Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that If tenses quantify over times explicitly represented in propositional content, temporal variation is captured without relativizing the circumstance itself.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Explicit quantification over times presupposes we can represent all temporal information propositionally—but indexicals ('now,' 'today') resist such capture.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Moving temporal parameters into propositional content doesn't eliminate context-dependence; it merely relocates it from circumstances to the semantic content itself.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The claim requires that tenses function as quantifiers, but natural language tenses appear to mark temporal relations, not to range over temporal domains.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Explicit temporal quantification in propositions (e.g., 'at t1: snow is white') makes time an object of reference, not a parameter of evaluation.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Avoiding circumstance-relativization preserves objectivity: truth conditions depend on propositional content alone, not on shifting evaluation contexts.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
This approach elegantly handles cross-temporal comparisons without multiplying metaphysical entities like 'circumstances' indexed to times.
?
How convincing is this?
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.