Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Higher‐Order Being and Time.Lukas Skiba - forthcoming - Noûs.
    Higher‐order metaphysicians take facts to be higher‐order beings, i.e., entities in the range of irreducibly higher‐order quantifiers. In this paper, I investigate the impact of this conception of facts on the debate about the reality of tense. I identify two major repercussions. The first concerns the logical space of tense realism: on a higher‐order conception of facts, a prominent version of tense realism, dynamic absolutism, turns out to conflict with the laws of (higher‐order tense) logic. The second concerns our understanding (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • LeMans’s gontological argument.Stephen Kearns - 2021 - Analysis 81 (3):447-452.
    LeMans’s gontological argument aims to prove the non-existence of God on the basis that it is possible to conceive of a being that is greater than any actual thing. If God were actual, then it would be possible to conceive of something greater than God. As this is not possible, God does not exist.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The a-theory of time, temporal passage, and comprehensiveness.Bahadir Eker - 2022 - Synthese 200 (2):1-20.
    It has been argued recently that one major difficulty facing the A-theory of time consists in the view’s failure to provide a satisfactory account of the passage of time. Critics have objected that this particular charge is premised on an unduly strong conception of temporal passage, and that the argument does not go through on alternative, less demanding conceptions of passage. The resulting dialectical stalemate threatens to prove intractable, given the notorious elusiveness of the notion of temporal passage. Here I (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Moving Spotlighter’s Way of ‘Unfreezing the Spotlight’.Nihel H. Jhou - 2021 - Analysis 81 (3):439-447.
    In their 2020 paper ‘Unfreezing the spotlight’, Correia and Rosenkranz argue that the spotlight theory – the mix of the view that, always, everything always exists and the view that there is a metaphysically robust property of presentness for times – is sufficient for temporal passage, and that the fact ‘that this robust property of presentness attaches to different times as time goes by … is unnecessary’. In this paper, I shall reveal that Correia and Rosenkranz’s spotlight theory is a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations