Abstract
In "On the Experience of Time", Russell claims that a knowledge of an objective earlier/later relation cannot establish our original awareness of "pastness". He proposes a special knowledge of pastness derived from introspection upon memory. My paper summarizes both accounts, examining Russell's rejection of the former. I conclude that the objective relation could indeed form the epistemic basis of pastness. Thus, for Russell's purposes, the psychological account is unnecessary.
Cite
CITATION STYLE
APA
Kenyon, T. (2007). Russell on Pastness. Notes, 2, 2–5.
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.
Already have an account? Sign in
Sign up for free