The Myth of Passage

Author(s):  
Donald C. Williams

This chapter is a defense of the pure manifold theory of time against those who argue that the pure manifold theory fails to account for the passage of time because it does not postulate genuine temporal becoming. It is argued that the motivation for postulating genuine temporal becoming is an unwarranted belief and based on sheer myth. It is further proposed that we should believe that there is no real passage of time in the sense of a genuine temporal becoming, but that this rejection of such a phenomenon does not imply that we are doing violence to our temporal experience of reality.

Author(s):  
Benson Farb ◽  
Dan Margalit

This chapter explains and proves the Nielsen–Thurston classification of elements of Mod(S), one of the central theorems in the study of mapping class groups. It first considers the classification of elements for the torus of Mod(T² before discussing higher-genus analogues for each of the three types of elements of Mod(T². It then states the Nielsen–Thurston classification theorem in various forms, as well as a connection to 3-manifold theory, along with Thurston's geometric classification of mapping torus. The rest of the chapter is devoted to Bers' proof of the Nielsen–Thurston classification. The collar lemma is highlighted as a new ingredient, as it is also a fundamental result in the hyperbolic geometry of surfaces.


Author(s):  
Craig Callender

Two of quantum mechanics’ more famed and spooky features have been invoked in defending the idea that quantum time is congenial to manifest time. Quantum non-locality is said by some to make a preferred foliation of spacetime necessary, and the collapse of the quantum wavefunction is held to vindicate temporal becoming. Although many philosophers and physicists seek relief from relativity’s assault on time in quantum theory, assistance is not so easily found.


Author(s):  
Donald C. Williams

This chapter is about the arrow or direction of time against the backdrop of the pure manifold theory. It is accepted that the fact that time has a direction ought to be explained. It is proposed that the arrow of time is grounded in deeper facts about the four-dimensional nature of each object in the manifold and in facts about the overall four-dimensional shape of the universe. Towards the end of the chapter the possibility of time travel is discussed. It is argued that time travel is metaphysically possible and that there is a reasonable and intelligible sense in which a time traveler can and cannot change the past, according to the pure manifold theory.


Author(s):  
Donald C. Williams

This chapter provides a fuller treatment of the pure manifold theory with an expanded discussion of competing doctrines. It is argued that competing doctrines fail to account for the extensive and/or transitory aspect(s) of time, or they do so at great theoretical cost. The pure manifold theory accounts for the extensive aspect of time because it admits a four-dimensional manifold and it accounts for the transitory aspect of time because it hypothesizes that the increase of entropy is the thing that is ‘felt’ in veridical cases of felt passage. A four-dimensionalist theory of time travel is outlined, along with a sketch of large-scale cosmological traits of the universe.


Author(s):  
Donald C. Williams

This chapter is the first of this book to deal specifically with the metaphysics of time. This chapter defends the pure manifold theory of time. On this view, time is just another dimension of extent like the three dimensions of space, the past, present, and future are equally real, and the world is at bottom tenseless. What is true is eternally true. For example, it is now true that there will be a sea fight tomorrow or that there will not be a sea fight tomorrow. It is argued that the pure manifold theory does not entail fatalism and that contingent statements about the future do not imply that only the past and present exist.


Gustav Mahler’s anniversary years (2010–11) have provided an opportunity to rethink the composer’s position within the musical, cultural and multi-disciplinary landscapes of the twenty-first century, as well as to reassess his relationship with the historical traditions of his own time. Comprising a collection of essays by leading and emerging scholars in the field, Rethinking Mahler in part counterbalances common scholarly assumptions and preferences which predominantly configure Mahler as proto-modernist, with hitherto somewhat neglected consideration of his debt to, and his re-imagining of, the legacies of his own historical past. It reassesses his engagement both with the immediate creative and cultural present of the late nineteenth century, and with the weight of a creative and cultural past that was the inheritance of artists living and working at that time. From a variety of disciplinary perspectives the contributors pursue ideas of nostalgia, historicism and ‘pastness’ in relation to an emergent pluralist modernity and subsequent musical-cultural developments. Mahler’s relationship with music, media and ideas past, present, and future is explored in three themed sections, addressing among them issues in structural analysis; cultural contexts; aesthetics; reception; performance, genres of stage, screen and literature; history/historiography; and temporal experience.


Author(s):  
Benedict Taylor

For the nineteenth century, music was commonly characterized as the “art of time,” and provided a particularly fertile medium for articulating concerns about the nature of time and the temporal experience of human life. This chapter examines some of the debates around music and time from the period, arranged thematically around a series of conceptual issues. These include the reasons proposed for the links between music and time, and the intimate connection between our subjective experience of time and music; the use of music as a poetic metaphor for the temporal course of history; its use by philosophers as an instrument for the explication of temporal conundrums; its alleged potential for overcoming time; its various forms of temporal signification across diverse genres; and the legacy of nineteenth-century thought on these topics today.


Author(s):  
Jakub Čapek ◽  
Sophie Loidolt

AbstractThis special issue addresses the debate on personal identity from a phenomenological viewpoint, especially contemporary phenomenological research on selfhood. In the introduction, we first offer a brief survey of the various classic questions related to personal identity according to Locke’s initial proposal and sketch out key concepts and distinctions of the debate that came after Locke. We then characterize the types of approach represented by post-Hegelian, German and French philosophies of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. We argue that whereas the Anglophone debates on personal identity were initially formed by the persistence question and the characterization question, the “Continental” tradition included remarkably intense debates on the individual or the self as being unique or “concrete,” deeply temporal and—as claimed by some philosophers, like Sartre and Foucault—unable to have any identity, if not one externally imposed. We describe the Continental line of thinking about the “self” as a reply and an adjustment to the post-Lockean “personal identity” question (as suggested by thinkers such as MacIntyre, Ricœur and Taylor). These observations constitute the backdrop for our presentation of phenomenological approaches to personal identity. These approaches run along three lines: (a) debates on the layers of the self, starting from embodiment and the minimal self and running all the way to the full-fledged concept of person; (b) questions of temporal becoming, change and stability, as illustrated, for instance, by aging or transformative life-experiences; and (c) the constitution of identity in the social, institutional, and normative space. The introduction thus establishes a structure for locating and connecting the different contributions in our special issue, which, as an ensemble, represent a strong and differentiated contribution to the debate on personal identity from a phenomenological perspective.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document