The moving spotlight theory

Deasy, Daniel

doi:10.1007/s11098-014-0398-5

Cited by 73 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…5 Growing blockers include Broad (1923), Tooley (1997), and Forrest (2004). 6 Sullivan (2012) and Deasy (2015) defend the moving spotlight theory. 7 Versions of this definition are given by, for example, Bigelow (1996, 35), Crisp (2003, 215), De Clercq (2006, Markosian (2004, 47, n.1), Meyer (2005 and Sider (1999, 326).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is Presentism?

Deasy

2015

Nous

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Different versions of the A‐theory of time (according to which some instant of time is absolutely, objectively present) are traditionally defined in terms of whether everything is present, or whether there are also past and future things. In this paper I argue that the traditional way of defining A‐theories should be abandoned. I focus on the traditional definition of presentism, according to which always, everything is present (§2). First, I argue that there are good reasons to reject all the most plausible interpretations of the predicate ‘is present’ as it appears in the traditional definition of presentism (§3). It follows that there are also good reasons to reject the most plausible interpretations of the traditional definitions of the other A‐theories. I then argue that there is a better way of defining the A‐theories, in terms of the question of whether existence has a beginning and an end (§4). Finally, I argue that what goes for the traditional definition of presentism goes for the traditional definition of its modal analogue actualism, according to which necessarily, everything is actual (§5): there are good reasons to reject the traditional definition of actualism in favour of a definition in terms of contingent existence.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is Presentism?

Deasy

2015

Nous

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…I do not explicitly consider that argument here, but some of the discussion in what follows is relevant. 10 Eternalists include B-theorists such as Sider (2001) and Skow (2015) and Moving Spotlighters such as Deasy (2015) and Cameron (2016). 11 There is a further response to the argument that I do not consider here, due to Cameron (2016).…”

Section: Tense and Trivialitymentioning

confidence: 99%

The triviality argument against presentism

Deasy

2017

Synthese

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One proposal focuses on whether the ontology of the world is subject to change . For example, Daniel Deasy has recently defended what he calls the moving spotlight theory, which he takes to be the combination of the A‐Theory (that there is an objectively privileged present) and the following principle (Deasy ).…”

Section: Presentism Eternalism and Permanentismmentioning

confidence: 99%

On Characterizing the Presentism/Eternalism and Actualism/Possibilism Debates

Cameron

2016

Philosophical Books

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The moving spotlight theory

Cited by 73 publications

References 19 publications

What is Presentism?

What is Presentism?

The triviality argument against presentism

On Characterizing the Presentism/Eternalism and Actualism/Possibilism Debates

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About