The Argument from Experience for a Dynamic View of Time: A Defence

Abstract

Perhaps the most significant argument in favor of the reality of time's passage is the argument from experience. More or less, this argument says that our experience of the passage of time gives us good reason for considering temporal passage to be objectively real, because assuming time really passes would provide the best explanation for this experience. But the argument from experience has come under heavy fire from multiple angles. It has turned out to be hard to understand what this experience actually is, and many philosophers have wanted to claim that it doesn't provide any actual evidence of objective passage. In this paper, I first examine and try to describe the experience as of time's passage, giving particular attention to the experience of change that is a part of it. I then strive to show how attempts in general (and some attempts in particular) to explain the experience of change away or otherwise dismantle its implications for reality miss the mark and lead to very undesirable consequences. The conclusion is that ultimately, it seems the only or at least the most reasonable way to understand our experiences of change is that dynamism is objectively real.