Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Uniform Grounding of Truth and the Growing Block Theory: A Reply to Heathwood

Peter Forrest

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

37 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Chris Heathwood requires the sentence 'Caesar was conscious when he crossed the Rubicon' to be made true in much the same way as 'Caesar was wet when he crossed the Rubicon' (2005: 250). Yet because the Growing Block theorist is committed to the zombiedom of the past,the former is not made true by past objects, although the latter is. Heathwood demands a uniform account of the grounding of truths and he will be given a uniform account. But we should exercise care in deciding just what sort of uniformity is appropriate. As Russell (1905) so famously pointed out a century ago the subject/predicate form of a sentence can be misleading. Likewise although the two sentences 'Caesar is conscious' and 'Caesar is wet' have similar subject/predicate forms they have, I say, different kinds of truth-conditions and hence their past tense transformations also have different kinds of truth-conditions. The uniformity I endorse is that in both cases the grounds for the past tense transformation are the same as the grounds the present tense versions used to have when they were true.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)161-163
JournalAnalysis
Volume66
Issue number290
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2006

Keywords

  • Philosophy

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Uniform Grounding of Truth and the Growing Block Theory: A Reply to Heathwood'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this