Skip Navigation

The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 2003 54(2):327-346; doi:10.1093/bjps/54.2.327
© 2003 by British Society for the Philosophy of Science
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (5)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Balashov, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Janssen, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Critical Notice

Presentism and Relativity

Yuri Balashov1 and Michel Janssen2

1 Department of Philosophy, University of Georgia 2 Program in History of Science and Technology, University of Minnesota

In this critical notice we argue against William Craig's recent attempt to reconcile presentism (roughly, the view that only the present is real) with relativity theory. Craig's defense of his position boils down to endorsing a ‘neo-Lorentzian interpretation’ of special relativity. We contend that his reconstruction of Lorentz's theory and its historical development is fatally flawed and that his arguments for reviving this theory fail on many counts.

1 Rival theories of time

2 Relativity and the present

3 Special relativity: one theory, three interpretations

4 Theories of principle and constructive theories

5 The relativity interpretation: explanatorily deficient?

6 The relativity interpretation: ontologically fragmented?

7 The space-time interpretation: does God need a preferred frame of reference?

8 The neo-Lorentzian interpretation: at what price?

9 The neo-Lorentzian interpretation: with what payoff?

10 Why we should prefer the space-time interpretation over the neo-Lorentzian interpretation

11 What about general relativity?

12 Squaring the tenseless space-time interpretation with our tensed experience


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br J Philos SciHome page
J. D. Norton
Why Constructive Relativity Fails
Brit J Philos Sci, December 1, 2008; 59(4): 821 - 834.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.