Advertisement

The Concept of Time: A Philosophical and Logical Perspective

  • Peter ØhrstrømEmail author
Part of the Studies in Brain and Mind book series (SIBM, volume 9)

Abstract

As pointed out by St. Augustine we cannot give a proper definition of time as such. Furthermore, conceiving time as a literal object would be highly problematic. It is, however, possible to establish a conceptual framework for meaningful discussion of the temporal aspects of reality in terms of the philosophical logic of time developed by Arthur Norman Prior. This framework is based on the view that John McTaggart’s A-language is more fundamental than the B-language. Prior’s view can be seen as based on some important properties of human experiences of time, and it involves the claim that it is useful to study the temporal aspects of reality in terms of so-called branching time models. This can in fact be done in several ways. It turns out that some of the most attractive and richest theories based on the ideas of branching time may be seen as formalisations of medieval and other early suggestions made by scholars such as William of Ockham and Luis de Molina. The tense-logical formalism appears to be useful wherever it is important to reason strictly regarding the temporal aspects of reality. Prior’s approach gives rise to a formal language which is relevant in the context of Julius T. Frazer’s hierarchical understanding of time as such and in the study of time in general. It offers a very powerful way to deal with time in a conceptually consistent, systematic and precise manner.

Keywords

Temporal logic Tense-logic Branching time Temporal aspects of reality The thin red line 

References

  1. Augustine, Saint. 1955. Confessions. Trans. and ed. Albert C. Outler. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/Augustine/Confessions. Accessed 6 July 2014.
  2. Belnap, Nuel, Michael Perloff, and Ming Xu. 2001. Facing the future: Agents and choices in our indeterminist world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. de Molina, Luis. 1988. On divine foreknowledge Trans. Alfred J. Freddoso. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Frazer, Julius T. 1978. The individual and society. In The study of time III, ed. Julius T. Frazer, N. Lawrence, and D. Park, 419–442. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Jakobsen, David. 2013. Arthur Norman Priors bidrag til metafysikken, Ph.D. dissertation. Department of Communication and Psychology, Aalborg University.Google Scholar
  6. McTaggart, John M.E. 1908. The unreality of time. Mind: A Quarterly Review of Psychology and Philosophy 17: 456–473.Google Scholar
  7. Mumford, Lewis. 2010. Technics and civilization. Chicago: University of Chicago Press (First published in 1934).Google Scholar
  8. Øhrstrøm, Peter. 2011. Towards a common language for the discussion of time based on Prior’s tense logic. In Multidisciplinary aspects of time and time perception, ed. Argiro Vatakis, Anna Esposito, Maria Giagkou, Fred Cummins, and Georgios Papadelis, 46–57. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Øhrstrøm, Peter, and Per Hasle. 1995. Temporal logic: From ancient ideas to artificial intelligence. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ploug, Thomas, and Peter Øhrstrøm. 2012. Branching time, indeterminism and tense logic. Synthese 188(3): 367–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Pnueli, Amir. 1977. The temporal logic of programs. In Proceeding SFCS ‘77: Proceedings of the 18 th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 46–57. Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
  12. Prior, Arthur N. 1957. Time and modality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Prior, Arthur N. 1959. Thank goodness that’s over. Philosophy 34: 12–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Prior, Arthur N. 1967. Past, present and future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Prior, Arthur N. 1972. The notion of the present. In The study of time, ed. Julius T. Fraser, F.C. Haber, and C.H. Müller, 320–323. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Prior, Arthur N. 1996a. A statement on temporal realism. In Logic and reality: Essays on the legacy of Arthur Prior, ed. Jack Copeland, 45–46. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  17. Prior, Arthur N. 1996b. Some free thinking about time. In Logic and reality: Essays on the legacy of Arthur Prior, ed. Jack Copeland, 47–51. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  18. Prior, Arthur N. 2003. In Papers on time and tense, new edition, ed. Per Hasle, Peter Øhrstrøm, Torben Braüner, and Jack Copeland. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. William of Ockham. 1969. Predestination, God’s foreknowledge, and future contingents Trans. Marilyn McCord Adams and Norman Kretzmann. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Communication and PsychologyAalborg UniversityAalborgDenmark

Personalised recommendations