No-futurism and Metaphysical Contingentism

Axiomathes 24 (4):483-497 (2014)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
According to no-futurism, past and present entities are real, but future ones are not. This view faces a skeptical challenge (Bourne 2002, 2006, Braddon-Mitchell, 2004): if no-futurism is true, how do you know you are present? I shall propose a new skeptical argument based on the physical possibility of Gödelian worlds (1949). This argument shows that a no-futurist has to endorse a metaphysical contingentist reading of no-futurism, the view that no-futurism is contingently true. But then, the no-futurist has to face a new skeptical challenge: how do you know that you are in a no-futurist world?
Reprint years
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
First archival date: 2014-05-05
Latest version: 3 (2016-04-16)
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Word and Object.Quine, Willard Van Orman

View all 42 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
L'éternité sans le temps.Le Bihan, Baptiste
Qu'est-ce que le temps ?Le Bihan, Baptiste
Getting tense about relativity.Read, James & Qureshi-Hurst, Emily

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
944 ( #3,289 of 50,239 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
38 ( #16,125 of 50,239 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.