Time of termination
View/ Open
ContosJL_2022.pdf (1.564Mb)
Date
21/04/2022Item status
Restricted AccessEmbargo end date
21/04/2023Author
Contos, Jasmin L.
Metadata
Abstract
This thesis provides an investigation into whether the viability of the Termination Thesis
(TERM) is affected by the kind of theory of time that one adopts. In other words, the chief
motivation for this project is the question: does a subscription to the A theory or B theory dictate
whether one can hold the TERM? The answer to which has implications not only for the greater
question regarding the fit between A theoretic versus B theoretic models of time and the TERM
but also for the secondary motivating question for this project: how are the normative claims that
are typically associated with the TERM affected by one’s temporal subscriptions?
Chapter one lays the foundation of the project by deriving three interpretations of the
TERM and providing a temporal analysis of each which reveals that the temporal notions of
cessation, simultaneity, and change are requisite for the TERM. The ethical theses that are
typically associated with the TERM and the connections between them are also presented.
Chapter two focuses on the TERM in light of McTaggart’s argument for the unreality of
time—more specifically, whether the viability of the TERM is affected by said argument.
Broadly, the resulting tension between McTaggart’s argument and the TERM signals an
incompatibility between death as the cessation of existence and the absence of time, which
serves as a good starting point for the considerations in chapters three and four.
Chapters three and four analyze the potential for the A theory and B theory to account for
the relevant temporal notions in such a way as to allow for a formulation of the TERM that
significantly overlaps and serves the same function as the classical TERM, thereby exploring the
viability of the TERM in light of both the A and B theory. A close inspection of the features of
the main A theoretic and B theoretic models of time in conjunction with the three TERM
interpretations reveals that the viability of the interpretations is affected by said theories.
Chapter five marks a return to the normative implications of the TERM in light of the
results from chapters one through four. The primary focus centers on the question: what is the
rational attitude toward death and how is the prescription regarding whether one ought to fear
death shaped by one’s temporal subscriptions? Additionally, on a metaphilosophical level,
chapter five also serves as an illustration of how one’s metaphysical commitments can inform
one’s ethical views.