Our Experience of Passage on the B-Theory
Elsewhere I have suggested that the B-theory includes a notion of passage, by virtue of including succession. Here, I provide further support for that claim by showing that uncontroversial elements of the B-theory straightforwardly ground a veridical sense of passage. First, I argue that the B-theor...
Saved in:
Published in | Erkenntnis Vol. 78; no. 4; pp. 713 - 726 |
---|---|
Main Author | |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
Dordrecht
Springer
01.08.2013
Springer Netherlands Springer Nature B.V |
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get full text |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Elsewhere I have suggested that the B-theory includes a notion of passage, by virtue of including succession. Here, I provide further support for that claim by showing that uncontroversial elements of the B-theory straightforwardly ground a veridical sense of passage. First, I argue that the B-theory predicts that subjects of experience have a sense of passivity with respect to time that they do not have with respect to space, which they are right to have, even according to the B-theory. I then ask what else might be involved in our experience of time as passing that is not yet vindicated by the B-theoretic conception. I examine a recent B-theoretic explanation of our 'illusory' sense of passage, by Robin Le Poidevin, and argue that it explains away too much: our perception of succession poses no more of a problem on the B-theory than it does on other theories of time. Finally, I respond to an objection by Oreste Fiocco that a causal account of our sense of passage cannot succeed, because it leaves out the 'phenomenological novelty' of each moment. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 14 |
ISSN: | 0165-0106 1572-8420 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s10670-013-9489-5 |