Philosophical Studies

, Volume 175, Issue 10, pp 2429–2446 | Cite as

Imprints in time: towards a moderately robust past

  • Michael Tze-Sung LongeneckerEmail author


Presentism says that only present objects exist (timelessly). But the view has trouble grounding past-tensed truths like “dinosaurs existed”. Standard Eternalism grounds those truths by positing the (timeless) existence of past objects—like dinosaurs. But Standard Eternalism conflicts with the intuition that there is genuine change—the intuition that there once were dinosaurs and no longer are any. I offer a novel theory of time—‘The Imprint’—that does a better job preserving both the grounding and genuine change intuitions. The Imprint says that the past and present exist (in the timeless sense), but where the present exhibits mass-energy, the past only consists of curved empty regions of spacetime. We therefore avoid saying that there are dinosaurs, since there is no mass-energy in the past; but the curvature of the past gives us a way to ground the truth that “dinosaurs existed”.


Grounding Genuine change Eternalism Presentism Growing block Spacetime Curvature General relativity 


  1. Armstrong, D. M. (1997). A world of states of affairs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Belnap, N. D., Perloff, M., & Xu, M. (2001). Facing the future: agents and choices in our indeterminist world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Bigelow, J. (1996). Presentism and properties. Philosophical Perspectives, 10, 35.Google Scholar
  4. Bilson-Thompson, S., Markopoulou, F., & Smolin, L. (2007). Quantum gravity and the standard model. Classical and Quantum Gravity, 24(16), 3975–3993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bourne, C. (2006). A future for presentism. Oxford: Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Butterfield, J. (2005). On the emergence of time in quantum gravity. In J. Butterfield (Ed.), The arguments of time (pp. 111–167). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Cameron, R. P. (2015). The moving spotlight: an essay on time and ontology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chisholm, R. M. (1976). Person and object: a metaphysical study. La Salle: Open Court Pub. Co.Google Scholar
  9. Craig, W. L. (2001). Time and the metaphysics of relativity. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Crisp, T. (2004a). On presentism and triviality. In D. Zimmerman (Ed.), Oxford studies in metaphysics (Vol. 1, pp. 15–20). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  11. Crisp, T. (2004b). Reply to Ludlow. In D. Zimmerman (Ed.), Oxford studies in metaphysics (pp. 37–46). Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  12. Crisp, T. M. (2007). Presentism and the grounding objection. Nous, 41(1), 90–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Deasy, D. (2015). The moving spotlight theory. Philosophical Studies, 172(8), 2073–2089.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Einstein, A. (1916). The foundation of the general theory of relativity. Annalen der Physik, 49, 769–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fales, E. (1990). Causation and universals. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Forrest, P. (2006). Uniform grounding of truth and the growing block theory: a reply to Heathwood. Analysis, 66(290), 161–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Forrest, P. (2008). Relativity, the passage of time and the cosmic clock. In D. Dieks (Ed.), The ontology of spacetime II (pp. 245–253). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hawthorne, J., & Uzquiano, G. (2011). How many angels can dance on the point of a needle? Transcendental theology meets modal metaphysics. Mind, 120(477), 53–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Heathwood, C. (2007). On what will be: Reply to Westphal. Erkenntnis, 67(1), 137–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Heller, M. (1984). Temporal parts of four dimensional objects. Philosophical Studies, 46(3), 323–334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Heller, M. (1998). Property counterparts in ersatz worlds. The Journal of Philosophy, 95(6), 293–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kierland, B., & Monton, B. (2007). Presentism and the objection from being- supervenience. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 85(3), 485–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kripke, S. (1980). Naming and necessity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.Google Scholar
  24. Lehmkuhl, D. (forthcoming). The metaphysics of super-substantivalism. Noûs.Google Scholar
