The evidence for relativism about future contingents
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2016 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/article/view/19130 |
Resumo: | John MacFarlane (2003; 2008; 2014, p. 201-237) claims that his relativist view on future contingents satisfies two desiderata: it is compatible with indeterminism and allows us to assess as accurate an assertion about a contingent event that has already occurred but that had not occurred when the assertion was made. Supervaluationism satisfies the first desideratum but not the second. I argue that MacFarlane does not provide good reasons to prefer his view to supervaluationism, and so for accepting his second desideratum. The only possible evidence that could be used to support his proposal consists in the apparent existence of accurate future contingent claims made in the past, and this evidence can be easily put into question. As a result, relativism is ill motivated in the case of future contingents. |
id |
UFC-17_6d019b04a9270e545654ec76413f0e72 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:periodicos.ufc:article/19130 |
network_acronym_str |
UFC-17 |
network_name_str |
Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
The evidence for relativism about future contingentsFuture contingents. Indeterminism. Relativism. Supervaluationism.Futuro contingente. Indeterminismo. Relativismo.John MacFarlane (2003; 2008; 2014, p. 201-237) claims that his relativist view on future contingents satisfies two desiderata: it is compatible with indeterminism and allows us to assess as accurate an assertion about a contingent event that has already occurred but that had not occurred when the assertion was made. Supervaluationism satisfies the first desideratum but not the second. I argue that MacFarlane does not provide good reasons to prefer his view to supervaluationism, and so for accepting his second desideratum. The only possible evidence that could be used to support his proposal consists in the apparent existence of accurate future contingent claims made in the past, and this evidence can be easily put into question. As a result, relativism is ill motivated in the case of future contingents.John MacFarlane (2003; 2008; 2014, p. 201-237) sustenta que sua visão relativista sobre futuros contingentes satisfaz dois desideratos: é compatível com o indeterminismo e nos permite avaliar uma afirmação verdadeira sobre um evento contingente já ocorrido, mas que não tinha ocorrido quando a asserção foi realiziada. O superavalicionismo satisfaz o primeiro desideratum, mas não o segundo. Defendo que MacFarlane não fornece boas razões para preferir sua visão ao superavaliacionismo e, assim, aceitar seu segundo desideratum. A única evidência possível que poderia ser usada para apoiar a sua proposta consiste na aparente existência de asserções verdadeiras acerca de futuros contingentes feitas no passado e esta evidência pode ser facilmente posta em dúvida. Como resultado, o relativismo não se encontra adequadamente motivado no caso dos futuros contingentes.Universidade Federal do Ceará2016-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttp://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/article/view/19130Argumentos - Revista de Filosofia; No 15Argumentos - Periódico de Filosofia; Núm. 15Argumentos - Revista de Filosofia; n. 151984-42551984-4247reponame:Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online)instname:Universidade Federal do Ceará (UFC)instacron:UFCporhttp://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/article/view/19130/29848Copyright (c) 2017 Argumentosinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessGariazzo, Matias2021-03-13T16:54:58Zoai:periodicos.ufc:article/19130Revistahttp://www.filosofia.ufc.br/argumentosPUBhttp://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/oaiargumentos@ufc.br||1984-42551984-4247opendoar:2021-03-13T16:54:58Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online) - Universidade Federal do Ceará (UFC)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
The evidence for relativism about future contingents |
title |
The evidence for relativism about future contingents |
spellingShingle |
The evidence for relativism about future contingents Gariazzo, Matias Future contingents. Indeterminism. Relativism. Supervaluationism. Futuro contingente. Indeterminismo. Relativismo. |
title_short |
The evidence for relativism about future contingents |
title_full |
The evidence for relativism about future contingents |
title_fullStr |
The evidence for relativism about future contingents |
title_full_unstemmed |
The evidence for relativism about future contingents |
title_sort |
The evidence for relativism about future contingents |
author |
Gariazzo, Matias |
author_facet |
Gariazzo, Matias |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Gariazzo, Matias |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Future contingents. Indeterminism. Relativism. Supervaluationism. Futuro contingente. Indeterminismo. Relativismo. |
topic |
Future contingents. Indeterminism. Relativism. Supervaluationism. Futuro contingente. Indeterminismo. Relativismo. |
description |
John MacFarlane (2003; 2008; 2014, p. 201-237) claims that his relativist view on future contingents satisfies two desiderata: it is compatible with indeterminism and allows us to assess as accurate an assertion about a contingent event that has already occurred but that had not occurred when the assertion was made. Supervaluationism satisfies the first desideratum but not the second. I argue that MacFarlane does not provide good reasons to prefer his view to supervaluationism, and so for accepting his second desideratum. The only possible evidence that could be used to support his proposal consists in the apparent existence of accurate future contingent claims made in the past, and this evidence can be easily put into question. As a result, relativism is ill motivated in the case of future contingents. |
publishDate |
2016 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2016-01-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/article/view/19130 |
url |
http://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/article/view/19130 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
http://periodicos.ufc.br/argumentos/article/view/19130/29848 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2017 Argumentos info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2017 Argumentos |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal do Ceará |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal do Ceará |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Argumentos - Revista de Filosofia; No 15 Argumentos - Periódico de Filosofia; Núm. 15 Argumentos - Revista de Filosofia; n. 15 1984-4255 1984-4247 reponame:Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online) instname:Universidade Federal do Ceará (UFC) instacron:UFC |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal do Ceará (UFC) |
instacron_str |
UFC |
institution |
UFC |
reponame_str |
Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online) |
collection |
Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Argumentos : Revista de Filosofia (Online) - Universidade Federal do Ceará (UFC) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
argumentos@ufc.br|| |
_version_ |
1797068845973766144 |