Future Contingents, Freedom, and Foreknowledge

Dissertation, Wayne State University (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This essay is a contribution to the new trend and old tradition of analyzing theological fatalism in light of its relationship to logical fatalism. All results pertain to branching temporal systems that use the A-theory and assume presentism. The project focuses on two kinds of views about branching time. One position is true futurism, which designates what will occur regardless of contingency. The opposing view is open futurism, by which no possible course of events is privileged over others; that is, there are no soft facts. A contextualist theory of temporal standpoints, standpoint inheritance, is designed to enhance Priorian temporal logics. The proposal helps all branching time systems, not only those with an open future. Even though an account of temporal standpoints goes a long way towards aiding various analyses linguistically, theories that designate a true future ultimately succumb to philosophical difficulties. Under open futurism, standpoint inheritance commandeers the best semantic evidence for true futurism. Standpoint inheritance accounts for the evidence, but the evidence does not support true futurism's stronger claims. Furthermore, attempts to explain why one timeline is privileged as the actual future lead to fatalism. Open futurism and a related kind of open theism are the only viable alternatives under dynamic, branching time. If true futurism is feasible at all, it is so only with a static or eternalist basis. Standpoint inheritance is very general. It is applied to every system discussed in this analysis to handle damning linguistic shortcomings of traditional logics. Standpoint inheritance yields several other fruitful results, too. The theory helps clarify what it is for characterizations of God's beliefs to be soft and how his beliefs must differ from normal beliefs to retain softness. For open futurism, all strings of consecutive will's and was's can be reduced to at most two such operators under standpoint inheritance, but not under traditional theories. The open futurist distinction between will and will-inevitably is clarified, too. Standpoint inheritance allows for a supervaluationist semantics using open futurism as its basis instead of the usual true futurism. The theory of standpoint inheritance enhances dynamic, branching accounts of time to better compete with their static correlates.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,907

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The philosophical case for open theism.Alan Rhoda - 2007 - Philosophia 35 (3-4):301-311.
A future for the thin red line.Alex Malpass & Jacek Wawer - 2012 - Synthese 188 (1):117-142.
Branching and (in)determinism.Jiri Benovsky - 2013 - Philosophical Papers 42 (2):151-173.
Temporal Necessity; Hard Facts/Soft Facts.William Lane Craig - 1986 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 20 (2/3):65 - 91.
In Defence of Ockhamism.Sven Rosenkranz - 2012 - Philosophia 40 (3):617-631.
The Real Truth About the Unreal Future.Rachael Briggs & Graeme A. Forbes - 2012 - In Karen Bennett & Dean W. Zimmerman (eds.), Oxford Studies in Metaphysics volume 7. Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
Ockhamism without Thin Red Lines.Andrea Iacona - 2014 - Synthese 191 (12):2633-2652.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-02-03

Downloads
47 (#346,774)

6 months
1 (#1,508,411)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Mohammed Abouzahr
Wayne State University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references