structure for 'Natural Reality'    |     alphabetical list of themes    |     unexpand these ideas

27. Natural Reality / D. Time / 2. Passage of Time / f. Tenseless (B) series

[B-series, of equal times, with no past-present-future]

12 ideas
Quine holds time to be 'space-like': past objects are as real as spatially remote ones [Quine, by Sider]
     Full Idea: Quine's view is that time is 'space-like'. Past objects are as real as present ones; they're just temporally distant, just as spatially distant objects are just as real as the ones around here.
     From: report of Willard Quine (Mr Strawson on Logical Theory [1953]) by Theodore Sider - Logic for Philosophy 7.3.1
     A reaction: Something is a wrong with a view that says that a long-dead person is just as real as one currently living. Death is rather more than travelling to a distant place. Arthur Prior responded to Quine by saying 'tense operators' are inescapable.
The new tenseless theory offers indexical truth-conditions, instead of a reductive analysis [Le Poidevin]
     Full Idea: The new tenseless theory has given up Russell's attempt to reduce tensed statements (in terms of 'simultaneous with'), and instead give tenseless truth-conditions (in terms of indexicals).
     From: Robin Le Poidevin (Intro to 'Questions of Time and Tense' [1998], 3)
     A reaction: [compressed]
B-theorists say tensed sentences have an unfilled argument-place for a time [Fine,K]
     Full Idea: B-theorists regard tensed sentences as incomplete expressions, implicitly containing an unfilled argument-place for the time at which they are to be evaluated.
     From: Kit Fine (Necessity and Non-Existence [2005], 01)
     A reaction: To distinguish past from future it looks as if you would need two argument-places, not one. Then there are 'used to be' and 'had been' to evaluate.
To say that the past causes the present needs them both to be equally real [Le Poidevin]
     Full Idea: The causal connection between the past and the present seems to require that the past is as real as the present.
     From: Robin Le Poidevin (Travels in Four Dimensions [2003], 08 'First')
     A reaction: Cause and effect need to conjoin in space, but their subsequent separation doesn't seem to be a problem. The idea that causes and their effects must be eternally compresent is an absurdity.
The B-series doesn't seem to allow change [Le Poidevin]
     Full Idea: How can anything change in a B-universe?
     From: Robin Le Poidevin (Travels in Four Dimensions [2003], 08 'Second')
     A reaction: It seems that change needs time to move on. A timeless series of varying states doesn't seem to be the same thing as change. B-seriesers must be tempted to deny change, and yet nothing seems more obvious to us than change.
If the B-universe is eternal, why am I trapped in a changing moment of it? [Le Poidevin]
     Full Idea: What in the B-universe determines my temporal perspective? I can move around in space at will, but I have no choice over where I am in time. What time I am is something that changes, and again I have no control over that
     From: Robin Le Poidevin (Travels in Four Dimensions [2003], 08 'Second')
     A reaction: The B-series always has to be asserted from the point of view of eternity (e.g. by Einstein). Yet an omniscient mind would still see each of us trapped in our transient moments, so that is part of eternal reality.
The B-series involves eternalism, and the reduction of tense [Sider]
     Full Idea: The B-series has two components: eternalism - the thesis that all future entities are real - and the thesis of reducibility of tense.
     From: Theodore Sider (Four Dimensionalism [2001], 4.2)
The B-theory is adequate, except that it omits to say which time is present [Sider]
     Full Idea: The B-theoretic description of the world is completely adequate except that it leaves out information about which time is present.
     From: Theodore Sider (Four Dimensionalism [2001], 4.6)
     A reaction: This strikes me as a pretty basic deficiency. How could there a time which lacked a present moment? The present is when things happen. How would it qualify as time at all if it lacked past, present and future?
The B-series needs a revised view of causes, laws and explanations [Bardon]
     Full Idea: If we accept the static (B-series) view, we have to reevaluate how we think about causation, natural laws, and scientific explanation.
     From: Adrian Bardon (Brief History of the Philosophy of Time [2013], 4 'Pervasive')
     A reaction: Any scientific account which refers to events seems to imply a dynamic view of time. Lots of scientists and philosophers endorse the static view of time, but then fail to pursue its implications.
The B-series is realist about time, but idealist about its passage [Bardon]
     Full Idea: The B-series theorist is a realist about time but an idealist about the passage of time. This is the Static Theory of time.
     From: Adrian Bardon (Brief History of the Philosophy of Time [2013], 4 'Reasons')
     A reaction: Note the both A and B are realists about time, and thus deny both the relationist and the idealist view.
The B-series adds directionality when it accepts 'earlier' and 'later' [Bardon]
     Full Idea: The static (B-series) theory, by embracing the relational temporal properties 'earlier' and 'later', adds a directional ordering to the block of events.
     From: Adrian Bardon (Brief History of the Philosophy of Time [2013], 5 'Time's')
     A reaction: I'm not clear whether this addition to the B-series picture is optional or obligatory. It is important that it seems to be a bolt-on feature, not immediately implied by the timeless series. What would Einstein say?
The B-series can have a direction, as long as it does not arise from temporal flow [Baron/Miller]
     Full Idea: The view that time has a direction is entirely consistent with the B-theory of time, as long as time's having a direction is not a matter of it having temporal flow.
     From: Baron,S/Miller,K (Intro to the Philosophy of Time [2019], 5.5)
     A reaction: I'm not sure how you could account for an intrinsic direction to time if it is not because of the 'flow'. The B-series seems to invite a reductive account of time's direction (e.g. to entropy).