues that the directionalist faces a dilemma; they must either (i) reject the principle Uniqueness, which states that no completion (fact, state of affairs, or proposition) is a completion of more than one relation, or (ii) reject the principle Identity, which states that each completion of a relation is identical to a completion of its converse (e.g., Dante’s loving Bice is identical to Bice’s being loved by Dante). Fine’s argument has been regarded as a decisive blow to directionalism. But new strategies for replying to it can be developed with the tools of the postmodal metaphysician, who is comfortable individuating relations and their completions hyperintensionally, allowing for necessary connections between distinct entities, and making use of hyperintensional notions like essence and grounding. In what follows, I develop postmodal strategies for denying both horns of Fine’s dilemma, concluding that the postmodal directionalist need not be concerned with Fine’s argument.

根据方向主义，非对称关系与它们的 converse 不同。Kit Fine （2000a） 认为方向主义者面临两难境地;他们必须 （i） 拒绝唯一性原则，该原则指出没有完成（事实、事态或命题）是多个关系的完成，或 （ii） 拒绝同一性原则，该原则指出一个关系的每个完成都与其反向的完成相同（例如，但丁的爱的 Bice 与 Bice 被但丁所爱相同）。Fine 的论点被视为对方向主义的决定性打击。但是，可以用后模态形而上学家的工具来制定新的回应策略，他们习惯于高度地个性化关系及其完成，允许不同实体之间必要的联系，并利用本质和基础等高度紧张的概念。在下文中，我制定了后模态策略来否认 Fine 困境的两个角，并得出结论，后模态方向论者不需要关心 Fine 的论点。