Temporal existence and temporal location

  • Fabrice CorreiaEmail author
  • Sven Rosenkranz


We argue that sensitivity to the distinction between the tensed notion of being something and the tensed notion of being located at the present time serves as a good antidote to confusions in debates about time and existence, in particular in the debate about how to characterise presentism, and saves us the trouble of going through unnecessary epicycles. Both notions are frequently expressed using the tensed verb ‘to exist’, making it systematically ambiguous. It is a commendable strategy to avoid using that verb altogether in these contexts and to use quantification and a location predicate instead.


Time Existence Location Presentism Tense 



Funding was provided by the European Commission's H2020 programme under grant agreement H2020-MSCA-ITN-2015-675415 and the Swiss National Science Foundation (project BSCGI0_157792).


  1. Cameron, R. (2017). On characterizing the presentism/externalism and actualism/possibilism debates. Analytic Philosophy, 57, 110–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Correia, F., & Rosenkranz, S. (2015). Presentism without presentness. Thought, 4, 19–27.Google Scholar
  3. Costa, D. (2017). The transcendentist theory of persistence. The Journal of Philosophy, 114, 57–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Crisp, T. M. (2004a). On presentism and triviality. In D. W. Zimmerman (Ed.), Oxford studies in metaphysics (Vol. 1, pp. 15–20). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Crisp, T. M. (2004b). Reply to Ludlow. In D. W. Zimmerman (Ed.), Oxford studies in metaphysics (Vol. 1, pp. 37–46). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Deasy, D. (2017). The triviality argument against presentism. Synthese. Scholar
  7. Deng, N. (2018). What is temporal ontology? Philosophical Studies, 175, 793–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ingram, D., & Tallant, J. (2018). Presentism. In N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2018 edition). <
  9. Lombard, L. B. (1999). On the alleged incompatibility of presentism and temporal parts. Philosophia, 27, 253–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lombard, L. B. (2010). Time for a change: A polemic against the presentism–eternalism debate. In J. K. Campbell, M. O’Rourke, & H. S. Silverstein (Eds.), Time and identity (pp. 49–77). Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ludlow, P. (2004). Presentism, triviality, and the varieties of tensism. In D. W. Zimmerman (Ed.), Oxford studies in metaphysics (Vol. 1, pp. 21–36). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Meyer, U. (2005). The presentist’s dilemma. Philosophical Studies, 122, 213–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Meyer, U. (2013). The triviality of presentism. In R. Ciuni, et al. (Eds.), New papers on the present: Focus on presentism (pp. 67–87). Munich: Philosophia Verlag.Google Scholar
  14. Miller, K. (2013). Presentism, eternalism, and the growing block. In H. Dyke & A. Bardon (Eds.), A companion to the philosophy of time (pp. 345–364). Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mozersky, M. J. (2011). Presentism. In C. Callender (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of philosophy of time (pp. 122–144). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Sider, T. (1999). Presentism and ontological commitment. The Journal of Philosophy, 96, 325–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sider, T. (2006). Quantifiers and temporal ontology. Mind, 115, 75–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Stoneham, T. (2009). Time and truth: The presentism-eternalism debate. Philosophy, 84, 201–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Tallant, J. (2014). Defining existence presentism. Erkenntnis, 79, 479–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Thomasson, A. (1999). Fiction and metaphysics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Torrengo, G. (2012). Time and simple existence. Metaphysica, 13, 125–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Williamson, T. (2013). Modal logic as metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Zimmerman, D. W. (1998). Temporary intrinsics and presentism. In P. van Inwagen & D. W. Zimmerman (Eds.), Metaphysics: The big questions (pp. 206–219). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of GenevaGeneva 4Switzerland
  2. 2.ICREA and Department of PhilosophyUniversity of BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations