Branching Time, Actuality and the Puzzle of Retrospective Determinacy

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
The supervaluationist approach to branching time (‘SBT-theory’) appears to be threatened by the puzzle of retrospective determinacy: if yesterday I uttered the sentence ‘It will be sunny tomorrow’ and only in some worlds overlapping at the context of utterance it is sunny the next day, my utterance is to be assessed as neither true nor false even if today is indeed a sunny day. John MacFarlane (“Truth in the Garden of Forking Paths” 81) has recently criticized a promising solution to this puzzle for falling short of an adequate account of ‘actually’. In this paper, I aim to rebut MacFarlane's criticism. To this effect, I argue that: (i) ‘actually’ can be construed either as an indexical or as a nonindexical operator; (ii) if ‘actually’ is nonindexical, MacFarlane's criticism is invalid; (iii) there appear to be independent reasons for SBT-theorists to claim that ‘actually’ is a nonindexical expression
Keywords
No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
LOSBTA
Revision history
Archival date: 2018-10-25
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Themes From Kaplan.Almog, Joseph; Perry, John & Wettstein, Howard (eds.)

View all 9 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2012-03-02

Total views
81 ( #27,801 of 41,462 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #39,581 of 41,462 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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