Full Idea
Since for presentism there is an ontologically significant and basic sense in which events are present, we should expect a definition of simultaneity in terms of presentness, rather than the other way round.
Gist of Idea
Since presentists treat the presentness of events as basic, simultaneity should be define by that means
Source
Craig Bourne (A Future for Presentism [2006], 6.IV)
Book Reference
Bourne,Craig: 'A Future for Presentism' [OUP 2006], p.174
A Reaction
Love it. I don't see how you can even articulate questions about simultaneity if you don't already have a notion of presentness. What are the relata you are enquiring about?