{"title":"A Grim End Is at Hand: Schmid’s Grim Reaper Symmetry Argument, Precognitive Grandfather Paradoxes, and an Intrinsicality Test","authors":"Wade A Tisthammer","doi":"10.1093/mind/fzaf006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Paradoxes inspired by José Benardete have been used in arguments for temporal finitism and causal finitism. Joseph C. Schmid has argued that there is a symmetry between those arguments and a corresponding argument against an endless future with respect to Koons’ patchwork principle using intrinsically identical copies of situations involving God revealing a future. I argue that this symmetry argument has limitations a theist can exploit to avoid the problem. A precognitive grandfather paradox about using simple foreknowledge to reveal the future that is redolent of the grandfather paradox against time travel illustrates why one might prefer a type of subjunctive foreknowledge over simple foreknowledge with respect to revealing the future, and a test for intrinsicality reveals that the future-revealing quality need not be intrinsic to a situation containing a subjunctively foreknowing God revealing the future.","PeriodicalId":48124,"journal":{"name":"MIND","volume":"123 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MIND","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzaf006","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Paradoxes inspired by José Benardete have been used in arguments for temporal finitism and causal finitism. Joseph C. Schmid has argued that there is a symmetry between those arguments and a corresponding argument against an endless future with respect to Koons’ patchwork principle using intrinsically identical copies of situations involving God revealing a future. I argue that this symmetry argument has limitations a theist can exploit to avoid the problem. A precognitive grandfather paradox about using simple foreknowledge to reveal the future that is redolent of the grandfather paradox against time travel illustrates why one might prefer a type of subjunctive foreknowledge over simple foreknowledge with respect to revealing the future, and a test for intrinsicality reveals that the future-revealing quality need not be intrinsic to a situation containing a subjunctively foreknowing God revealing the future.
由jos benardette启发的悖论被用于时间有限主义和因果有限主义的论证中。约瑟夫·c·施密德(Joseph C. Schmid)认为,在这些论点和反对无限未来的相应论点之间存在对称性,这与昆斯的拼凑原则有关,该原则使用本质上相同的情况副本,包括上帝揭示未来。我认为,这种对称性论证有其局限性,有神论者可以利用它来避免这个问题。关于使用简单的预知来揭示未来的预知祖父悖论,让人联想到反对时间旅行的祖父悖论,这说明了为什么人们可能更喜欢一种虚拟预知而不是简单预知来揭示未来,而对内在性的测试表明,揭示未来的品质不一定是包含虚拟预知的上帝揭示未来的情况的内在品质。
期刊介绍:
Mind has long been a leading journal in philosophy. For well over 100 years it has presented the best of cutting edge thought from epistemology, metaphysics, philosophy of language, philosophy of logic, and philosophy of mind. Mind continues its tradition of excellence today. Mind has always enjoyed a strong reputation for the high standards established by its editors and receives around 350 submissions each year. The editor seeks advice from a large number of expert referees, including members of the network of Associate Editors and his international advisers. Mind is published quarterly.