Advertisement

The Truth About the Past and the Future

  • Ned Markosian
Chapter
Part of the Synthese Library book series (SYLI, volume 361)

Abstract

This chapter is about The Truthmaker Problem for Presentism. I spell out a solution to the problem that involves appealing to indeterministic laws of nature and branching semantics for past- and future-tensed sentences. Then I discuss a potential glitch for this solution, and propose a way to get around that glitch. Finally, I consider some likely objections to the view offered here, as well as replies to those objections.

Keywords

Tense Operator Current Arrangement Standard Semantic Tense Logic Singular Proposition 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

Earlier versions of this material were presented at the University of Leeds and the University of Sydney in 2005. I am grateful to both audiences for helpful discussions. Also, the core ideas of this paper appeared in my 1990 doctoral dissertation at the University of Massachusetts. I am grateful to the members of my dissertation committee – Gary Matthews, Fred Feldman, Ed Gettier, and Angelika Kratzer – and also to David Cowles, Cranston Paull, Tom Ryckman, and Ted Sider for helpful discussions. I am also grateful to Andrea Borghini, Giuliano Torrengo, and an anonymous referee for comments on the penultimate draft.

References

  1. Armstrong, David. 1983. What is a law of nature? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bigelow, John. 1996. Presentism and properties. In Philosophical perspectives, vol. 10, ed. James Tomberlin, 35–52. Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  3. Cameron, Ross, Truthmakers. In The Oxford handbook of truth, ed. Michael Glanzberg. Oxford University Press, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  4. Dretske, Fred. 1977. Laws of nature. Philosophy of Science 44: 248–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Keller, Simon. 2004. Presentism and truthmaking. In Oxford studies in metaphysics, vol. 1, ed. Dean Zimmerman, 83–104. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Lewis, David. 1986. On the plurality of worlds. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  7. Lewis, David. 2001. Truthmaking and difference-making. Noûs 35: 602–615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lukasiewicz, Jan. 1967. On determinism. In Polish logic, ed. Storrs McCall, 19–39. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Markosian, Ned. 1993. How fast does time pass? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 53: 829–844.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Markosian, Ned. 1995. The open past. Philosophical Studies 79: 95–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Markosian, Ned. 2004. A defense of presentism. In Oxford studies in metaphysics, vol. 1, ed. Dean Zimmerman, 47–82. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Merricks, Trenton. 2007. Truth and ontology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1934. Collected papers of C.S. Peirce. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Plantinga, Alvin. 1974. The nature of necessity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Prior, Arthur. 1967. Past, present and future. Oxford: Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Sider, Theodore. 2001. Four-dimensionalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Smith, Barry. 1999. Truthmaker realism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 77: 274–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Thomason, Richmond. 1970. Indeterminist time and truth-value gaps. Theoria 36: 264–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Tooley, Michael. 1977. The nature of laws. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 7: 667–698.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyWestern Washington UniversityBellinghamUSA

Personalised recommendations