Lexicon of Arguments

 

I 124f
Flux/Heraclitus/ChisholmVsQuine: Quine needs spatial and temporal extension on the same level
Chi: not every sum of flux stages is a flux process. We have to say what conditions a sum must satisfy to be a flow process.
>Mereological sum.
Problem: that in turn presupposes continuants: shore, observers, absolute space or an introduction of "is co-fluvial with".
>Continuants.
This could only be explained circularly by "is the same river as". Thus, the four-dimensionalism has not eliminated all singular or general terms that denote continuants.
SimonsVsQuine: one does not bath in a flux stage but in the whole flux.
Error: it is wrong trying to change the subject to leave the predicate unchanged.
I125
Time-stage/flux-stages/SimonsVsFour-Dimensionalism: stages can be misleading: e.g. a Philip stage is not drunk, but the whole man. One does not bath in a flux stadium. A consequent description in four-dimensionalism is only achieved by higher beings. For us, this is not decidable. Terminology: process ontology equals four-dimensionalism here. Simons: this is not impossible, only the language is different.
>Four-dimensionalism.
I 127
SimonsVsFour-Dimensionalism: four-dimensionalism is a convenient representation of the Minkowski-space, but representation is not an ontological argument.
>Minkowski-space.
I 126
Process/Geach/Simons: a process has all its properties timeless, that means, what has different properties, are the temporal parts and not the whole process. Hence, there is no change, e.g. like the poker which is hot on one end and cold at the other.
>Timelessness.