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 Sider's 'four-dimensionalism' explicitly allows that perdurance is compatible with presentism if temporal parts are construed as instantaneous intrinsic property-bearers rather than requiring robust past/future ontology.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Instantaneous temporal parts lack duration; it's unclear how momentary entities constitute genuine perdurance across time.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Without past/future parts, the identity relation connecting temporal stages becomes mysterious and under-motivated theoretically.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This hybrid view may collapse into endurantism, undermining four-dimensionalism's core claim that persistence involves having distinct parts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Presentism requires only present entities; instantaneous temporal parts exist only now, avoiding commitment to non-existent past/future.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Intrinsic properties of instantaneous stages can ground facts about persistence without positing robust cross-temporal reality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This reconciliation preserves four-dimensionalism's explanatory power for change while respecting presentism's temporal ontology.
      ?

      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.