Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:10:55.100Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Shedding Light on Time

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Craig Callender
Craig Callender*
Affiliation:
London School of Economics
*
†Send requests for reprints to the author, Department of Philosophy, Logic & Scientific Method, The London School of Economics, Houghton St., London WC2A 2AE, U.K.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Throughout this century many philosophers and physicists have gone for the ‘big kill’ regarding tenses. They have tried to show via McTaggart's paradox and special relativity that tenses are logically and physically impossible, respectively. Neither attempt succeeds, though as I argue, both leave their mark. In the first two sections of the paper I introduce some conceptual difficulties for the tensed theory of time. The next section then discusses the standing of tenses in light of special relativity, especially recent work by Stein on the topic. I argue that, Stein's possibility theorem notwithstanding, special relativity is inconsistent with any philosophically interesting conception of tense. Finally, I search for help for tenses in the broader context of quantum theory, Lorentzian interpretations of time dilation/length contraction, and general relativistic spacetimes. I suggest that these avenues do not provide tenses the home for which some have hoped.

Type
Philosophy of Physics and Chemistry
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 67 , Issue S3: Supplement. Proceedings of the 1998 Biennial Meetings of the Philosophy of Science Association. Part II: Symposia Papers Sep., 2000 , 2000 , pp. S587 - S599
Copyright
Copyright © 2000 by the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albert, D. (1998), “Special Relativity As an Open Question”, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Bell, J. S. (1987), “How To Teach Special Relativity”, in Speakable and Unspeakable in Quantum Mechanics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 67–80.Google Scholar
Clifton, R. and Hogarth, M. (1995), “The Definability of Objective Becoming in Minkowski Spacetime”, Synthese 103, 355–387.10.1007/BF01089733CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dickson, M. (1998), Quantum Chance and Nonlocality. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorato, M. (1995), Time and Reality: Spacetime Physics and the Objectivity of Temporal Becoming. Bologna: CLUEB.Google Scholar
Earman, J. (1995), Bangs, Crunches, Whimpers and Shrieks: Singularities and Acausality in Relativistic Spacetimes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Godei, K. (1949), “A Remark About the Relationship Between Relativity Theory and Idealistic Philosophy”, in P. Schilpp (ed.) (1988), Albert-Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist. LaSalle, IL, Open Court, 557–562.Google Scholar
Goldstein, S. and Teufel, S. (forthcoming), “Quantum Spacetime Without Observers: On tological Clarity and the Conceptual Foundations of Quantum Gravity”, in Callender, C. and Huggett, N. (eds.), Physics Meets Philosophy at the Planck Scale, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hinchliff, M. (1996), “The Puzzle of Change”, in J. Tomberlin (ed.), Philosophical Perspectives: Metaphysics, 10, 119–136.Google Scholar
Maudlin, T. (1996), “Spacetime in a Quantum World” in Cushing, J.T., Fine, A., and Goldstein, S. (eds.), Bohmian Mechanics and Quantum Theory: An Appraisal. Boston: Kluwer, 285–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maxwell, N. (1985), “Are Probabilism and Special Relativity Incompatible?”, Philosophy of Science 52, 23–43.10.1086/289220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCall, S. (1994), A Model of the Universe. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Oaklander, N. (1998), “The Problem of Time and Change”, STOA 1, 1: 85–109.Google Scholar
Priest, G. (1986), “Tense and Truth Conditions”, Analysis 46: 162–166.10.1093/analys/46.4.162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, H. (1967), “Time and Physical Geometry”, Journal of Philosophy 64: 240–247.10.2307/2024493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rakic, N. (1997), “Past, Present, Future, and Special Relativity”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 48: 257–280.10.1093/bjps/48.2.257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stein, H. (1968), “On Einstein-Minkowski Space-Time”, Journal of Philosophy 65: 5–23.10.2307/2024512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stein, H. (1991), “On Relativity Theory and Openness of the Future”, Philosophy of Science 58: 147–167.10.1086/289609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weingard, R. (1972), “Relativity and the Reality of Past and Future Events”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 23: 119–121.10.1093/bjps/23.2.119CrossRefGoogle Scholar