Is Endurantism really more plausible than Perdurantism form a commonsense perspective?

Publikation: Beiträge in ZeitschriftenZeitschriftenaufsätzeForschungbegutachtet

Standard

Is Endurantism really more plausible than Perdurantism form a commonsense perspective? / Felletti, Flavia.
in: Praxis Filosofica, Jahrgang 45, 2017, S. 77-99.

Publikation: Beiträge in ZeitschriftenZeitschriftenaufsätzeForschungbegutachtet

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{7a6aec71a2264140b0e550c8fddd68a2,
title = "Is Endurantism really more plausible than Perdurantism form a commonsense perspective?",
abstract = "I will discuss three arguments in favor of perdurantism, the thesis that objects persist by having temporal parts located at different times. Firstly, I will introduce the rival accounts of persistence of perdurantism and endurantism. Then I will discuss three arguments for perdurantism: the problem of temporary intrinsics, the argument from vagueness and the argument from Special Relativity. I will conclude that none of them represents a knock-down argument for perdurantism. However, endurantism faces important difficulties in offering its solutions to the issues at stake, and the solutions proposed are often at odds with commonsense. Therefore, if one of the main problem for perdurantism is its being at odds with commonsense, endurantism is in no better position with respect to this issue.",
keywords = "Philosophy, Metaphysics of time, Endurantism, Perdurantism, Eternalism, Temporal parts, Constitution, Mereology",
author = "Flavia Felletti",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.25100/pfilosofica.v0i45S.6076",
language = "English",
volume = "45",
pages = "77--99",
journal = "Praxis Filosofica",
issn = "0120-4688",
publisher = "Universidad del Valle",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Is Endurantism really more plausible than Perdurantism form a commonsense perspective?

AU - Felletti, Flavia

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - I will discuss three arguments in favor of perdurantism, the thesis that objects persist by having temporal parts located at different times. Firstly, I will introduce the rival accounts of persistence of perdurantism and endurantism. Then I will discuss three arguments for perdurantism: the problem of temporary intrinsics, the argument from vagueness and the argument from Special Relativity. I will conclude that none of them represents a knock-down argument for perdurantism. However, endurantism faces important difficulties in offering its solutions to the issues at stake, and the solutions proposed are often at odds with commonsense. Therefore, if one of the main problem for perdurantism is its being at odds with commonsense, endurantism is in no better position with respect to this issue.

AB - I will discuss three arguments in favor of perdurantism, the thesis that objects persist by having temporal parts located at different times. Firstly, I will introduce the rival accounts of persistence of perdurantism and endurantism. Then I will discuss three arguments for perdurantism: the problem of temporary intrinsics, the argument from vagueness and the argument from Special Relativity. I will conclude that none of them represents a knock-down argument for perdurantism. However, endurantism faces important difficulties in offering its solutions to the issues at stake, and the solutions proposed are often at odds with commonsense. Therefore, if one of the main problem for perdurantism is its being at odds with commonsense, endurantism is in no better position with respect to this issue.

KW - Philosophy

KW - Metaphysics of time

KW - Endurantism

KW - Perdurantism

KW - Eternalism

KW - Temporal parts

KW - Constitution

KW - Mereology

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/0a41764b-c6ee-3bf5-8f7e-3640371a78de/

U2 - 10.25100/pfilosofica.v0i45S.6076

DO - 10.25100/pfilosofica.v0i45S.6076

M3 - Journal articles

VL - 45

SP - 77

EP - 99

JO - Praxis Filosofica

JF - Praxis Filosofica

SN - 0120-4688

ER -

DOI