Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Is the relativity of simultaneity a temporal illusion?B. Brogaard & K. Marlow - 2013 - Analysis 73 (4):635-642.
    Tensism holds that the present moment has a special status that sets it apart from the past and the future, independently of perceivers. One of the main objections to this view has been Einstein’s argument from special relativity, which aims at showing that absolute simultaneity is a myth. We argue that the moving observer in a causal variant of Einstein’s original thought experiment is subject to a temporal illusion. Owing to the analogy of the cases, this casts doubt on the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • (1 other version)Critical notice.Paul Fitzgerald - 1985 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 15 (4):695-705.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Moving Spotlight Theory.Daniel Deasy - 2015 - Philosophical Studies 172 (8):2073-2089.
    The aim of this paper is to describe and defend the moving spotlight theory of time. I characterise the moving spotlight theory as the conjunction of two theses: permanentism, the thesis that everything exists forever, and the A-theory, the thesis that there is an absolute, objective present time. I begin in Sect. 2 by clearing up some common misconceptions about the moving spotlight theory, focusing on the discussion of the theory in Sider. In doing so, I also fill-out the barebones (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   73 citations  
  • Philosophical Arguments Against the A-Theory.Daniel Deasy - 2018 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 99 (2):270-292.
    According to the A-theory of time some instant of time is absolutely present. Many reject the A-theory on the grounds that it is inconsistent with current spacetime physics, which appears to leave no room for absolute presentness. However, some reject the A-theory on purely philosophical grounds. In this article I describe three purely philosophical arguments against the A-theory and show that there are plausible A-theoretic responses to each of them. I conclude that, whatever else is wrong with the A-theory, it (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • Common Sense, Ontology and Time: A Critique of Lynne Rudder Baker's View of Temporal Reality.L. Nathan Oaklander - forthcoming - Manuscrito 39 (4):117-156.
    ABSTRACT The aim of this paper is twofold: First, to critically discuss Lynne Rudder's Baker BA-theory of time, and second to contrast it with the R-theory (after Russell). In the course of my discussion I will contrast three different methodological approaches regarding the relation between common sense and ontology; clarify Russell's authentic view in contrast to the B-theory which is McTaggart's misrepresentation of Russell, and consider how the R-theory can respond to objections Baker makes to eternalism (as she understands it).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • (1 other version)Time. [REVIEW]Paul Fitzgerald - 1985 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 15 (4):695-705.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark