Presentism is not a valid argument because the conclusions one arrives to using the presentist hypothesis do not always hold true. Specifically, the existence of objects freely from temporal association, and the flow of time towards the future fatally objects the notion that nothing exists that isn’t present.
Presentism fatally concludes that things cannot exist without also being strictly associated with the present. This conclusion is problematic because it recursively denies the existence of things that cannot defined in terms of the strict that are not strictly associated with the past, present, or future. A gleaming example of something that can be said to exist freely from strict temporal associations is the habitual state of one’s mind.
Presentism fatally concludes that things cannot exist without also being strictly associated with the present. This conclusion is problematic because it recursively denies the existence of things that cannot defined in terms of the strict that are not strictly associated with the past, present, or future. A gleaming example of something that can be said to exist freely from strict temporal associations is the habitual state of one’s mind.