Abstract

In this paper, I examine the combination of Presentism and theories of persistence. To do this, first I point out that the current most standard eternalist formulation of theories of persistence, the one based on spatiotemporal location, has three theoretical virtues: (1) it provides a clear understanding of “wholly present”, (2) it allows us to understand the opposition of these theories as substantive, (3) it adequately captures the explanatory nature of these theories. Next, I argue that various presentist formulations of theories of persistence fail to have some of these virtues. This means, I argue, that it is still unclear what it is for presentism that things persist and what it is for presentism to explain persistence.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call