Analysis 61 (4):289–293 (2001)
|Abstract||Ignoring the temporal dimension, an object such as a railway tunnel or a human body is a three-dimensional whole composed of three-dimensional parts. The four-dimensionalist holds that a physical object exhibiting identity across time—Descartes, for example—is a four-dimensional whole composed of 'briefer' four-dimensional objects, its temporal parts. Peter van Inwagen (1990) has argued that four-dimensionalism cannot be sustained, or at best can be sustained only by a counterpart theorist. We argue that different schemes of individuation of temporal parts are available, which undermines van Inwagen's argument.|
|Keywords||temporal parts four-dimensionalism|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Theodore Sider (1997). Four-Dimensionalism. Philosophical Review 106 (2):197-231.
Berit Brogaard (2000). Presentist Four-Dimensionalism. The Monist 83 (3):341-356.
T. Sattig (2003). Temporal Predication with Temporal Parts and Temporal Counterparts. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 81 (3):355 – 368.
Ryan Wasserman, Recombination, Causal Constraints and Humean Supervenience: An Argument for Temporal Parts?
Thomas Sattig (2002). Temporal Parts and Complex Predicates. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 102 (3):279–286.
Josh Parsons (2000). Must a Four-Dimensionalist Believe in Temporal Parts? The Monist 83 (3):399-418.
Eric T. Olson (2006). Temporal Parts and Timeless Parthood. Noûs 40 (4):738–752.
Michael F. Patton (2002). Probabilities and Temporal Parts. Acta Analytica 17 (1):39-52.
Eric T. Olson (2006). Temporal Parts and Timeless Parthood. Noûs 40 (4):738-752.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads44 ( #29,802 of 722,876 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #17,024 of 722,876 )
How can I increase my downloads?