The browser you are using is not supported by this website. All versions of Internet Explorer are no longer supported, either by us or Microsoft (read more here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Please use a modern browser to fully experience our website, such as the newest versions of Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari etc.

The Endurance/Perdurance Controversy is No Storm in a Teacup

På svenska

Author

Summary, in English

Several philosophers have maintained in recent years that the endurance/perdurance debate is merely verbal: these prima facie distinct theories of objects’ persistence are in fact metaphysically equivalent, they claim. The present paper challenges this view. Three proposed translation schemes (those set forth by Miller 2005; McCall and Lowe 2006; Hirsch 2009) are examined; all are shown to be faulty. In the process, constructive reasons for regarding the debate as a substantive one are provided. It is also suggested that the theories may have differing practical implications.

Department/s

Publishing year

2014

Language

English

Pages

463-482

Publication/Series

Axiomathes

Volume

24

Issue

4

Document type

Journal article

Publisher

Springer

Topic

  • Philosophy

Keywords

  • endurance
  • metaphysical equivalence
  • perdurance
  • persistence
  • verbal dispute
  • deflationism

Status

Published

Project

  • Social Ontology and Theories of Persistence

Research group

  • Metaphysics and Collectivity

ISBN/ISSN/Other

  • ISSN: 1572-8390