2015
DOI: 10.1007/s11406-015-9648-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Presentism and the Triviality Objection

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, given Tensed Verbs, the natural language (English) verb 'to exist' in the sentence 'Everything that exists is present' must be either past, present, or future tensed-in which case, the standard definition must be read as expressing one of the following propositions: 12 (P1) Everything that exists now is present (P2) Everything that did, does now, or will exist is present But why should Presentists accept Tensed Verbs? Neither Ludlow (2004), Stoneham (2009), Meyer (2012, Tallant (2014) nor Sakon (2015) cites any evidence in its support. 13 However, there is some compelling linguistic evidence against the thesis.…”
Section: Tensed Verbs: Every Natural Language English Verb Is Inherenmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…However, given Tensed Verbs, the natural language (English) verb 'to exist' in the sentence 'Everything that exists is present' must be either past, present, or future tensed-in which case, the standard definition must be read as expressing one of the following propositions: 12 (P1) Everything that exists now is present (P2) Everything that did, does now, or will exist is present But why should Presentists accept Tensed Verbs? Neither Ludlow (2004), Stoneham (2009), Meyer (2012, Tallant (2014) nor Sakon (2015) cites any evidence in its support. 13 However, there is some compelling linguistic evidence against the thesis.…”
Section: Tensed Verbs: Every Natural Language English Verb Is Inherenmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…(2) The sentence 'Everything that exists is present' must be read as expressing either the proposition that everything that exists now is present or the proposition that everything that did, does now, or will exist is present 9 Something like this argument is endorsed by Merricks (1995), Lombard (1999), Stoneham (2009), Meyer (2012, Tallant (2014) and Sakon (2015). I have also seen the argument endorsed by philosophers in other contexts.…”
Section: Tense and Trivialitymentioning
confidence: 97%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“… There is a distinct doubt about the substance of the traditional Presentism–Eternalism debate centred on the question of whether the copula ‘is’ in the standard definition of Presentism should be read as ‘tensed’ or ‘tenseless’ – see, for example, Crisp (), Ludlow (), Meyer (), Sakon () and Deasy (forthcoming in Synthese ). This is not the worry about the traditional debate that I have in mind here. …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%