Tenseless/Non-Modal Truthmakers for Tensed/Modal Truths

Logique Et Analyse 199:269-287 (2007)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

There is a common approach to metaphysical disputes, which takes language as its starting point, and leads to a view about the range of acceptable metaphysical positions in any such dispute. I argue that this approach rests on accepting what I call the Strong Linguistic Thesis (SLT). In the metaphysical debate about time I argue that the new B-theory has rejected SLT, and for good reasons. The metaphysical debate about modality parallels the early metaphysical debate about time. I argue that a position analogous to the new B-theory of time is available in the modal debate, and has some advantages over its rivals.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-05-13

Downloads
640 (#41,031)

6 months
110 (#53,935)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Heather Dyke
University of Otago

Citations of this work

The Moodless Theory of Modality: An Introduction and Defence.Bradford Skow - 2022 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 100 (2):279-295.

Add more citations

References found in this work

On the Plurality of Worlds.David K. Lewis - 1986 - Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell.
On the Plurality of Worlds.David Lewis - 1986 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 178 (3):388-390.
Word and Object.Willard Van Orman Quine - 1960 - Les Etudes Philosophiques 17 (2):278-279.
From an ontological point of view.John Heil - 2003 - New York: Oxford University Press.
The Structure of Appearance.Nelson Goodman - 1951 - Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard University Press.

View all 41 references / Add more references