Respond to one of these prompts and be clear about which one you are referring to:
PROMPT #1: A-Theory vs. B-THEORY. Consider this argument: “The subjective A-theory is inferior to the objective B-theory. For the subjective A-theory does not allow us to give a completely objective account of time descriptions. But the objective B-theory does allow us togive a subjective account of time descriptions.” Critically discuss this argument.
PROMPT #2: UNCHANGED WORLD. Could there be a world in which there was time, but never any change at all? Explain your answer.
PROMPT #3: FUTURE TIME TRAVEL. Even if backward time travel were possible, you could not change the past. But how about forward time travel? Could you change the future if you traveled into the future? If future time travel were possible, would you do it? Explain your answers.
PROMPT #4: NATURE OF TIME. Is the question of the nature of time a question to be answered by philosophy, or a question to be answered by physics? Explain your answer.
PROMPT #: FATALISM. Suppose you were Osmo and you found the book describing your past and future life in a local library. Would you adopt a fatalistic attitude and why?
And please also provide critical feedback to these two people’s posts.(I’ll post another later)
A substantive post is generally >150 words and introduces a new idea or is a meaningful response toanother person’s post. When responding to another person’s post, please either expand the thought, addadditional insights, or respectfully disagree and explain why.