The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Infinity, Time, and Successive Addition
Abstract
According to an influential line of argument, the past must be finite because no infinite series can be formed by successive addition. The present paper pinpoints the non sequitur at the heart of this argument, disentangles the ambiguities that disguise it, and dismantles the misleading picture of ‘traversing the infinite’ that gives the argument so much of its allure. Finally, the paper critically explores the related argument that a beginningless series of past events is impossible because there could be no explanation of its having been ‘completed’ at one time rather than another.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Moreover, an additional commitment comes with premise (3), as it is widely acknowledged that this premise binds SAA's proponents to some dynamic view of time in which events are actualized one after another (Craig 1991a, p. 15;2013, p. 13;Morriston 2021, p. 2).”
From The traversal of the infinite: considering a beginning for an infinite past (2024) · cites this paper as Morriston 2021, p. 2
In the citing paper
“From the above, one can deduce that participants in the debate agree on the following claim: by starting with a first addition, one cannot form an actually infinite series through equal successive additions.Let us refer to this as the “First Addition Claim” (FAC).”
From The traversal of the infinite: considering a beginning for an infinite past (2024) · cites this paper as Morriston (2021, p. 4)
Citations
Cites
Malpass, A., & Morriston, W. (2020) · The Philosophical Quarterly · doi:10.1093/pq/pqaa005 · Cited by 10
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- Craig William Lane, 2013, Debating Christian Theism, 7
- Craig William Lane, 2012, The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology, 101
- 10.1093/analys/25.Suppl-3.99 · DOI
- 10.1007/978-3-319-73438-5 · DOI
- Leibniz G.W., 1717, Correspondence
- 10.1007/978-3-319-57547-6 · DOI
- 10.1017/CBO9780511498985 · DOI
- 10.1080/00048402.2014.949804 · DOI · Paper page
- Sorabji Richard, 1983, Time, Creation, and the Continuum: Theories in Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The traversal of the infinite: considering a beginning for an infinite past
Viglione, F. (2024) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-024-04735-4 · Cited by 1
“Given this, there could be a counter who would not be finished until next year or a hundred years from now, as well as a counter who would be finished now (Morriston, 1999, p. 13; Morriston, 2017, p. 77; Morriston, 2021, p. 11).”
Influential
Metadata
- Authors
- Morriston, W.
- Affiliations
- University of Colorado Boulder (US)
- Corresponding author
- Morriston, Wes
- ORCID
- Morriston, Wes
- Venue
- Australasian Journal of Philosophy
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2021-04-11
- Volume
- 100
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 70-85
- ISSN
- 0004-8402 (ISSN-L)
- 1471-6828
- OpenAlex
- W3156380884
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3
- FWCI
- 7.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Australasian Journal of Philosophy (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › History and Theory of Mathematics
- Keywords
- infinite series, time, infinity, philosophy of time
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
