Synthese 200 (2) (2022)

Authors
Yael Loewenstein
University of Houston
Abstract
1000 time-travelers travel back in time, each with the intention of killing their own infant-self. If there is no branching time, then on pain of bringing about a logical contradiction, all must fail. But this seems inexplicable: what is to ensure that the time-travelers are stopped? For a time, this inexplicability objection was thought to provide evidence that there is something incoherent about the possibility of backwards time travel in a universe without branching time. There is now near-consensus, however, that the objection has no bite: there is nothing inexplicable about the mass failure. Lewis, Sider and Ismael independently argue that since it is built into the description of the class of cases considered that the time-travelers must fail – and so we consider only unsuccessful attempts – there is no mystery. Smith argues that the absence of possible worlds at which auto-infanticide is committed suffices as a complete explanation for the failures. And Baron and Colyvan maintain that available causal and logical explanations jointly account for everything that needs accounting for. I argue that these are wrong. There is remaining, problematic inexplicability. For backwards time travel not to lead to logical contradiction, something would need to do logic’s bidding, after all.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s11229-022-03543-y
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 Paradoxes of Time Travel.David K. Lewis - 1976 - American Philosophical Quarterly 13 (2):145-152.
Time Enough for Explanation.Sam Baron & Mark Colyvan - 2016 - Journal of Philosophy 113 (2):61-88.
Time Travel, Coincidences and Counterfactuals.Theodore Sider - 2002 - Philosophical Studies 110 (2):115 - 138.
I’D Do Anything to Change the Past (But I Can’T Do ‘That').Nicholas J. J. Smith - 2017 - American Philosophical Quarterly 54 (2):153-168.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

What Tim Can and Cannot Do: A Paradox of Time Travel Revisited.Romy Jaster - 2020 - Kriterion - Journal of Philosophy 34 (4):93-112.
A New Grandfather Paradox?Theodore Sider - 1997 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 57 (1):139-144.
Time Travel and Modern Physics.Frank Arntzenius - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Time Travel and Modern Physics.Frank Arntzenius & Tim Maudlin - 2002 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 50:169-200.
“The Ravens Paradox” is a Misnomer.Roger Clarke - 2010 - Synthese 175 (3):427-440.
A New Solution to the Paradoxes of Rational Acceptability.Igor Douven - 2002 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 53 (3):391-410.
The Epistemic Virtues of Consistency.Sharon Ryan - 1996 - Synthese 109 (2):121-141.
Hempel's Raven Paradox: A Lacuna in the Standard Bayesian Solution.Peter B. M. Vranas - 2004 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 (3):545-560.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2022-01-08

Total views
136 ( #84,814 of 2,499,389 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
136 ( #4,713 of 2,499,389 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes