The time-gap argument
Australasian Journal of Philosophy 47 (3):263-272 (1969)
| Abstract | I argue that the time-gap argument poses no objection to Direct Realism. In the case of exploded stars many light years from us, what we see is no longer the star, but its light. I argue that in all cases of seeing we see light, but only when physical objects exist at the time of our seeing do we see them. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,672 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesJan Willem Wieland (2011). Filling a Typical Gap in a Regress Argument. Logique and Analyse 54 (216):589-597.
L. Nathan Oaklander & V. Alan White (2007). B-Time: A Reply to Tallant. Analysis 67 (296):332–340.
W. A. Suchting (1969). Perception and the Time-Gap Argument. Philosophical Quarterly 19 (January):46-56.
M. Scheele (2002). Never Mind the Gap: The Explanatory Gap as an Artifact of Naive Philosophical Argument. Philosophical Psychology 15 (3):333-342.
Barbara Montero (2003). The Epistemic/Ontic Divide. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 66 (2):404 - 418.
Sean Enda Power (2013). Perceiving External Things and the Time-Lag Argument. European Journal of Philosophy 21 (1):94-117.
Leonard S. Carrier (1969). The Time-Gap Argument. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 47 (December):263-272.
A. Olding (1978). The Time-Gap Argument. Metaphilosophy 9 (January):44-57.
L. S. Carrier (1972). Time-Gap Myopia. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 50 (May):55-57.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2010-08-10Total downloads9 ( #114,014 of 549,063 )Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,252 of 549,063 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
