Your Actual Eternalism, Without Metaphysics
نویسنده
چکیده
The core of ontology is disagreement over what there is, over whether there exist numbers, events, sets, physical objects, fusions, past and future objects, and so on. Skeptics say this disagreement is merely verbal since apparently disagreeing ontologists use ‘exists’ in different ways. Each theorist is right given her own use of ‘exists’; there is nothing to fight over. On one meaning for ‘exist’, numbers “exist”, on another they do not; fusions “exist” under one meaning but not another, and so on. No one of these meanings is “better” than the rest; no one is a more genuine sort of existence than the rest. One might sensibly disagree over which is meant by ‘exists’ in a given linguistic community, or over which would be most useful to mean for a given purpose. But the ontologists’ debate concerns neither meaning nor utility, and cannot survive this proliferation of meanings for ‘exists’.
منابع مشابه
Propositions and the Metaphysics of Time
The central point of Brogaard's interesting essay is that temporalism, roughly, the thesis that there are propositions whose evaluation is sensitive to time (14), is a better alternative to standard semantic eter-nalism, roughly, the thesis that no proposition is sensitive to temporal variation. Five theoretical roles individuate propositions: (i) semantic values of sentences, (ii) objects of a...
متن کاملAbsolute becoming, relational becoming and the arrow of time
The first and main claim of this paper is that physics cannot provide, empirical evidence for the objectivity (mind-independence) of absolute becoming, for the simple reason that it must presuppose it, at least to the extent that a classical (i.e., non-quantum) spacetime theory presupposes a priori an ontology of events. However, the fact that a theory of absolute becoming must be situated in t...
متن کاملThe Metaphysical Status of Logic
The purpose of this paper is to examine the status of logic from a metaphysical point of view – what is logic grounded in and what is its relationship with metaphysics. There are three general lines that we can take. 1) Logic and metaphysics are not continuous, neither discipline has no bearing on the other one. This seems to be a rather popular approach, at least implicitly, as philosophers of...
متن کاملReview: [Untitled] Reviewed Work(s): Having Thought: Essays in the Metaphysics of Mind by John Haugeland
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your perso...
متن کاملThe Priority Principle
Some philosophers say that you do not think in the primary or nonderivative sense. Rather, they say some item distinct from you (perhaps one of your parts or something of which you are a part) does your thinking for you; you inherit your mental life from that item. In this paper, I argue that this is a mistake. We do not inherit our thoughts in this way. keywords: personal ontology, metaphysics...
متن کامل