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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Objects are wholly present at all temporal points of their existence.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Perdurance theory, defended by David Lewis in 'On the Plurality of Worlds,' holds that objects persist by having distinct temporal parts at each moment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If objects have temporal parts analogous to spatial parts, then no single temporal stage constitutes the whole object.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, the claim that objects are wholly present at any given moment commits a mereological error by confusing a temporal stage with the whole persisting entity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The problem of temporary intrinsics, identified by Lewis, shows that an object being bent at t1 and straight at t2 generates contradiction if the object is wholly present at both times.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Endurantism resolves this only by relativizing properties to times, which undermines the intuition that intrinsic properties belong to the object simpliciter rather than relationally.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The logical cost of preserving whole-presence is thus the abandonment of non-relational intrinsic predication, a consequence that destabilizes the very commonsense metaphysics the claim purports to defend.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.It is not natural to think of objects as having objects as their temporal parts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If objects do not have temporal parts, then objects cannot be thought of as series of short-lived objects stacked end to end.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The only coherent alternative is that an object is wholly present at each moment of its existence.
      ?

      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.