Synthese (forthcoming)

Authors
Kristie Miller
University of Sydney
James Norton
University of Iceland
Andrew James Latham
University of Sydney
Abstract
We investigated, experimentally, the contention that the folk view, or naïve theory, of time, amongst the population we investigated (i.e. U.S. residents) is dynamical. We found that amongst that population, (i) ~70% have an extant theory of time (the theory they deploy after some reflection, whether it be naïve or sophisticated) that is more similar to a dynamical than a non-dynamical theory, and (ii) ~70% of those who deploy a naïve theory of time (the theory that have on the basis of naïve interactions with the world and not on the basis of scientific investigation or knowledge) deploy a naïve theory that is more similar to a dynamical than a non-dynamical theory. Interestingly, while we found stable results across our two experiments regarding the percentage of participants that have a dynamical or non-dynamical extant theory of time, we did not find such stability regarding which particular dynamical or non-dynamical theory of time they take to be most similar to our world. This suggests that there might be two extant theories in the population—a broadly dynamical one and a broadly non-dynamical one—but that those theories are sufficiently incomplete that participants do not stably choose the same dynamical (or non-dynamical) theory as being most similar to our world. This suggests that while appeals to the ordinary view of time may do some work in the context of adjudicating disputes between dynamists and non-dynamists, they likely cannot do any such work adjudicating disputes between particular brands of dynamism (or non-dynamism).
Keywords experimental philosophy  time  concept  dynamism
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11229-019-02340-4
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

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

The Metaphysics within Physics.[author unknown] - 2007 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 69 (3):610-611.

View all 50 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Dynamical Systems and the Direction of Time.Claudio Mazzola - 2013 - In Pierluigi Graziani, Luca Guzzardi & Massimo Sangoi (eds.), Open Problems in Philosophy of Sciences. London: College Publications. pp. 217-232.
Reversible Dynamics and the Directionality of Time.Claudio Mazzola & Marco Giunti - 2012 - In Gianfranco Minati, Mario Abram & Eliano Pessa (eds.), Methods, Models, Simulations and Approaches towards a General Theory of Change. Singapore: World Scientific. pp. 161-172.
The Nature of Dynamical Explanation.Carlos Zednik - 2011 - Philosophy of Science 78 (2):238-263.
Why Dynamical Implementation Matters.James W. Garson - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (5):641-642.
Commentary: Why I Am Not a Dynamicist.Matthew Botvinick - 2012 - Topics in Cognitive Science 4 (1):78-83.
Dynamical Systems Theory and Explanatory Indispensability.Juha Saatsi - 2017 - Philosophy of Science 84 (5):892-904.
Time Reversal Symmetry and Collapse Models.D. J. Bedingham & O. J. E. Maroney - 2017 - Foundations of Physics 47 (5):670-696.
Computation, Dynamics, and Cognition.Marco Giunti - 1997 - Oxford University Press.
Dynamical System and Huygens' Principle.Ubiratan D'ambrosio - 1972 - Philosophia Mathematica (1):27-39.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-05-08

Total views
191 ( #48,648 of 2,403,030 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
37 ( #22,071 of 2,403,030 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes