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
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Most endurantists think that processes perdure, which wou... — Carmelics
    Home/Personal Identity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The claim that things have temporal parts if and only if the past and future exist has a peculiar consequence.

    Most endurantists think that processes perdure, which would require a mixed world.

    Personal Identity
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Personal Identity

    Connections

    1 topic

    Modality & Possibility2 linked

    Related

    If this biconditional holds, there can be no mixed worlds in which some things p...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Personal Identity
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    The claim that things have temporal parts if and only if the past and future exi...

    Similar

    There cannot be 'mixed' worlds in which some things perdure and others...75%Eternalism and endurantism can be combined coherently72%Presentism is incompatible with perdurantism, endurantism, and stage t...70%Eternalism and endurantism should not be combined68%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: temporal-parts
    View source passageHide passage
    If we could establish that things have temporal parts if and only if the past and the future exist, this would raise a number of issues. First, should we attempt to establish a theory of persistence, and then let this dictate our theory of time? Or should we start with the theory of time? (See section 7 for an argument from physics against presentism and thus, perhaps, against endurantism.) Or can we somehow establish both at once? Second, tying the dispute about persistence to the dispute abo

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective