Aspects and the Alteration of Temporal Simples
Baxter (Donald L.M.)
Source: Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofia, Campinas (Brazil): Vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 169-181, Oct - Dec 2016
Paper - Abstract

Paper StatisticsDisclaimer


Author’s Abstract

  1. According to David Lewis, alteration is “qualitative difference between temporal parts of something.” It follows that moments, since they are simple and lack temporal parts, cannot alter from future to present to past.
  2. Here then is another way to put McTaggart's paradox about change in tense.
  3. I will appeal to my theory of Aspects to rebut the thought behind this rendition of McTaggart. On my theory, it is possible that qualitatively differing things be numerically identical. I call these differing, numerically identical things “aspects.”
  4. I will argue that alteration can be a qualitative difference between temporal aspects of something that lacks temporal parts. So a moment can alter in tense.
  5. By rejecting Lewis's assumption my theory can solve this version of McTaggart's paradox.

Comment:

For the full text, see Baxter - Aspects and the Alteration of Temporal Simples.

Text Colour Conventions (see disclaimer)

  1. Blue: Text by me; © Theo Todman, 2019
  2. Mauve: Text by correspondent(s) or other author(s); © the author(s)



© Theo Todman, June 2007 - Oct 2019. Please address any comments on this page to theo@theotodman.com. 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