The Growing Block, the Epistemic Objection and Zombie Parrots

IF 0.1 Q3 Arts and Humanities Disputatio (Spain) Pub Date : 2021-12-01 DOI:10.2478/disp-2021-0022
N. Markosian
{"title":"The Growing Block, the Epistemic Objection and Zombie Parrots","authors":"N. Markosian","doi":"10.2478/disp-2021-0022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this book symposium contribution, I raise a question about Correia and Rosenkranz’s version of the Growing Block Theory: Is it meant to be a Four-Dimensionalist theory (with a commitment to temporal parts), or a Three-Dimensionalist theory (according to which an object is wholly present whenever it is present)? I argue that a downside of giving the first answer to this question (that the theory is committed to temporal parts) is that in that case their theory will be vulnerable to the Epistemic Objection to the Growing Block Theory. I further argue that an important advantage of giving the second answer to my question (that the theory does not come with a commitment to temporal parts) is that the Three-Dimensionalist version of the Growing Block Theory is not susceptible to the Epistemic Objection. And I also suggest that an apparent disadvantage of saying that their theory is a Three-Dimensionalist theory, namely, that in that case they will have difficulty answering questions about the properties of non-present objects (such as parrots from the distant past), can be dealt with in a way that does not commit them to either zombie parrots or bare particulars.","PeriodicalId":52369,"journal":{"name":"Disputatio (Spain)","volume":"79 1","pages":"399 - 410"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Disputatio (Spain)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/disp-2021-0022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract In this book symposium contribution, I raise a question about Correia and Rosenkranz’s version of the Growing Block Theory: Is it meant to be a Four-Dimensionalist theory (with a commitment to temporal parts), or a Three-Dimensionalist theory (according to which an object is wholly present whenever it is present)? I argue that a downside of giving the first answer to this question (that the theory is committed to temporal parts) is that in that case their theory will be vulnerable to the Epistemic Objection to the Growing Block Theory. I further argue that an important advantage of giving the second answer to my question (that the theory does not come with a commitment to temporal parts) is that the Three-Dimensionalist version of the Growing Block Theory is not susceptible to the Epistemic Objection. And I also suggest that an apparent disadvantage of saying that their theory is a Three-Dimensionalist theory, namely, that in that case they will have difficulty answering questions about the properties of non-present objects (such as parrots from the distant past), can be dealt with in a way that does not commit them to either zombie parrots or bare particulars.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
成长障碍、认知异议与僵尸鹦鹉
在这本书研讨会的投稿中,我提出了一个关于Correia和Rosenkranz版本的增长块理论的问题:它意味着是一个四维理论(承诺时间部分),还是一个三维理论(根据它,一个物体无论何时都是完全存在的)?我认为,对这个问题给出第一个答案(即理论致力于时间部分)的一个缺点是,在这种情况下,他们的理论将容易受到对增长块理论的认识论异议的影响。我进一步认为,对我的问题给出第二个答案的一个重要优势(即该理论不涉及时间部分)是,生长块理论的三维版本不容易受到认识论反对意见的影响。我还建议说,说他们的理论是一个三维理论的明显缺点,即,在这种情况下,他们将很难回答关于非现在物体(比如来自遥远过去的鹦鹉)的特性的问题,可以用一种既不会把他们变成僵尸鹦鹉也不会把他们变成纯粹的细节的方式来处理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Disputatio (Spain)
Disputatio (Spain) Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
35 weeks
期刊最新文献
Indexicals in Fiction Comparatives in Context Introduction: Varieties of Context-Sensitivity in a Pluri-Propositionalist Reflexive Semantic Framework First-Person Plural Indexicals Formalizing English Contextuals
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1