Journal
MANUSCRITO
Volume 39, Issue 4, Pages 169-181Publisher
UNICAMP-UNIV ESTADUAL CAMPINAS, CTRO LOGICA EPISTEMOLOGIA HIST CIENCIA
DOI: 10.1590/0100-6045.2016.V39N4.DB
Keywords
Aspects; Alteration; Time; McTaggart's paradox; numerical identity; Leibniz's law
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
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. Here then is another way to put McTaggart's paradox about change in tense. 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. 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. By rejecting Lewis's assumption my theory can solve this version of McTaggart's paradox.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available