Apperception and the Unreality of Tense

In Christoph Hoerl & Teresa McCormack (eds.), Time and memory: issues in philosophy and psychology. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 375-391 (2001)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The aim of this essay is to characterize the issue whether tense is real. Roughly, this is the issue whether, given any tensed representation, its tense corresponds in some suitably direct way to some feature of reality. The task is to make this less rough. Eight characterizations of the issue are considered and rejected, before one is endorsed. On this characterization, the unreality of tense is equivalent to the unity of temporal reality. The issue whether tense is real, so characterized, is then related to Kant’s deduction of the categories in his Critique of Pure Reason. It is argued that Kant’s deduction does not provide the argument for the unreality of tense that it may appear to. The conclusion drawn at the end of the essay is that the unreality of tense cannot be argued for—not because tense is real, but because, even if it is unreal, its unreality is basic.

Author's Profile

Augusta Moore
University of Wisconsin, Madison

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-02-01

Downloads
238 (#79,443)

6 months
84 (#68,172)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?