|Abstract||One obstacle faced by proposals of retrocausal influences in quantum mechanics is the perceived high conceptual cost of making such a proposal. I assemble here a metaphysical picture consistent with the possibility of retrocausality and not precluded by the known physical structure of our reality. I conclude that given the right mix of some reasonable metaphysical and epistemological ingredients there is no conceptual cost to such a picture.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Bashshar Haydar (2003). The Moral Relevance of Cost. Philosophical Studies 112 (2):127 - 134.
Donald C. Hubin (1993). Book Review:Thoughtful Economic Man: Essays on Rationality, Moral Rules and Benevolence. Gay Meeks. [REVIEW] Ethics 103 (3):572-.
David Thomas Pegg (2008). Retrocausality and Quantum Mechanics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 39 (4):830-840.
Greg Bognar (2010). Does Cost Effectiveness Analysis Unfairly Discriminate Against People with Disabilities? Journal of Applied Philosophy 27 (4):394-408.
Peter Forrest (2001). Counting the Cost of Modal Realism. In Gerhard Preyer (ed.), Reality and Humean Supervenience: Essays on the Philosophy of David Lewis. Rowman and Littlefield.
Donald C. Hubin (1994). The Moral Justification of Benefit/Cost Analysis. Economics and Philosophy 10 (02):169-.
Huw Price (2008). Toy Models for Retrocausality. Studies in Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 39 (4):752-761.
Cornelis van Putten (2006). Changing the Past: Retrocausality and Narrative Construction. Metaphilosophy 37 (2):254–258.
Added to index2010-05-20
Total downloads10 ( #106,438 of 549,198 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,397 of 549,198 )
How can I increase my downloads?