{"id":8945,"date":"2013-03-02T12:22:39","date_gmt":"2013-03-02T12:22:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2013\/03\/02\/can-a-thing-exist-without-existing-now-2\/"},"modified":"2013-03-02T12:22:39","modified_gmt":"2013-03-02T12:22:39","slug":"can-a-thing-exist-without-existing-now-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2013\/03\/02\/can-a-thing-exist-without-existing-now-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Can a Thing Exist Without Existing Now?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">Clearly, a thing can exist without existing <em>here<\/em>.&#0160; The Washington Monument exists but not in my backyard.&#0160;&#0160; Accordingly, &#39;x exists here&#39; can be split up as follows:<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">1. x exists here iff (i) x exists &amp; (ii) x is in the vicinity of the speaker.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">It seems pretty obvious that existence and the indexical property of hereness&#0160; are different properties if you want to call them properties.&#0160; <\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">A much more difficult&#0160;&#0160;question is whether a thing can exist without existing <em>now<\/em>.&#0160; Is it true that:<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">2. x exists now iff (i) x exists &amp; (ii) x is temporally present?<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">Clearly, we can prise apart the existence of a (spatially located) thing and its hereness.&#0160; Anyone who maintained that to exist = to be here we would deem either crazy or not conversant with the English language, a sort of &#39;local yokel&#39; <em>in excelsis<\/em>.&#0160; But can we prise apart the existence of a thing and its temporal presentness?&#0160; Is there a real distinction between the existence of a thing and its temporal presentness?<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">A.&#0160; A negative answer will be returned by the presentist who maintains that only the temporally present exists.&#0160; He will maintain that what no longer exists and what does not yet exist does not now exist, and <em>therefore<\/em> does not exist at all.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">Note that it ought to be is perfectly obvious to anyone who understands English that what no longer exists and what does not yet exist does not now exist.&#0160; What is not at all obvious is the part after &#39;therefore&#39; in the sentence before last.&#0160; It is not at all obvious that an individual or event or time that is wholly past or wholly future does not exist at all.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">B.&#0160; An affirmative answer will be returned by all those who reject presentism.&#0160; Some will reject presentism on the ground that abstracta exist, but are not in time at all, and so cannot be said to exist now.&#0160;A presentist can accommodate this point by restricting his thesis:<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\"><strong>Restricted Presentism<\/strong>:&#0160; Necessarily, only temporally present concreta exist.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">Nevertheless, the anti-presentist will insist that there are past and perhaps also future concreta that exist but do not exist now.&#0160; Scollay Square, for example, no longer exists.&#0160; But that it not to say that it is now nothing.&#0160; After all, we &#0160;still refer to it and say true things about it.&#0160; It is true, for example, that my father visited Scollay Square while on shore leave during WW II on a break from service on destroyer escorts in the North Atlantic. &#0160;So it is true that a a sailor who no longer exists visited a place that no longer exists and was involved in events that no longer exist.&#0160; It also true that Scollay Square had been demolished by the time I arrived in Boston in 1973.&#0160; I can now argue as follows:<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">1.&#0160;Various predicates (e.g., is remembered by some Bostonians) are true of Scollay Square.<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">2. Scollay Square does not exist now.<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">3. If x does not exist, then no predicate is true of x.<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">Therefore<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">4. Scollay Square exists. (From 1 and 3)<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">Therefore<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">5. Scollay Square&#0160; exists but is not temporally present.&#0160;(From&#0160;2 and 4)<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">Therefore<\/span><br \/><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">6. Restricted Presentism is false.