Back to the actual future

Abstract

The purpose of the paper is to rethink the role of actuality in the branching model of possibilities. We investigate the idea that the model should be enriched with an additional factor-the so-called Thin Red Line-which is supposed to represent the single possible course of events that gets actualized in time. We believe that this idea was often misconceived which prompted some unfortunate reactions. On the one hand, it suggested problematic semantic models of future tense and and on the other, it provoked questionable lines of criticism. We reassess the debate and point to potential pitfalls, focusing on the semantic dimension of the Thin Red Line theory. Our agenda transcends the semantics, however. We conclude that semantic considerations do not threaten the Thin Red Line theory and that the proper debate should be carried in the domain of metaphysics.Keywords Branching time · Thin Red Line · Future contingents · Actualism The paper is structured as follows: In the first section, we motivate introduction of the Thin Red Line (TRL) and explain how it may be applied for semantic purposes. In the second, we outline the semantic objection raised against TRL theory by BelnapThe research of Jacek Wawer was funded by the Polish National Science Center (funds granted by the Decision Number DEC-2013/11/N/HS1/04805). Green (1994) according to which TRL theory treats temporal and modal operators inadequately. We explain how the objection may be overturned by a simple postsemantic maneuver-to interpret a sentence used at the time and the history of the context. The postsemantic move, which we ultimately recommend, appeals to the notion of the history of the context (which we identify with the actual history). In the third section we focus on a particular line of criticism of the simple postsemantics-the postsemantic problem of Belnap et al. (2001). In the next three sections, we discuss two postsemantic responses to the problem-by MacFarlane (2003) and by Malpass and Wawer (2012)-and outline some of their weak points. In the last section, we reassess and undermine the postsemantic problem. We argue that it is underlined by metaphysical assumptions alien to the TRL theory. When TRL is stated in its proper setting of modal actualism, the postsemantic problem has no teeth and the simple theory introduced in the second section turns out to be free of both semantic and postsemantic difficulties. Why do we need the Thin Red Line?The reasons supporting the TRL are twofold-metaphysical and semantic. As we shall see, these two domains are closely connected and the theoretical choices made in one domain usually affect the decisions made in another.Let us explore metaphysics first. The branching model is meant to represent the possible ways in which the world may develop (for detailed discussion of the model and its significance see e.g., Belnap et al. 2001;Rumberg 2016;Wawer 2016). As Aristotle noticed, the notion of possibility is intelligible only if contrasted with the notion of actuality. Thus, the branching represent...

Ockhamism and Philosophy of Time

“…A version of such a theory was proposed in and defended inWawer and Malpass (2020). Also, a very similar view was put forward byIacona (2014, see esp.…”

“…The theory I present here is faithful to the spirit of our original paper, but it better expresses (I hope) the intuitions which guided our research. For discussion of some (alleged) problems of our original theory, see and Wawer and Malpass (2020). is therefore a requirement to treat actual future contingents and merely possible future contingents differently.…”

“…The objection is expressed in various forms inMcArthur (1974, pp. 284-285),Belnap and Green (1994, p. 381),Perloff et al (2001, p. 162), MacFarlane (2003.3 Recently, Ockhamism has been elaborated and defended inØhrstrøm (2009),,Iacona (2013),,,Malpass and Wawer (2020).…”

Future and Negation

“…There are other forms of linearism that do not entail a deterministic conception of reality: In other terms, it is possible to combine an open metaphysical view of the future with linearist semantics. The Thin Red Line (TRL) semantics adopts this train of thought (see for instance, (Øhrstrøm, 1981Malpass & Wawer, 2012;Wawer, 2014;Wawer & Malpass, 2020)); according to TRL-theorists, future-tense sentences are interpreted with respect to the future history that will actually happen. Given an instant t, we thus have many histories radiating from t but one is privileged since it is the history that will become true.…”

Twardowski i przygodna przyszłość. Prawdopodobieństwo kontra Cienka Czerwona Linia

“…Jedną z szerzej komentowanych kwestii filozoficznych jest zagadnienie futura contingentia 1 , czyli problem stworzenia adekwatnej teorii semantycznej dla zdań o przygodnej przyszłości. Najczęściej omawianymi stanowiskami są tu peirceanizm, ockhamizm (Prior 1967), superwaluacjonizm (Thomason 1970(Thomason , 1984, relatywizm oceny (MacFarlane 2003(MacFarlane , 2008(MacFarlane , 2014 i teoria cienkiej czerwonej linii (Øhrstrøm 2009, Wawer, Malpass 2020.…”