MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2747217895 · doi:10.3968/9677

Problem of Time and the Dilemma of Presentism

2017· article· en· W2747217895 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Adeyanju Olanshile Muideen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhilosophy and Theoretical Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPresentismMetaphysicsB-theory of timeDilemmaEpistemologyTime travelPhilosophyPhilosophy of space and timeComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper engages in a critique of the problem of time and a presentist approach to the problem. The metaphysical problem of time bothers on the question of whether time exists the same way some other existents in the universe are said to exist. There have been arguments for and against the position of the reality of time. One of the metaphysical positions on the reality of time is presentism. Presentism is the view that only the present constitutes the reality of time. Past and future are unreal and do not constitute time. Thus, the position of presentism, unlike other positions on the reality of time, posits real existence of times to be that which is present. This paper seeks to argue that presentism is self-stultifying and faces a dilemma that shows that the theory either posits the unreality of time (which will be opposing to what it purportedly stands for) or it admits of other features of time (that is, past and future). Either way, presentism is faced with a challenge that it is an inadequate theory of addressing the problem of time.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.051
Scholarly communication0.0090.024
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0100.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicPhilosophy and Theoretical ScienceFrench-language works237,207