  25. Lewis, D. (1986). On the plurality of worlds. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  26. Lewis, D. (2001). Truthmaking and difference-making. Nous, 35(4), 602–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lewis, D. (2009). Ramseyan humility. In D. Braddon-Mitchell & R. Nola (Eds.), Conceptual analysis and philosophical naturalism (pp. 203–222). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  28. Lombard, L. B. (2010). Time for a change: a polemic against the Presentism-Eternalism debate. In J. K. Campbell, M. O'Rourke, & H. Silverstein (Eds.), Time and identity (pp. 49–77). Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lowe, E. J. (1987). The indexical fallacy in McTaggart’s proof of the unreality of time. Mind, 96(381), 62–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lucas, J. R. (2008). The special theory and absolute simultaneity. In W. L. Craig & Q. Smith (Eds.), Einstein, relativity and absolute simultaneity (pp. 279–290). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Markosian, N. (1993). How fast does time pass? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 53(4), 829–844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Markosian, N. (2003). A defense of presentism. In D. Zimmerman (Ed.), Oxford studies in metaphysics (Vol. 1, pp. 47–82). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. McDaniel, K. (2013). Degrees of being. Philosopher’s Imprint, 13(19), 1–18.Google Scholar
  34. McDaniel, K. (Online Manuscript). The Fragmentation of Being.Google Scholar
  35. Mctaggart, J. M. E. (1908). The unreality of time. Mind, 17, 457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Merricks, T. (2007). Truth and ontology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Meyer, U. (2005). The Presentist’s dilemma. Philosophical Studies, 122(3), 213–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mozersky, M. J. (2011). Presentism. In C. Callendar (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy of time (pp. 122–143). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Paul, L. A. (2006). Coincidence as overlap. Noûs, 40(4), 623–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Popper, K. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  41. Prior, A. N. (1967). Past, present and future. Oxford: Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Prior, A. N. (1996). Some free thinking about time. In B. J. Copeland (Ed.), Logic and reality: essays on the legacy of arthur prior (pp. 47–51). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Psillos, S. (2006). What do powers do when they are not manifested? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 72(1), 137–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Putnam, H. (1967). Time and physical geometry. The Journal of Philosophy, 64(8), 240–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schaffer, J. (2009a). On what grounds what. In D. J. Chalmers, D. Manley, & R. Wasserman (Eds.), Metametaphysics new essays on the foundations of ontology (pp. 347–383). Oxford, New York: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  46. Schaffer, J. (2009b). Spacetime the one substance. Philosophical Studies, 145(1), 131–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Shoemaker, S. (1980). Causality and properties. In P. van Inwagen (Ed.), Time and cause: Essays presented to Richard Taylor (pp. 109–135). Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sider, T. (2001). Four-dimensionalism: an ontology of persistence and time. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Sider, T. (2006). Quantifiers and temporal ontology. Mind, 115(457), 75–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sider, T. (2011). Writing the book of the world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Skow, B. (2015). Objective becoming. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Smart, J. J. C. (1956). The river of time. In A. Flew (Ed.), Essays in conceptual analysis (pp. 213–227). New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
  53. Sober, E. (1980). Evolution, population thinking, and essentialism. Philosophy of Science, 47(3), 350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sullivan, M. (2012). The minimal A-theory. Philosophical Studies, 158(2), 149–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Swoyer, C. (1982). The nature of natural laws. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 60(3), 203–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Szabo, Z. G. (2006). Counting across times. Philosophical Perspectives, 20(1), 399–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wesson, P. S. (1999). Space-time-matter modern Kaluza-Klein theory. Singapore: World Scientific.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wheeler, J. A. (1962). Geometrodynamics. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  59. Will, C. (2014). The confrontation between general relativity and experiment. Living Reviews in Relativity, 17(1), 1–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Williams, N. E. (2009). The ungrounded argument is unfounded: a response to Mumford. Synthese, 170(1), 7–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Williams, N. E. (2011). Dispositions and the argument from science. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 89(1), 71–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Williamson, T. (2002). Necessary existents. In A. O’Hear (Ed.), Logic, thought and language (pp. 233–251). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Zimmerman, D. (2005). The A-Theory of Time, The B-Theory of Time, and ‘Taking Tense Seriously’. Dialectica, 59(4), 401–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Zimmerman, D. (2011). Presentism and the space-time manifold. In C. Callender (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy of time (pp. 163–239). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Notre DameNotre DameUSA

Personalised recommendations