more from this thinker
|
more from this text
Single Idea 12297
[filed under theme 9. Objects / E. Objects over Time / 5. Temporal Parts
]
Full Idea
Even if one is a three-dimensionalist, one might affirm the existence of temporal parts, on the grounds that everything merely endures for an instant.
Clarification
See Idea 12295 for 'three-dimensionalist'
Gist of Idea
Three-dimensionalist can accept temporal parts, as things enduring only for an instant
Source
Kit Fine (In Defence of Three-Dimensionalism [2006], p.2)
Book Ref
'Being: Developments in Contemporary Metaphysics', ed/tr. Le Poidevin,R [CUP 2008], p.2
A Reaction
This seems an important point, as belief in temporal parts is normally equated with four-dimensionalism (see Idea 12296). The idea is that a thing might be 'entirely present' at each instant, only to be replaced by a simulacrum.
Related Ideas
Idea 12296
4-D says things are stretched in space and in time, and not entire at a time or at a location [Fine,K]
Idea 12295
3-D says things are stretched in space but not in time, and entire at a time but not at a location [Fine,K]
The
21 ideas
with the same theme
[things have parts in time, as they do in space]:
13267
|
Temporal parts is a crazy doctrine, because it entails constantly creating stuff ex nihilo
[Thomson, by Koslicki]
|
16209
|
How can point-duration slices of people have beliefs or desires?
[Thomson]
|
17521
|
You can't have the concept of a 'stage' if you lack the concept of an object
[Ayers]
|
17514
|
Temporal 'parts' cannot be separated or rearranged
[Ayers]
|
16023
|
Stage theorists accept four-dimensionalism, but call each stage a whole object
[Noonan]
|
12297
|
Three-dimensionalist can accept temporal parts, as things enduring only for an instant
[Fine,K]
|
17279
|
Even a three-dimensionalist might identify temporal parts, in their thinking
[Fine,K]
|
14730
|
Temporal parts exist, but are not prior building blocks for objects
[Sider]
|
14731
|
Temporal parts are instantaneous
[Sider]
|
14758
|
How can an instantaneous stage believe anything, if beliefs take time?
[Sider]
|
14762
|
Four-dimensionalism says temporal parts are caused (through laws of motion) by previous temporal parts
[Sider]
|
16203
|
Stage Theory seems to miss out the link between stages of the same object
[Hawley]
|
16204
|
Stage Theory says every stage is a distinct object, which gives too many objects
[Hawley]
|
16205
|
The stages of Stage Theory seem too thin to populate the world, or to be referred to
[Hawley]
|
16206
|
Stages must be as fine-grained in length as change itself, so any change is a new stage
[Hawley]
|
16212
|
An isolated stage can't be a banana (which involves suitable relations to other stages)
[Hawley]
|
16213
|
Stages of one thing are related by extrinsic counterfactual and causal relations
[Hawley]
|
13927
|
We must explain change amongst 'momentary entities', or else the world is inexplicable
[Haslanger]
|
13928
|
If the things which exist prior to now are totally distinct, they need not have existed
[Haslanger]
|
14410
|
You believe you existed last year, but your segment doesn't, so they have different beliefs
[Merricks]
|
14561
|
Perdurantism imposes no order on temporal parts, so sequences of events are contingent
[Mumford/Anjum]
|