Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T04:59:55.171Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

L’individuation des parties temporelles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

MURIEL CAHEN
MURIEL CAHEN*
Affiliation:
Institut Jean-Nicod, Paris (EHESS, ENS, CNRS)
*
*<[email protected]>
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

All perdurantists claim that objects persist by having different temporal parts at different moments of their existence. Nevertheless, while most of them argue that temporal parts are individuated by their temporal boundaries, a minority claim that they are individuated by a principle of unity. After a critical review of these two options, I will argue in favour of a new version of the second one, by showing that it provides a better defence of perdurantism against other conceptions of persistence.

Tous les perdurantistes soutiennent que les objets persistent dans le temps en ayant différentes parties temporelles à différents moments de leur existence. Cependant, alors que la majorité d’entre eux considère que les parties temporelles sont individuées par leurs limites temporelles, une minorité pense qu’elles sont individuées par un principe d’unité. Après un examen critique de ces deux options, je défendrai une nouvelle version de la seconde, notamment en montrant qu’elle est mieux à même de défendre le perdurantisme face aux les autres conceptions de la persistance.

Keywords

individuationméréologiepartie temporelleperdurancetemps
Type
Articles
Information
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 56 , Issue 4 , December 2017 , pp. 745 - 773
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bibliographie

Broad, Charlie. D. 1938 Examination of McTaggart’s Philosophy, Vol. II, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Caplan, Ben et Matheson, Carl 2006 «Defending Musical Perdurantism», British Journal of Aesthetics, vol. 46, p. 59–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chisholm, Roderick M. 1976 Person and Object, Lasalle (IL), Open Court.Google Scholar
Copeland, Jack, Dyke, Heather et Proudfoot, Diane 2001 «Temporal Parts and Their Individuation», Analysis, vol. 61, p. 289–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crisp, Thomas M. et Smith, Donald P. 2005 «Wholly Present Defined», Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, vol. 71, p. 318–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dau, Paolo 1986 «Part-Time Objects», Midwest Studies in Philosophy, vol. 11, p. 459–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Djukic, George 2004 «Do Four-Dimensionalists Have to Be Counterpart Theorists?», Australasian Journal of Philosophy, vol. 82, no 2, p. 292–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Effingham, Nikk 2012 «Endurantism and Perdurantism», Manson, dans Neil A. et Barnard, Robert W., dir. The Continuum Companion to Metaphysics, New York (NY), Continuum, p. 170–197.Google Scholar
Hawley, Katherine 2001 How Things Persist, Oxford, Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Hawthorne, John 2006 Metaphysical Essays, Oxford (NY), Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heller, Mark 1993 «Varieties of Four Dimensionalism», Australasian Journal of Philosophy, vol. 71, p. 47–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hudson, Hud 2005 The Metaphysics of Hyperspace, Oxford, Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inwagen, Peter van 1981 «The Doctrine Of Arbitrary Undetached Parts», Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, vol. 62, p. 123–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inwagen, Peter van 1990 «Four-Dimensional Objects», Noûs, vol. 24, p. 245–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, Mark 1984 «Particulars and Persistence», Dissertation, Princeton University.Google Scholar
Johnston, Mark 1987 «Is There a Problem About Persistence?», Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, vol. 61, p. 107–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kripke, Saul A. 1980 Naming and Necessity, Cambridge, Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, David K. 1983 «Postscripts to ‘Survival and Identity’» dans Philosophical Papers, Vol. I, Oxford, Oxford University Press, p. 73–77.Google Scholar
Lewis, David K. 1986 On the Plurality of Worlds, Oxford, Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
McDaniel, Kris 2007 «Extended Simples», Philosophical Studies, vol. 133, p. 131–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKinnon, N. 2002 «The Endurance/Perdurance Distinction», Australasian Journal of Philosophy, vol. 80, p. 288–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McTaggart, John Ellis 1927 The Nature of Existence, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mellor, David H. 1981 Real Time, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Miller, Kristie 2005 «A New Definition of Endurance», Theoria, vol. 71, p. 309-332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olson, Eric T. 2006 «Temporal Parts and Timeless Parthood», Noûs, vol. 40, p. 738–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parsons, Josh 2000 «Must a Four-Dimensionalist Believe in Temporal Parts?», The Monist, vol. 83, p. 399–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, Bertrand 1948 Human Knowledge, Its Scope and Limits, New York (NY), Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Schaffer, Jonathan 2009 «Spacetime the One Substance», Philosophical Studies, vol. 145, p. 131–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sider, Theodore 1997 «Four-Dimensionalism», Philosophical Review, vol. 106, p. 197–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sider, Theodore 2001 Four-dimensionalism. An Ontology of Persistence and Time, Oxford, Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sider, Theodore 2007 «Parthood», Philosophical Review, vol. 116, p. 51–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simons, Peter 1987 Parts. A Study in Ontology, Oxford, Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Barry et Varzi, Achille C. 2000 «Fiat and Bona Fide Boundaries», Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, vol. 60, p. 401–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomson, Judith Jarvis 1983 «Parthood and Identity Across Time», Journal of Philosophy, vol. 80, p. 201–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wasserman, Ryan 2002 «The Standard Objection to the Standard Account», Philosophical Studies, vol. 111, p. 197–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zimmerman, Dean W. 1996 «Persistence and Presentism», Philosophical Papers, vol. 25, p. 115–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar