At least since Aristotle’s famous ‘sea-battle’ passages in On Interpretation 9, some substantial minority of philosophers has been attracted to the doctrine of the open future—the doctrine that future contingent statements are never true. Such views, however, seem inconsistent with what John MacFarlane has called the determinacy intuition—the intuition, roughly, that if something has happened, then (looking backwards) it was the case that it would happen. This tension forms, in large part, what might be called the problem of future contingents. A dominant trend in semantic theorizing about future contingents—paradigmatically, Thomason (1970) and MacFarlane himself (2003, 2014)—has maintained that the apparent tension between the “open future” and the “determinacy intuition” is in fact merely apparent. In short, such theorists seek to maintain both of the following two theses: (i) the open future: Future contingents are not true, and (ii) retro-closure: From the fact that something is true, it follows that it was the case that it would be true. It is well-known that reflection on the problem of future contingents has in many ways been inspired by importantly parallel issues regarding divine omniscience, indeterminism, and time. In this paper, we take up this perspective, and ask what accepting both the open future and retro-closure predicts about omniscience. When we theorize about a perfect knower, we are theorizing about what an agent ought, and ought not, to believe. Our contention is that there isn’t an acceptable view of ideally rational belief given the assumptions of the open future and retro-closure, and thus this casts doubt on the conjunction of those assumptions.
|Keywords||the open future future contingents relativism supervaluationism omniscience indeterminacy|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
The Open Future, Bivalence and Assertion.Corine Besson & Anandi Hattiangadi - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 167 (2):251-271.
A Note on Assertion, Relativism and Future Contingents.J. Adam Carter - 2012 - Logos and Episteme 3 (1):139-144.
Omniscience in Łukasiewicz’s, Kleene’s and Blau’s Three-Valued Logics.Gerogiorgakis Stamatios - 2011 - Polish Journal of Philosophy 5 (1):59-78.
Wszechwiedza Boża a problem zła z perspektywy teizmu otwartego.Dariusz Łukasiewicz - 2012 - Filo-Sofija 12 (19).
Future Contingents Are All False! On Behalf of a Russellian Open Future.Patrick Todd - 2016 - Mind 125 (499):775-798.
Partial and Paraconsistent Approaches to Future Contingents in Tense Logic.Seiki Akama, Tetsuya Murai & Yasuo Kudo - forthcoming - Synthese:1-11.
The Abundance of the Future. A Paraconsistent Approach to Future Contingents.Roberto Ciuni & Carlo Proietti - 2013 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 22 (1):21-43.
Added to index2017-04-11
Total downloads109 ( #45,724 of 2,171,797 )
Recent downloads (6 months)109 ( #1,101 of 2,171,797 )
How can I increase my downloads?