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 claim that things have temporal parts if and only if ... — Carmelics
    Home/Personal Identity
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

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

    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
    ?
    • 1.If this biconditional holds, there can be no mixed worlds in which some things perdure and others endure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The biconditional conflates ontological commitment to temporal parts with metaphysical claims about the reality of tense, which are logically independent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.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.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, the existence of temporal parts does not entail eternalism, severing the biconditional's right-to-left direction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Haslanger's distinction between 'property-variation perdurance' and 'mereological perdurance' shows that processes can have temporal parts under a thin ontology that does not commit to the full reality of past and future.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If processes perduring requires only that they have successive stages picked out by our descriptions rather than robustly real future entities, then endurantists can coherently accept process perdurance without accepting an eternalist ontology.
      ?

      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

    Haslanger's distinction between 'property-variation perdurance' and 'mereologica...If processes perduring requires only that they have successive stages picked out...If this biconditional holds, there can be no mixed worlds in which some things p...Most endurantists think that processes perdure, which would require a mixed worl...
    +3 moreShow less
    Sider's 'four-dimensionalism' explicitly allows that perdurance is compatible wi...The biconditional conflates ontological commitment to temporal parts with metaph...Therefore, the existence of temporal parts does not entail eternalism, severing ...

    Similar

    If things have temporal parts if and only if the past and the future e...83%If the past and future do not exist, there is nowhere and nowhen for '...80%Presentists might therefore claim that the banana did have temporal pa...79%Endurantism claims that things are wholly present whenever they exist78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    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
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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