David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Australasian Journal of Philosophy 91 (2):311-324 (2013)
This paper defends stage theory against the argument from diachronic counting. It argues that stage theorists can appeal to quantifier domain restriction in order to accommodate intuitions about diachronic counting sentences. Two approaches involving domain restriction are discussed. According to the first, domains of counting are usually restricted to stages at the time of utterance. This approach explains intuitions in many cases, but is theoretically costly and delivers wrong counts if diachronic counting is combined with fission or fusion. On the second approach, domains of counting are usually restricted in an indeterminate way, so as to include at most one member of any maximal class of counterpart-interrelated stages (with respect to a certain utterance). This view can accommodate all the relevant intuitions about counting sentences, and it fits well with a new stage-theoretic view of reference that allows speakers to refer to both present and past stages.
|Keywords||Metaphysics Theories of Persistence Perdurantism Stage Theory Worm Theory Quantifier Domain Restriction|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Wylie Breckenridge & Ofra Magidor (2012). Arbitrary Reference. Philosophical Studies 158 (3):377-400.
Katherine Hawley (2001). How Things Persist. Oxford University Press.
K. Manfred (1990). Four Thousand Ships Passed Through the Lock: Object-Induced Measure Functions on Events. [REVIEW] Linguistics and Philosophy 13 (5):487-520.
Ned Markosian (2004). A Defence of Presentism. Oxford Studies in Metaphysics 1 (3):47-82.
Mark Moyer (2008). Why We Shouldn't Swallow Worm Slices: A Case Study in Semantic Accommodation. Noûs 42 (1):109–138.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Yuri Balashov (2002). On Stages, Worms, and Relativity. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 50:223-.
Joshua M. Stuchlik (2003). Not All Worlds Are Stages. Philosophical Studies 116 (3):309-321.
Sarah Moss (2012). Four-Dimensionalist Theories of Persistence. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90 (4):671-686.
Yuri Balashov (2007). About Stage Universalism. Philosophical Quarterly 57 (226):21–39.
Tobias Hansson Wahlberg (2008). Can I Be an Instantaneous Stage and yet Persist Through Time? Metaphysica 9 (2):235-239.
Jeffrey F. Sicha (1970). Counting and the Natural Numbers. Philosophy of Science 37 (3):405-416.
Tobias Hansson Wahlberg (2009). Objects in Time: Studies of Persistence in B-Time. Dissertation, Lund University
Theodore Sider (1996). All the World's a Stage. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 74 (3):433 – 453.
Jiri Benovsky (2009). Eternalist Theories of Persistence Through Time: Where the Differences Really Lie. Axiomathes 19 (1):51-71.
Jessica M. Wilson (2000). Could Experience Disconfirm the Propositions of Arithmetic? Canadian Journal of Philosophy 30 (1):55-84.
Martin Otto (1996). The Expressive Power of Fixed-Point Logic with Counting. Journal of Symbolic Logic 61 (1):147-176.
Stephen Wright (2010). The Leibniz's Law Problem (For Stage Theory). Metaphysica 11 (2):137-151.
Jessica M. Wilson (2000). Could Experience Disconfirm the Propositions of Arithmetic? Canadian Journal of Philosophy 30 (1):55--84.
Added to index2012-06-13
Total downloads43 ( #38,844 of 1,101,094 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #34,441 of 1,101,094 )
How can I increase my downloads?