Proof Eternalism is Correct
-
- Posts: 341
- Joined: June 17th, 2018, 8:24 pm
Proof Eternalism is Correct
1. Presentism posits that only now exists
2. Therefore only now always existed
3. Therefore time did not have a start
4. But if you take away the start (Monday) does the rest of the week (Tuesday...) still exist?
5. No, so time has a start
6. Hence Presentism is false
7. Hence Eternalism must be true
- Halc
- Posts: 405
- Joined: March 17th, 2018, 9:47 pm
Re: Proof Eternalism is Correct
4 is invalid. Taking away the start doesn't take away Monday (any particular moment).
The same sort of proof has been rendered to show eternalism to be false. It doesn't work either.
-
- Posts: 341
- Joined: June 17th, 2018, 8:24 pm
Re: Proof Eternalism is Correct
- Halc
- Posts: 405
- Joined: March 17th, 2018, 9:47 pm
Re: Proof Eternalism is Correct
3 says 'therefore' like it logically follows from point 1. It doesn't.
If it is an additional premise, word it like it isn't a conclusion.
Even eternalism is vague about if there is a start to time. Both interpretations allow infinite or finite time in both directions.
And I said 4 is invalid. Lack of a start doesn't remove Monday. There is still a Sunday before it. There has to be if it doesn't have a start.
-
- Posts: 3601
- Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm
Re: Proof Eternalism is Correct
Misrepresenting an argument proves nothing. It is not that only now always existed but that always only now exists. You assert the very thing that is denied and then argue against your own assertion. To say “always existed” is to make a claim about the past, a claim about what was, a claim about what is not.2. Therefore only now always existed
Again, you are asserting the very thing that is being denied. Now does not start on Monday or at any other time. Now is not Tuesday or any time other than now.4. But if you take away the start (Monday) does the rest of the week (Tuesday...) still exist?
There are problems with presentism, but that does not prove eternalism, for there are problems with it too, and pointing to those problems does not prove that presentism or any other theory of time is correct At best what your “proofs” demonstrate is that we do not have an adequate concept of time.
-
- Posts: 341
- Joined: June 17th, 2018, 8:24 pm
Re: Proof Eternalism is Correct
But if there is no start, there is no middle or end. Take away Monday and the rest of the week does not exits.Halc wrote: ↑October 21st, 2018, 3:15 pm3 says 'therefore' like it logically follows from point 1. It doesn't.
If it is an additional premise, word it like it isn't a conclusion.
Even eternalism is vague about if there is a start to time. Both interpretations allow infinite or finite time in both directions.
And I said 4 is invalid. Lack of a start doesn't remove Monday. There is still a Sunday before it. There has to be if it doesn't have a start.
-
- Posts: 341
- Joined: June 17th, 2018, 8:24 pm
-
- Posts: 3601
- Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm
Re: Proof Eternalism is Correct
So you are saying:
I do not know how you got the second statement from anything I said. According to Presentism the past does not exist and so no 'now exists' in the past.- Presentist believe that only now exists
- But Presentist believe that in the past more than now exists
???
-
- Posts: 341
- Joined: June 17th, 2018, 8:24 pm
Re: Proof Eternalism is Correct
-
- Posts: 341
- Joined: June 17th, 2018, 8:24 pm
Re: Proof Eternalism is Correct
Right so according to Presentism, time has a NO start, so the rest of my proof follows...
-
- Posts: 3601
- Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm
Re: Proof Eternalism is Correct
I am not interested in playing this game. It does not follow from anything I have said or anything that presentism claims that ‘now’ has a start. You continue to misrepresent what is actually said in order to make it fit your failed “proof”.Right so according to Presentism, time has a start, so the rest of my proof follows…
You have ignored the fact that even if presentism is false that does not mean that eternalism is true.
-
- Posts: 341
- Joined: June 17th, 2018, 8:24 pm
Re: Proof Eternalism is Correct
Presentism is the believe that only now exists; hence if Presentism is false, more than now exists; past and present exist, so Eternalism is true.
- ThomasHobbes
- Posts: 1122
- Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm
Re: Proof Eternalism is Correct
I think you have a lot more work to do.devans99 wrote: ↑October 21st, 2018, 7:30 am Eternalism is the belief that past present and future are real. The opposing view, Presentism posits that only now exists. I show that Presentism is wrong, thus Eternalism is true:
1. Presentism posits that only now exists
2. Therefore only now always existed
3. Therefore time did not have a start
4. But if you take away the start (Monday) does the rest of the week (Tuesday...) still exist?
5. No, so time has a start
6. Hence Presentism is false
7. Hence Eternalism must be true
Points 2 and 3 ASSUME eternalism, which you fallaciously use to deny presentism.
Eternalism also implies endlessness. Since you can not (in fact never) prove that reality shall never end, you cannot assert the truth of eternalism.
-
- Posts: 341
- Joined: June 17th, 2018, 8:24 pm
Re: Proof Eternalism is Correct
Point 2 follows from point 1 only; Presentism posits that only now exists; And therefore only now has always existed. I am not assuming anything.ThomasHobbes wrote: ↑October 21st, 2018, 4:28 pmI think you have a lot more work to do.devans99 wrote: ↑October 21st, 2018, 7:30 am Eternalism is the belief that past present and future are real. The opposing view, Presentism posits that only now exists. I show that Presentism is wrong, thus Eternalism is true:
1. Presentism posits that only now exists
2. Therefore only now always existed
3. Therefore time did not have a start
4. But if you take away the start (Monday) does the rest of the week (Tuesday...) still exist?
5. No, so time has a start
6. Hence Presentism is false
7. Hence Eternalism must be true
Points 2 and 3 ASSUME eternalism, which you fallaciously use to deny presentism.
Eternalism also implies endlessness. Since you can not (in fact never) prove that reality shall never end, you cannot assert the truth of eternalism.
Point 3 follows from point 2; if now has always existed, there can be no start to time
Eternalism does always not imply endlessness; the word has two meanings: eternal in time implies endlessness/infinity and is impossible. The way I mean it is eternal outside time which is a finite state.
-
- Posts: 3601
- Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm
Re: Proof Eternalism is Correct
It does not follow from the denial that there is a start of now that it is not the case that always only now exists.SORRY I MEANT:
Right so according to Presentism, time has a NO start, so the rest of my proof follows…
But you have not shown that presentism is false. Presentism and eternalism are not the only options. In addition, you don't say anything about the future and eternalism. One can hold that the past existed but no longer does, the present exists but did not exist in the past and will not exist in the future, and that the future does not exist.Presentism is the believe that only now exists; hence if Presentism is false, more than now exists; past and present exist, so Eternalism is true.
Once again, all of these concepts of time, including eternalism, present problems. To pretend or worse to delude yourself that you have proven that eternalism is correct is self-deception.
2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
2023 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023