The Real but Dead past: A Reply to Braddon-Mitchell
Forrest (Peter)
Source: Analysis, Vol. 64, No. 4 (Oct., 2004), pp. 358-362
Paper - Abstract

Paper StatisticsBooks / Papers Citing this PaperDisclaimer

Author’s Introduction

  1. In "Braddon-Mitchell (David) - How Do We Know It Is Now Now?", David Braddon-Mitchell (2004) develops an objection to No Futurism (also known as the Growing Block theory) that the past is real but the future is not. He notes my response to this, namely that the past, although real, is lifeless and (a fortiori?) lacking in sentience. He argues, however, that this response, which I call the Past is Dead hypothesis is not tenable if combined with Special Relativity.
  2. My purpose in this reply is to argue that, on the contrary, Special Relativity supports No Futurism or Presentism at the expense of the Parmenidean position that past and future are both real.

Text Colour Conventions (see disclaimer)

  1. Blue: Text by me; © Theo Todman, 2018
  2. Mauve: Text by correspondent(s) or other author(s); © the author(s)

© Theo Todman, June 2007 - Nov 2018. Please address any comments on this page to File output:
Website Maintenance Dashboard
Return to Top of this Page Return to Theo Todman's Philosophy Page Return to Theo Todman's Home Page