Last week I provided an overview of the dynamic and static theories of time, and their implications for whether or God is temporal. Today I intend to provide a summary of the various arguments for and against these positions. Over the next while, I intend to go into each of the arguments in more detail (as some are rather difficult to get your head around).dido white flag download key

Dynamic Theory of Timedido white flag download key

To recap briefly, the dynamic theory of time argues that time really flows, and there is an objective "now". Events are initially future, they become present, and then are past. There are two main arguments in favour of a dynamic theory of time:dido white flag download key

The Ineliminability of Tense - this argues that it is undisputed that we use tense as part of everyday sentences. Furthermore, it argues that it is impossible to restate tensed sentences as tenseless sentences, and it is not possible to determine if tensed sentences are true simply by knowing tenseless facts. Consequently, it says, there are tensed facts, so the dynamic theory of time must be correct.dido white flag download key

The Presentness of Experience - this argument holds that a deep belief in the objective reality of past, present, and future is a universal part of human experience. In simple terms it claims that everyone experiences the difference between the past, present, and future, which the static theory of time denies. Everyone experiences the passage of time, and so we are justified in holding the objectivity of tense as true, unless a good reason is found not to.dido white flag download key

Then there are two arguments against the dynamic view of time that need to be considered.dido white flag download key

McTaggart's Paradox - this argument has two parts. The first argues that time is essentially tensed, but the second then argues that tensed time is contradictory. Consequently, McTaggart's conclusion is that time is unreal. The argument that tensed time is contradictory notes that events are first future, then present, then past. Furthermore, these states are mutually exclusive - no event can have more than one. However, this is exactly what happens, and so we have a contradiction.dido white flag download key

The Myth of Passage - this argues that time seems to pass at different speeds. During bursts of activity, time seems to pass very fast, leading us to exclaim "how time flies". In contrast, when we are bored, time passes very slowing and we complain "time keeps dragging by". The argument is that time's flow is really physological, and not objective, and so consequently the dynamic view of time is incorrect.dido white flag download key

dido white flag download key

Static Theory of Timedido white flag download key

The static theory of time is that time doesn't really flow at all. Events just exist tenselessly, and there is no such thing as the objective "now". Events always exist tenselessly, and are only past, present, or future, relative to each other.dido white flag download key

There are two main arguments in favour of a static theory of time.dido white flag download key

Relativity Theory - the main argument leading people to consider a static view of time is relativity theory, in particular, the Minkowski space-time interpretation of the special theory of relativity (STR). Minkowski space-time argues that space-time is not just a representation of the world of space and time, but it is the world. It argues that space-time itself never changes. Every event in time is permanently fixed at its location. It can be said that space-time is instrinsically temporal (in that one of its dimensions is time), it is extrinsically timeless as it does not change as a whole. As only a static view of time is compatible with Minkowski space-time, it must be true.dido white flag download key

The Mind Dependence of Becoming - Grunbaum presents pretty much the only other argument in favour of a static view of time, arguing that being experienced is essential to any event's occurring now. He says "independently of being perceived, physical events themselves qualify at no time as occurring now and hence as such do not become." He argues that temporal becoming is not an attribute of the events themselves, but is a subjective phenomenon. Hence, he argues, the static view of time is correct.dido white flag download key

Four main arguments can be raised against the static view of time.dido white flag download key

"Spatializing" Time - this argument states that time has the essential ordering relationships of earlier than and later than, which are unique to temporal relations. However, by treating time as effectively just another dimension (as Minkowski space-time does), there is no real justification for ordering as "earlier than" or "later than", with the result that this dimension can no longer be called time. In effect, this argues that the static theory of time is incoherent.dido white flag download key

The Illusion of Becoming - this argument presupposes that The Mind Dependence of Becoming argument has already been defeated. The argument effectively argues that temporal becoming is mind dependent, and so if there were no minds, there would be no temporal becoming (but the events will still exist timelessly). This argument takes this further and examines mental events, and the contradiction that arises when you remove minds once again. Do these mental events still exist timelessly even though minds do not?dido white flag download key

The Problem of Intrinsic Change - this is probably the most complicated argument of the lot and there is no way I can do it justice in a paragraph. But here goes: McTaggart's paradox, briefly discussed earlier, raises the problem of intrinsic change for both the static and dynamic views of time. The problem is how can an object can remain self-identical if it has different properties at different times. The static view of time's solution to this problem is perdurantism, and essesntially argues that objects are really four-dimensional, and at each point in time, a different portion of them is 'visible'. Consequently, the objects never undergo any intrinsic changes at all. However, perdurantism appears to require denial of personal consciousness and moral responsibility. If this is the case, it really has to be denied.dido white flag download key

Creatio ex Nihilo - creation out of nothing is an essential Christian belief. The bible beings with the words In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. However, under the static view of time, space-time is extrinsically eternal - as a whole it exists timelessly. Consequently, there is no "beginning" for when space-time was created, and it is very difficult to see how God created it out of nothing. A robust doctrine of creatio ex nihilo would appear to require a temporal beginning of the universe, and consequently the dynamic view of time.dido white flag download key

dido white flag download key

So we've covered all the arguments for against both views of time. Next we'll start going through these arguments in more detail, and see where we end up.dido white flag download key

Posted by Dave Bryant at 9:25 PM | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0) dido white flag download key