Nothing to Come in a Relativistic Setting.

In the first part of the paper, we show that C&R's axioms generate the following dilemma. On the one hand, they could admit that truths about future contingents have no real ground in reality. To reject the requirement of grounding, however, goes against the intuitions of most philosophers concernin...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Disputatio: International Journal of Philosophy Vol. 13; no. 63; pp. 433 - 445
Autores principales: Dorato, Mauro, Hoefer, Carl
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Paradigm Publishing Services Dec2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=163368602&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 163368602
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        0873626X
        1CM2
      jtl: Disputatio: International Journal of Philosophy
      issn: 0873626X
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Dec2021
      vid: 13
      iid: 63
      pid: 35924
      pub: Paradigm Publishing Services
    artinfo:
      ui:
        163368602
        10.2478/disp-2021-0025
      ppf: 433
      ppct: 12
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
            size: 533KB
      tig:
        atl: Nothing to Come in a Relativistic Setting.
      aug:
        au:
          Dorato, Mauro
          Hoefer, Carl
        affil:
          Roma Tre University
          ICREA & University of Barcelona
      su:
        Axioms
        Logic
        Generalization
        Presentism (Philosophy)
        Philosophy of time
      sug:
        subj:
          Axioms
          Logic
          Generalization
          Presentism (Philosophy)
          Philosophy of time
      keyword:
        bivalence
        ground
        growing block theory
        permanentism
        temporarysm
      ab: In the first part of the paper, we show that C&R's axioms generate the following dilemma. On the one hand, they could admit that truths about future contingents have no real ground in reality. To reject the requirement of grounding, however, goes against the intuitions of most philosophers concerning truth. On the other hand, C&R could give up bivalence for future contingents at the cost of making their temporal logic more complicated and presumably losing certain theorems. In the second part, we evaluate C&R's relativistic generalization of the growing block by discussing the various options that can be used to make relativity cohere with the growing block, and we illustrate the reasons why Stein's "pointy present" looks preferable to bow-tie presentism.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Disputatio: International Journal of Philosophy is the property of Paradigm Publishing Services and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
      item: Disputatio: International Journal of Philosophy
      holder: Paradigm Publishing Services
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2021
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N