Logic, Thought and Action pp 291-313

Part of the Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science book series (LEUS, volume 2)

Agents and Agency in Branching Space-Times

  • Nuel Belnap

Abstract

Branching time puts an indeterminist causal structure on instantaneous but world-wide “super-events” called moments. This theory has “action at a distance” as an inevitable presupposition. In contrast, branching space-times puts an indeterminist causal order on tiny little point events. The benefit of branching space-times theory is that it can represent local indeterminist events with only local outcomes. The “seeing to it that” or “stit” theory of agency developed in Belnap, Perloff and Xu, 2001 employs branching time as a substructure, and thus has the following shortcoming: It is inevitably committed to an account of action-outcomes that makes them instantaneously world-wide. This essay asks how the stit theory of agency can be adapted to branching space-times in such a way that action-outcomes are local.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Belnap N. (1992). “Branching Space-Time”. Synthese 385–434.Google Scholar
  2. ____ (1999). “Concrete Transitions.” In Actions, norms, values: Discussions with Georg Henrik von Wright. G. Meggle, Ed. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 227–236. A “postprint” (2002) may be obtained from http://philsci-archive.pitt.eduGoogle Scholar
  3. ____ (2002a). Double Time References: Speech-Act Reports as Modalities in an Indeterminist Setting. In Wolter et al, 37–58. A preprint of this essay may be obtained from http://www.pitt.edu/~belnapGoogle Scholar
  4. ____ (2002b). A Theory of Causation: Causae causantes (Originating Causes) as inus Conditions in Branching Space-Times. A preprint of this essay may be obtained from http://philsci.archive.pitt.edu.Google Scholar
  5. ____ (2002c). No-Common-Cause EPR-Like Funny Business in Branching Space-Times. Forthcoming in Philosophical studies. A preprint of this essay may be obtained from http://philsci-archive.pitt.eduGoogle Scholar
  6. ____ (2002d). Branching Histories Approach to Indeterminism and Free Will. This essay may be obtained from http://philsci-archive.pitt.eduGoogle Scholar
  7. ____ (2002e). EPR-like ‘Funny Business’ in the Theory of Branching Space-Times. In Placek and Butterfield 2002, 293–315. A preprint of this essay may be obtained from http://philsci-archive.pitt.eduGoogle Scholar
  8. Belnap N., Perloff M. and Xu M. Facing the Future: Agents and Choices in our Indeterminist World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2000.Google Scholar
  9. Copley B. (2000). “Conceptualizing the Futurate and the Future”. In MIT working papers in philosophy and linguistics: The linguistics / philosophy interface, Bhatt R., Hawley P., Kackl M. and Maitra I. eds. Cambridge MA.: MIT Press. 45–72.Google Scholar
  10. Horty J.F. (2001). Agency and Deontic Logic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Kane R. (1998). The Significance of Free Will. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Müller T. (2002). Branching Space-Time, Modal Logic and the Counterfactual Conditional. In Placek and Butterfield, 273–291.Google Scholar
  13. Placek T. (2000a) “Stochastic Outcomes in Branching Space-Time: Analysis of Bell’s Theorem”. British journal for the philosophy of science, 51:445–475.Google Scholar
  14. ____ (2000). Is Nature Deterministic?. Kraków: Jagiellonian University Press.Google Scholar
  15. ____ (2002b). Partial Indeterminism is Enough: a Branching Analysis of Bell-Type Inequalities. In Placek and Butterfield 2002, 317–342.Google Scholar
  16. Placek T. and Butterfield J. (20020). Non-Locality and Modality. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  17. Rakić N. (1997). Common-Sense Time and Special Relativity. Ph. D. thesis. University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  18. Szabo L. and Belnap N. (1996). Branching Space-Time Analysis of the GHZ Theorem. Foundations of physics, 26,8:989–1002.Google Scholar
  19. Thomson J. (1977). Acts and Other Events. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Wolter F., Wansing H., de Rijke M. and Zakharyaschev M. “Advances in Modal Logic”. World Scientific Co. Pte. Ltd, 2002:3. Singapore.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nuel Belnap
    • 1
  1. 1.Pittsburgh UniversityPittsburgh

Personalised recommendations