| Autor(es): |
Número total de Autores: 2
|
| Afiliação do(s) autor(es): | [1] Univ Estadual Campinas, Campinas, SP - Brazil
[2] Univ Nacl Autonoma Mexico, Grad Program Philosophy Sci, Mexico City, DF - Mexico
Número total de Afiliações: 2
|
| Tipo de documento: | Artigo Científico |
| Fonte: | HUMANA MENTE-JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHICAL STUDIES; n. 32, p. 195-227, AUG 2017. |
| Citações Web of Science: | 0 |
| Resumo | |
In this paper we discuss Priest's account of change and motion, contrasting it with its more orthodox rival, the Russellian account. The paper is divided in two parts. In first one we take a stance that is more sympathetic to the Russellian view, arguing that Priest's arguments against it are inconclusive. In the second part, instead, we take a more sympathetic attitude towards Priest's objections. We argue, however, that if these objections pose insurmountable difficulties to the Russellian account (which is what one of the authors of this paper indeed thinks), then they pose the same difficulties also to Priest's favoured Hegelian account, and for the same reasons (AU) | |
| Processo FAPESP: | 15/20138-2 - Sobre o tratamento adequado da noção de passagem temporal |
| Beneficiário: | Emiliano Boccardi |
| Modalidade de apoio: | Bolsas no Exterior - Estágio de Pesquisa - Pós-Doutorado |