Faith and Philosophy 22 (3):363-369 (2005)
|Abstract||Linda Zagzebski has recently argued that there is a conflict between a common view of the asymmetry of time and various other metaphysical hypotheses. She identifies conflicts in the case of the modal arrow of time and in the case of the causal arrow of time. In the case of the modal arrow I argue that on one view there is no conflict and that on another the principle should be abandoned that there are entailments between propositions about the past and the future. In the case of the causal arrow I argue that the conflict can be avoided by the adoption of a suitable closure principle|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Mario Castagnino, Manuel Gadella & Olimpia Lombardi (2005). Time's Arrow and Irreversibility in Time-Asymmetric Quantum Mechanics. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 19 (3):223 – 243.
Jos Uffink (2001). Bluff Your Way in the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B 32 (3):305-394.
Mario Castagnino & Olimpia Lombardi (2009). The Global Non-Entropic Arrow of Time: From Global Geometrical Asymmetry to Local Energy Flow. Synthese 169 (1):1 - 25.
Linda Zagzebski (2002). ``Omniscience and the Arrow of Time&Quot. Faith and Philosophy 19:503-519.
Linda Zagzebski (2002). Omniscience and the Arrow of Time. Faith and Philosophy 19 (4):503-519.
Étienne Klein (2007). About the Confusion Between the Course of Time and the Arrow of Time. Foundations of Science 12 (3).
Hugh Rice (2005). Zagzebski on the Arrow of Time. Faith and Philosophy 22 (3):363-369.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?