Books on Amazon
|Process / Flux||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. - Problem: that in turn presupposes continuants: shore, observers - or: absolute space - or introduction of "is co-fluvial with" - 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: trying to change the subject to leave the predicate unchanged.
Time stage/flux stages/SimonsVsFour-Dimensionalism: stages misleading: e.g. a Philip stage is not drunk, but the whole man - one does not bath in a flux stadium - consequent description in four-dimensionalism only by higher beings - for us not decidable - Terminology. Process ontology here = four-dimensionalism. - Simons: not impossible, only language different.
SimonsVsFour-Dimensionalism: convenient representation of the Minkowski space, but representation is not an ontological argument.
Process/Geach/Simons has all its properties timeless, that means, what has different properties, are the temporal parts - not the whole process - hence no change - E.g. like the poker which is hot on one end and cold at the other.
Parts Oxford New York 1987