A draft of this book was complete some time ago. Length, however, is a problem, so cuts need to be made. In addition, a section on the temporal asymmetry of basic laws of nature needs to be revised to address what Barry Loewer has labeled the “Mentaculus Vision,” a view advanced by David Albert, and according to which the laws of physics are temporally symmetric. If this view were sound, it would be the basis of a serious objection to any non-reductionist view of causation, and thus to the view that I am defending.

I also need to add a short chapter  discussing the view advanced by L. A. Paul and Ned Hall in Chapter 2 of their book Causation – A User’s Guide, according to which philosophers should think not in terms of offering an analysis of the concept of causation, but instead of setting out an ontological reduction of causation.

My goal is to have these revisions done by the end of this summer.

Articles

The following articles are nearly complete:

“Special Relativity, Gauss’s Law, and Maxwell’s Equations”

Here I argue that Gauss’s law is incompatible with the Special Theory of Relativity, and thus that Maxwell’s equations cannot be true.

“Against the Mentaculus Vision”

Here I set build upon my objection to Gauss’s law to defend the view that the basic laws of physics are temporally asymmetric, which entails that the Mentaculus Vision proposed by David Albert and defended by Barry Loewer cannot be true.

“A Refutation of an Objection to the Growing Block View of Time”

Craig Bourne and David Braddon-Mitchell have both argued that a ‘growing block’ view of the nature of time cannot be correct because it would follow that one could not know that it is now now. I show that the argument rests upon an unsound account analysis of tensed statements, and that, given a sound account, one can know, on a growing block view, that it is now now.

“A Defense of Perdurantism”

Here I argue that the types of formulations of perdurantism that have been advanced, for example, by David Lewis and Ted Snider are unsound, and that there is an alternative formulation of perdurantism against which modal objections fail.

“On the Impossibility of Irreducible Powers”

The basic thesis of this paper is that powers and disposition cannot be irreducible properties: they must be analyzed in terms of categorical properties and causal laws.

“Sex and Human Irrationality”

The basis theses here will be that humans are deeply irrational when it comes to sex, that that irrationality is responsible for great suffering, that it follows that most sexual behavior on the part of humans is morally wrong, but that it should not be at all difficult to avoid the irrationality I question, and hence the immorality.

Future Research Projects

Books

A Philosopher’s Toolkit: Thinking about Time and Tense

There are many disaster areas in philosophy - areas where views are advanced that can be shown to be untenable. My goal will be to set out crucial tools for thinking about philosophical problems in general, and to illustrate the use of those tools in thinking about issues in the philosophy of time.  

The Justification of Induction

This book will survey the various attempts that have been made to show that induction is justified. After showing that none of those attempts is successful, I shall argue that induction can be justified if and only if governing laws of nature are logically possible.

The Refutation of Skepticism 

This book will build upon the preceding refutation of skepticism about induction and  argue that given that induction is justified, skepticism about the existence of an external, physical world, about the past, and about other minds can also be refuted.

Indirect Realism and the Philosophy of Perception

The theses being defended in this book will be, first, that there are decisive objections to all forms of direct realism in the philosophy of perception, and, secondly, that there are very strong arguments in support of, and no plausible objections to, indirect realism.

Abortion: The Arguments

A few years ago I completed an online bibliography on abortion for Oxford University Press. In doing so, I concluded that this was another disaster area in philosophy, where most articles should never have been published, since the authors were unaware of crucial arguments. My goal in this book will be to set out all of the important arguments dealing with the question of the moral status of abortion, then to survey possible objections in order to arrive at conclusion about which arguments are sound and which unsound.

This is a book that I want to see published not only in traditional form, but also online, so that if any parts of the book turn out to be unsound, corrections can be made in the online version.