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">I think there are three ways to attack this argument: (a) reject one or more of the premises; (b) find fault with the reasoning; (c) complain that it is not clear what Restricted Presentism amounts to.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: georgia,palatino;\">Have at it, boys.&#0160;<\/span><\/p>\n<fieldset class=\"zemanta-related\">\n<legend class=\"zemanta-related-title\">Related articles<\/legend>\n<div class=\"zemanta-article-ul zemanta-article-ul-image\" style=\"margin: 0px; padding: 0px; overflow: hidden;\">\n<div class=\"zemanta-article-ul-li-image zemanta-article-ul-li\" style=\"list-style: none; margin: 2px 10px 10px 2px; padding: 0px; width: 84px; text-align: left; font-size: 11px; vertical-align: top; float: left; display: block;\"><a href=\"http:\/\/maverickphilosopher.typepad.com\/maverick_philosopher\/2013\/02\/scollay-square-no-longer-exists.html\" style=\"padding: 2px; border-radius: 2px; text-decoration: none; display: block; box-shadow: 0px 0px 4px #999;\" target=\"_blank\"><img decoding=\"async\" alt=\"\" src=\"https:\/\/i.zemanta.com\/147591060_80_80.jpg\" style=\"margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px currentColor; width: 80px; display: block; max-width: 100%;\" \/><\/a><a href=\"http:\/\/maverickphilosopher.typepad.com\/maverick_philosopher\/2013\/02\/scollay-square-no-longer-exists.html\" style=\"padding: 5px 2px 0px; height: 80px; line-height: 12pt; overflow: hidden; text-decoration: none; display: block;\" target=\"_blank\">Scollay Square No Longer Exists<\/a><\/div>\n<div class=\"zemanta-article-ul-li-image zemanta-article-ul-li\" style=\"list-style: none; margin: 2px 10px 10px 2px; padding: 0px; width: 84px; text-align: left; font-size: 11px; vertical-align: top; float: left; display: block;\"><a href=\"http:\/\/maverickphilosopher.typepad.com\/maverick_philosopher\/2013\/01\/presentism-between-scylla-and-charybdis.html\" style=\"padding: 2px; border-radius: 2px; text-decoration: none; display: block; box-shadow: 0px 0px 4px #999;\" target=\"_blank\"><img decoding=\"async\" alt=\"\" src=\"https:\/\/i.zemanta.com\/135137192_80_80.jpg\" style=\"margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px currentColor; width: 80px; display: block; max-width: 100%;\" \/><\/a><a href=\"http:\/\/maverickphilosopher.typepad.com\/maverick_philosopher\/2013\/01\/presentism-between-scylla-and-charybdis.html\" style=\"padding: 5px 2px 0px; height: 80px; line-height: 12pt; overflow: hidden; text-decoration: none; display: block;\" target=\"_blank\">Presentism Between Scylla and Charybdis<\/a><\/div>\n<div class=\"zemanta-article-ul-li-image zemanta-article-ul-li\" style=\"list-style: none; margin: 2px 10px 10px 2px; padding: 0px; width: 84px; text-align: left; font-size: 11px; vertical-align: top; float: left; display: block;\"><a href=\"http:\/\/maverickphilosopher.typepad.com\/maverick_philosopher\/2013\/02\/caesar-is-no-more-1.html\" style=\"padding: 2px; border-radius: 2px; text-decoration: none; display: block; box-shadow: 0px 0px 4px #999;\" target=\"_blank\"><img decoding=\"async\" alt=\"\" src=\"https:\/\/i.zemanta.com\/148907625_80_80.jpg\" style=\"margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px currentColor; width: 80px; display: block; max-width: 100%;\" \/><\/a><a href=\"http:\/\/maverickphilosopher.typepad.com\/maverick_philosopher\/2013\/02\/caesar-is-no-more-1.html\" style=\"padding: 5px 2px 0px; height: 80px; line-height: 12pt; overflow: hidden; text-decoration: none; display: block;\" target=\"_blank\">Caesar Is No More: The Aporetics of Reference to the Past<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/fieldset>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Clearly, a thing can exist without existing here.&#0160; The Washington Monument exists but not in my backyard.&#0160;&#0160; Accordingly, &#39;x exists here&#39; can be split up as follows: 1. x exists here iff (i) x exists &amp; (ii) x is in the vicinity of the speaker. It seems pretty obvious that existence and the indexical property &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/2013\/03\/02\/can-a-thing-exist-without-existing-now-2\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;Can a Thing Exist Without Existing Now?&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[142,408,204],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8945","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-existence","category-language-philosophy-of","category-time-and-change"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8945","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8945"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8945\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8945"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8945"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/maverickphilosopher.blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8945"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}