Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter March 16, 2018

Time as Motion

Emiliano Boccardi
From the journal Metaphysica

Abstract

The arena of the philosophy of time has been largely concerned with deciding whether tense distinctions reflect absolute metaphysical distinctions or not. After bringing the debate over the metaphysical status of instantaneous velocity to bear on the debate over the nature of temporal passage, I argue that we should further investigate whether aspectual distinctions reflect objective and absolute metaphysical distinctions too. I conclude that those who think that being realist about tense uniquely makes room for the idea that time passes should be realist about the progressive too.

Acknowledgements

Research for this paper was supported by grant 2015/20138-2 from FAPESP (Brazil). I wish to thank Nathan Oaklander for his insightful comments on earlier drafts of this paper.

References

Albert, D. Z. 2000. Time and Chance. Cambridge (MA), London: Harvard University Press.10.4159/9780674020139Search in Google Scholar

Arntzenius, F. 2000. “Are There Really Instantaneous Velocities?” The Monist 83: 187–208.10.5840/monist20008328Search in Google Scholar

Bergson, H. 1998 [1911]. Creative Evolution. Translated by Arthur Mitchell. New York: Dover.Search in Google Scholar

Bigelow, J. 1991. “Worlds Enough for Time.” Noûs 25: 1–19.10.2307/2216090Search in Google Scholar

Bigelow, J., and R. Pargetter. 1990. Science and Necessity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511551611Search in Google Scholar

Boccardi, E. 2015. “If It Ain’t Moving It Shall Not Be Moved.” In Special Issue of Topoi: Time and Time Experience, edited by R. Ciuni and G. Torrengo, 34 (1): 171–185.Search in Google Scholar

Boccardi, E. 2016. “Recent Trends in the Philosophy of Time: An Introduction to Time and Reality I.” In Special Issue of Manuscrito: Time and Reality I, edited by E. Boccardi, 39: 5–34.10.1590/0100-6045.2016.v39n4.ebSearch in Google Scholar

Broad, C. D. 1923. Scientific Thought. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and Company.Search in Google Scholar

Carroll, J. 2002. “Instantaneous Motion.” Philosophical Studies 110: 49–67.10.1023/A:1019824927383Search in Google Scholar

Christensen, F. 1993. Space-Like Time. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Search in Google Scholar

Crisp, T. 2007. “Presentism and the Grounding Objection.” NOÛS 41 (1): 90–109.10.1111/j.1468-0068.2007.00639.xSearch in Google Scholar

Dummett, M. 2000. “Is Time a Continuum of Instants?” Philosophy 75 (294): Oct., 2000 497–515.10.1017/S0031819100000644Search in Google Scholar

Fine, K., ed. 2005. “Tense and Reality.” In Modality and Tense: Philosophical Papers, 261–320. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/0199278709.003.0009Search in Google Scholar

Forrest, P. 2004. “The Real but Dead Past: A Reply to Braddon-Mitchell.” Analysis 64: 358–362.10.1093/analys/64.4.358Search in Google Scholar

James, W. 1987. Writings 1902–1910. New York, NY: Literary Classics of the United States Inc.Search in Google Scholar

Lange, M. 2005. “How Can Instantaneous Velocity Fulfill Its Causal Role?” The Philosophical Review 114 (4): 433–468.10.1215/00318108-114-4-433Search in Google Scholar

Leftow, B. 2014. “Instants, Events, and God.” In Debates in the Metaphysics of Time, edited by N. Oaklander. London: Bloomsbury.Search in Google Scholar

McLaughlin, W., and S. Miller. 1992. “An Epistemological Use of Nonstandard Analysis to Answer Zeno’s Objections against Motion.” Synthese 92 (3): 371–384.10.1007/BF00414288Search in Google Scholar

Montague, R. 1974. “Towards a Proper Treatment of Quantification in English.” In Formal Philosophy, edited by R. H. Thomason. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Oaklander, N. 2010. “McTaggart’s Paradox and Crisp’s Presentism.” Philosophia 38: 229–241.10.1007/s11406-009-9222-4Search in Google Scholar

Prior, A. 1968. Papers on Time and Tense. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Search in Google Scholar

Prior, A. N. 1970. “The Notion of the Present.” Studium Generale 23: 245–248.10.1007/978-3-642-65387-2_22Search in Google Scholar

Robinson, A. 1966. Non-Standard Analysis. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Co.Search in Google Scholar

Russell, B. 1903 [1938]. Principles of Mathematics. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.Search in Google Scholar

Russell, B. 1981 [1929]. “Mathematics and the Metaphysicians.” In Mysticism and Logic, edited by B. Russel, 59–74. Totawa, NJ: Barnes and Noble Books.Search in Google Scholar

Russell, B. 2001 [1929]. The Problem of Infinity Considered Historically, reprinted in Salmon, W. C., 2001, Zeno’s Paradoxes, 2nd ed. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Co. Inc.10.4324/9780203875360-8Search in Google Scholar

Skow, B. 2012. “Why Does Time Pass?.” Nous 46 (2012): 223–242.10.1111/j.1468-0068.2010.00784.xSearch in Google Scholar

Smith, S. 2003. “Are Instantaneous Velocities Real and Really Instantaneous?.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 34 (2003): 261–280.10.1016/S1355-2198(03)00007-8Search in Google Scholar

Tallant, J. 2010. “A Sketch of A Presentist Theory of Passage.” Erkenntnis 73: 133–140.10.1007/s10670-010-9215-5Search in Google Scholar

Tallant, J. 2016. “Temporal Passage and the ‘No Alternate Possibilities’ Argument.” In Special Issue of Manuscrito: Time and Reality I, edited by E. Boccardi, Vol. 39: 35–47.10.1590/0100-6045.2016.v39n4.jtSearch in Google Scholar

Tooley, M. 1988. “In Defense of the Existence of States of Motion.” Philosophical Topics 16 (1): 225–254.10.5840/philtopics19881618Search in Google Scholar

Tooley, M. 1997. Time, Tense, and Causation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Williams, D. C. 1951. “The Myth of Passage.” Journal of Philosophy 48: 457–472.10.2307/2021694Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2018-3-16
Published in Print: 2018-3-26

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Scroll Up Arrow