Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Eternalism and endurantism can be combined coherently

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Endurantism requires an object to be wholly present at t1 and wholly present at t2, yet numerically identical across both times.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Eternalism treats t1 and t2 as equally real, making the object's intrinsic properties at each time equally real and potentially contradictory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An object that is bent at t1 and straight at t2 cannot be wholly and numerically identical at both times without violating Leibniz's Law, as Lewis argued in 'On the Plurality of Worlds'.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Eternalism's block universe renders all temporal locations ontologically on a par with spatial locations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If times are analogous to places in the block universe, then an object 'wholly present' at multiple times is as paradoxical as a single object being wholly present at multiple distinct spatial locations simultaneously.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Endurantism's 'wholly present' relation presupposes a privileged present that eternalism structurally eliminates, making the combination incoherent at the level of foundational ontology, as Sider argues in 'Four-Dimensionalism'.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • A consistent metaphysical position can hold both that all times exist and that objects are wholly present at each time
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42