Graduate studies at Western
Philosophia 40 (3):617-631 (2012)
|Abstract||Ockhamism implies that future contingents may be true, their historical contingency notwithstanding. It is thus opposed to both the Peircean view according to which all future contingents are false, and Supervaluationist Indeterminism according to which all future contingents are neither true nor false. The paper seeks to defend Ockhamism against two charges: the charge that it cannot meet the requirement that truths be grounded in reality, and the charge that it proves incompatible with objective indeterminism about the future. In each case, the defence draws on the idea that certain truths are truths only courtesy of others and of what makes the latter true. After introduction of the Ockhamist view, its competitors and implications, a suitable definition of grounded truth is being devised that both is faithful to the spirit of the grounding-requirement and allows the Ockhamist to heed that requirement quite comfortably. Then two senses in which the future might be open are being introduced, indeterminacy as failure of predetermination by past and present facts, and indeterminacy as failure of entailment by past and present truths. It is argued that while openness in the former sense, but not in the latter sense, coheres with the Ockhamist view, it is only openness in the former sense that matters for objective indeterminism.|
|Keywords||Time Open future Indeterminism Future contingents Grounding|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Ezio Di Nucci (2012). Knowing Future Contingents. Logos and Episteme 3 (1):43-50.
Alex Malpass & Jacek Wawer (2012). A Future for the Thin Red Line. Synthese 188 (1):117-142.
Michael Perloff & Nuel Belnap (2011). Future Contingents and the Battle Tomorrow. The Review of Metaphysics 64 (3):581-602.
Simo Knuuttila (2010). Medieval Commentators on Future Contingents in De Interpretatione. Vivarium 48 (1-2):75-95.
Nataša Rakić (1997). Past, Present, Future, and Special Relativity. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 48 (2):257-280.
Natasa Rakic (1997). Past, Present, Future, and Special Relativity. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 48 (2):257-280.
Alan Rhoda (2007). The Philosophical Case for Open Theism. Philosophia 35 (3-4):301-311.
Matthew H. Slater (2005). The Necessity of Time Travel (On Pain of Indeterminacy). The Monist 88 (3):362-369.
Berit Brogaard (2008). Sea Battle Semantics. Philosophical Quarterly 58 (231):326–335.
Benjamin H. Arbour (2013). Future Freedom and the Fixity of Truth: Closing the Road to Limited Foreknowledge Open Theism. [REVIEW] International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 73 (3):189-207.
Kristie Miller (2008). Backwards Causation, Time, and the Open Future. Metaphysica 9 (2):173-191.
Jc Beall (2012). Future Contradictions. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90 (3):547-557.
Allan Hazlett (2011). How the Past Depends on the Future. Ratio 24 (2):167-175.
Alan R. Rhoda (2010). Probability, Truth, and the Openness of the Future. Faith and Philosophy 27 (2):197-204.
Added to index2011-11-05
Total downloads23 ( #60,455 of 751,289 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #62,995 of 751,289 )
How can I increase my downloads?