Book | Chapter
(2001) The importance of time, Dordrecht, Springer.
Le Poidevin's argument is that defenders of the tenseless theory of time must explain the aspects of our experience of time that seem to suggest that the tensed theory of time is true. In particular, he mentions (1) what is experienced is always experienced at present; (2) we seem to share the same present and (3) we perceive that one thing occurs after another. Regarding the third point, we perceive something y as occurring after something x because in part our perception of y is causally influenced by our perception of x.
Publication details
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-017-3362-5_22
Full citation:
Smith, Q. (2001)., Is precedence a secondary quality?: a reply to Robin Le Poidevin, in L. N. Oaklander (ed.), The importance of time, Dordrecht, Springer, pp. 263-266.
This document is unfortunately not available for download at the moment.