Some Future Contingents and Aristotle

Abstract

Aristotle argued that particular statements about the future were neither true nor false. Turner rejects this claim, arguing that implicit to such a theory is an untenable theory of time. Whilst developing a theory of time was not Aristotle’s intent, Turner believes his view does entail an ontology that is questionable at best. Once we have sorted out an acceptable theory of time, the only reasonable conclusions about all statements is that they are true or false. That we do not know whether our statements about the future are true or false is an epistemological problem. This claim is aimed at those who wish to adopt Aristotle’s view today.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 106,824

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Aristotle and the Future.Alex Blum - forthcoming - Symposion. Theoretical and Applied Inquiries in Philosophy and Social Sciences.
Fatalism and False Futures in De Interpretatione 9.Jason W. Carter - 2022 - Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 63:49-88.
The open future, bivalence and assertion.Corine Besson & Anandi Hattiangadi - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 167 (2):251-271.
Some Problems with the Russellian Open Future.Jacek Wawer - 2018 - Acta Analytica 33 (4):413-425.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-08-26

Downloads
14 (#1,384,326)

6 months
14 (#239,356)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Andrew John Turner
University of Adelaide (PhD)

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references