'Beyond A- and B-Time' Reconsidered

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article is a response to Clifford Williams's claim that the debate between A- and B theories of time is misconceived because these theories do not differ. I provide some missing support for Williams's claim that the B-theory includes transition, by arguing that representative B-theoretic explanations for why we experience time as passing (even though it does not) are inherently unstable. I then argue that, contra Williams, it does not follow that there is nothing at stake in the A- versus B debate.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)741-753
Number of pages13
JournalPhilosophia
Volume38
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2010 Dec 1

Fingerprint

B-theory

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Philosophy

Cite this

Deng, Natalja. / 'Beyond A- and B-Time' Reconsidered. In: Philosophia. 2010 ; Vol. 38, No. 4. pp. 741-753.
@article{8c181480e5e7476097e2538d5cd8aa29,
title = "'Beyond A- and B-Time' Reconsidered",
abstract = "This article is a response to Clifford Williams's claim that the debate between A- and B theories of time is misconceived because these theories do not differ. I provide some missing support for Williams's claim that the B-theory includes transition, by arguing that representative B-theoretic explanations for why we experience time as passing (even though it does not) are inherently unstable. I then argue that, contra Williams, it does not follow that there is nothing at stake in the A- versus B debate.",
author = "Natalja Deng",
year = "2010",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s11406-010-9257-6",
language = "English",
volume = "38",
pages = "741--753",
journal = "Philosophia",
issn = "0048-3893",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "4",

}

'Beyond A- and B-Time' Reconsidered. / Deng, Natalja.

In: Philosophia, Vol. 38, No. 4, 01.12.2010, p. 741-753.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - 'Beyond A- and B-Time' Reconsidered

AU - Deng, Natalja

PY - 2010/12/1

Y1 - 2010/12/1

N2 - This article is a response to Clifford Williams's claim that the debate between A- and B theories of time is misconceived because these theories do not differ. I provide some missing support for Williams's claim that the B-theory includes transition, by arguing that representative B-theoretic explanations for why we experience time as passing (even though it does not) are inherently unstable. I then argue that, contra Williams, it does not follow that there is nothing at stake in the A- versus B debate.

AB - This article is a response to Clifford Williams's claim that the debate between A- and B theories of time is misconceived because these theories do not differ. I provide some missing support for Williams's claim that the B-theory includes transition, by arguing that representative B-theoretic explanations for why we experience time as passing (even though it does not) are inherently unstable. I then argue that, contra Williams, it does not follow that there is nothing at stake in the A- versus B debate.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=78049482541&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=78049482541&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11406-010-9257-6

DO - 10.1007/s11406-010-9257-6

M3 - Article

VL - 38

SP - 741

EP - 753

JO - Philosophia

JF - Philosophia

SN - 0048-3893

IS - 4

ER -