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
    Presentism compels endurantism — Carmelics
    Home/Personal Identity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Presentism compels endurantism

    Modality & PossibilityPersonal Identity
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • The nature of presentism requires objects to endure rather than perdure
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Presentism is compatible with stage theory, where objects are instantaneous stages that wholly exist at present moments without temporal extension.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Stage theorists like Ted Sider argue that counterpart relations across times can ground persistence claims without requiring numerically identical objects to endure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Presentism entails only that whatever exists exists wholly in the present, which is equally satisfied by an object having no temporal parts as by an object being a single present stage.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The inference from 'wholly present' to 'enduring' commits a modal scope error, since 'wholly present at each time it exists' does not entail cross-temporal numerical identity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Personal IdentityModality & Possibility

    Related

    Presentism entails only that whatever exists exists wholly in the present, which...Presentism is compatible with stage theory, where objects are instantaneous stag...Stage theorists like Ted Sider argue that counterpart relations across times can...The inference from 'wholly present' to 'enduring' commits a modal scope error, s...
    +1 moreShow less
    The nature of presentism requires objects to endure rather than perdure

    Similar

    Eternalism and endurantism can be combined coherently90%Eternalism rules out endurantism90%Eternalism and endurantism should not be combined89%Presentists should be endurantists86%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: temporal-parts
    View source passageHide passage
    Suggested Reading: Earlier discussions of temporal parts paid close attention to analogies and disanalogies between space and time: e.g. Taylor (1955), Meiland (1966); Butterfield (1985) reflects on these. Lombard (1999) and Brogaard (2000) argue that presentism is compatible with perdurantism, while Merricks (1995) and Hestevold and Carter (2002) argue that presentism compels endurantism. Benovsky (2009) takes an even-handed approach. Merricks (1995) and Hinchliff (1996) argue that eternalism r
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit