Diodorus' “master” argument: A semantic interpretation [Book Review]
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Erkenntnis 15 (1):65 - 72 (1980)
This paper discusses the 'master argument' of diodorus cronos from a semantic perspective. An argument is developed which suggests that proposition (1), 'every proposition true about the past is necessary', May have provided the principal motivation for diodorus denial of proposition (3), I.E., His equation of possibility with present-Or-Future truth. It is noted that (1) and (3) are jointly inconsistent only given the assumption of a linear ordering of time. It is further noted that diodorus' fatalism "could" be employed to justify this additional assumption. However, To then use the conclusion of the 'master' to argue for fatalism would obviously be circular. I suspect, Rather, That diodorus' assumption of temporal linearity was implicit and uncritical
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Configure|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Jaakko Hintikka (1964). Aristotle and the "Master Argument" of Diodorus. American Philosophical Quarterly 1 (2):101 - 114.
John Sutula (1976). Diodorus and the “Master Argument”. Southern Journal of Philosophy 14 (3):323-343.
Nicholas Rescher (1966). A Version of the "Master Argument" of Diodorus. Journal of Philosophy 63 (15):438-445.
R. McKirahan (1979). Diodorus and Prior and the Master Argument. Synthese 42 (2):223 - 253.
Frederick Seymour Michael (1976). What Is the Master Argument of Diodorus Cronus? American Philosophical Quarterly 13 (3):229 - 235.
Jennifer Smalligan Marusic (2009). Comments on Michael Jacovides “How Berkeley Corrupted His Capacity to Conceive”. Philosophia 37 (3):431-436.
Harry Ide (1992). Chrysippus's Response to Diodorus's Master Argument. History and Philosophy of Logic 13 (2):133-148.
Adam Sennet (2008). The Binding Argument and Pragmatic Enrichment, or, Why Philosophers Care Even More Than Weathermen About 'Raining'. Philosophy Compass 3 (1):135-157.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads13 ( #100,521 of 1,088,403 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #69,601 of 1,088,403 )
How can I increase my downloads?