Ratio 24 (2):167-175 (2011)
It is often said that, according to common sense, there is a fundamental asymmetry between the past and future; namely, that the past is closed and the future is open. Eternalism in the ontology of time is often seen as conflicting with common sense on this point. Here I argue against the claim that common sense is committed to this fundamental asymmetry between the past and the future, on the grounds that facts about the past often depend on facts about the future.1
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
Truthmakers, the Past, and the Future.Josh Parsons - 2005 - In Helen Beebee & Julian Dodd (eds.), Truthmakers: The Contemporary Debate. Clarendon Press.
Past, Present, Future, and Special Relativity.Natasa Rakic - 1997 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 48 (2):257-280.
The Necessity of Time Travel (On Pain of Indeterminacy).Matthew H. Slater - 2005 - The Monist 88 (3):362-369.
When What Had to Happen Was Not Bound to Happen: History, Chance, Narrative, Evolution.John Beatty & Isabel Carrera - 2011 - Journal of the Philosophy of History 5 (3):471-495.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads131 ( #36,478 of 2,169,723 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #345,460 of 2,169,723 )
How can I increase my downloads?