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
    The A series generates an infinite regress of contradicti... — Carmelics
    Home/Divine Attributes
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The A series generates an infinite regress of contradictions rather than resolving the original contradiction

    Divine Attributes
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.McTaggart's original regress shows that A-series defenders must posit a second-order A-series to explain the first, generating the same contradiction at every level.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Broad and Dummett confirmed that no metalinguistic or perspectival restatement escapes this structure, since any higher-order series reintroduces tense and thus inherits the contradiction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A resolution that merely relocates rather than eliminates a contradiction is logically equivalent to no resolution at all, making the regress vicious rather than benign.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Mellor's 'Real Time' demonstrates that every proposed A-series escape route—including token-reflexive, relational, and presentist variants—still requires tensed facts that themselves must be ordered by a further A-series.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A series whose explanatory structure is isomorphic to the structure it was introduced to explain cannot provide foundational grounding, entailing the regress is not merely infinite but explanatorily circular.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Any time t possesses incompatible A properties (past, present, future)
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.To explain how t possesses these incompatible A properties, additional times must be invoked
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.These additional times must themselves possess all of the same incompatible A properties
      ?

      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

    Divine Attributes

    Related

    A resolution that merely relocates rather than eliminates a contradiction is log...A series whose explanatory structure is isomorphic to the structure it was intro...Any further times invoked to explain those additional times must also possess al...Any time t possesses incompatible A properties (past, present, future)
    +6 moreShow less
    Broad and Dummett confirmed that no metalinguistic or perspectival restatement e...McTaggart's original regress shows that A-series defenders must posit a second-o...Mellor's 'Real Time' demonstrates that every proposed A-series escape route—incl...These additional times must themselves possess all of the same incompatible A pr...This process continues ad infinitum, generating more contradictions at each stepTo explain how t possesses these incompatible A properties, additional times mus...

    Similar

    This process continues ad infinitum, generating more contradictions at...79%Even God cannot survey infinitely many propositions because the series...74%The Divine Nature is essentially infinite and incomprehensible.71%A reductio ad absurdum has been presented showing that such a scenario...71%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: time
    View source passageHide passage
    One response to this argument that McTaggart anticipates involves claiming that it’s not true of any time, t, that t is both future and past. Rather, the objection goes, we must say that it was future at some moment of past time and will be past at some moment of future time. But this objection fails, according to McTaggart, because the additional times that are invoked in order to explain t’s possession of the incompatible A properties must themselves possess all of the same A properties (as mu
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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