London School of Economics and Political Science UK; Sharif University of Technology, IR
I would like to thank Dr. Matthew Parker, Dr. Bryan Roberts and Jonathan Burton for their helpful comments.
MSc student in Philosophy of Science at the (2013-2015). She did her BSc in Chemical Engineering. Her interests cover general issues in philosophy of science, logic and set theory, and philosophy of mind. She hopes to continue research in the future.
In his famous article ‘Time and Physical Geometry’, Putnam claims that the presentist view of time is inconsistent with Special Theory of Relativity (STR). He provides two main formulations for his argument. In this paper, I first reveal the logical flaw in his first formulation. Second, I will show how it can be amended. Third, I show how his second formulation is logically sound, given my analysis of his first formulation. Finally, and based on these logical evaluations, I show that Sklar’s criticism of Putnam’s argument is not well founded.
How to Cite:
Tohidi, S., 2015. Putnam and the Reality of Time. Rerum Causae, 7(1), pp.1–14.