Introduction to Presentism
Definition of Presentism: Presentism is a philosophical doctrine asserting that only the present exists; it posits that items or events must be temporally present to hold any reality. According to this perspective, the present is the only moment that possesses the properties of existence, as past and future events are not considered real but rather as abstractions based on current perceptions.
Nature of the Present: The present is not static; it is a dynamic and continuously shifting phenomenon that aligns solely with presently observable objects and occurrences. The fleeting nature of the present raises questions about how we perceive time and reality.
The Debate on Existence
Opposing View: Eternalism: In contrast to presentism, eternalism argues that past, present, and future objects have equal claim to existence. Eternalists contend that time is more like a landscape where all points—past, present, and future—are real and can be accessed or known in some capacity.
Challenges for Eternalists: A major point of contention for eternalists is the inquiry concerning the whereabouts of past and future entities. For instance, if dinosaurs or historical figures like Cleopatra are deemed real under the eternalist view, how do we account for their existence if they cannot be detected or interacted with in the present? This raises profound philosophical questions about the nature and parameters of existence.
Problems with Presentism
Grounding Objection: Presentism faces significant challenges, particularly the grounding objection, which points out inconsistencies between presentist claims and certain intuitive truths about truth and existence:
Truth About the Past and Future: It is possible to construct true statements about past and future events, such as "It will rain on Tuesday" or "Yesterday was colder than today". Presentism struggles to account for these assertions if the events themselves do not exist.
Dependence of Truth on Existence: The nature of truth appears to rely on existence; for example, the statement "Grass is green" is true because grass exists. Thus, if the past and future lack real existence, the truth of similar statements becomes questionable.
Implication: This leads to the implication that if the past and future are nonexistent, any statements regarding them might be false. For instance, the assertion "The T-rex was 40 feet long" could be as misleading as saying, "Abraham Lincoln is king of Mars," as there may not be a valid truth-maker for either claim.
Practical Consequences: Should presentism be upheld as a valid philosophical doctrine, it bears significant implications for how we approach predictive statements and legal truths regarding past actions. For instance, legal systems reliant on historical evidence and testimonies could face challenges if past events are not deemed real under presentist logic.
Presentism's Explanatory Challenges
Explaining Former Existence: One of the major challenges that presentists face is the need to explain the existence of objects and events that were previously present. The presentist must provide a coherent framework to justify how we can speak about and understand the former existence of entities while maintaining that only the present is truly real. Questions about how memories, records, and historical documentation fit into presentism arise, further complicating the idea that the past can meaningfully inform the present.
