Abstract
AbstractA basic intuition we have regarding the nature of time is that the future is open whereas the past is fixed. However, although this intuition is largely shared, it is not a straightforward matter to determine the nature of the asymmetry it reflects. So, in this chapter, I survey the various philosophical ways of characterizing the asymmetry in openness between the future and the past in order to account for our intuition. In particular, I wonder whether the asymmetry is to be characterized in semantic, epistemic, anthropocentric, physical, modal, metaphysical or ontological terms. I conclude that an ontological characterization of the asymmetry is to be preferred, since it is superior to the alternatives in explanatory power, intelligibility, and in how it coheres with interesting senses of openness.
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Reference131 articles.
1. Albert, D. (1994). Quantum mechanics and experience. Harvard University Press.
2. Albert, D. (2000). Time and chance. Harvard University Press.
3. Andreoletti, G. (2020). Back to the (Branching) Future. Acta Analytica, 35, 181–194.
4. Aristotle. (2014). Categories, on interpretation, and on sophistical refutations. E. M. Edghill (Trans.), Neeland Media LLC.
5. Bacon, A. (2019). Is reality fundamentally qualitative? Philosophical Studies., 176, 259–295.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献