Key Moments
Is the Future Real Yet? | Michael Tooley
Closer To TruthWant to know something specific about what's covered?
We've already dissected every moment. Ask and we will deliver (with timestamps).
Key Moments
The future doesn't exist yet, and time's flow is dictated by causation, not abstract 'earlier than' relations. This challenges divine omniscience, as God can't know a future that hasn't been caused into existence.
Key Insights
The author favors the 'growing block' theory of time, where past and present events are real, but future events are not yet in existence.
The 'earlier than' relation in time is not analytically basic; it must be defined in terms of causation.
Causation is presented as a concept that is directly observable, unlike the 'earlier than' relation, which can be subject to illusions or external interventions.
The growing block theory implies that past events have occurred and are real, and present events are caused by these past events.
If God were to know the future, this would imply backward causation, which the author suggests might be possible even within a causally ordered universe.
An alternative view is that God's omniscience is not compromised by the non-existence of future events, as God knows all that is possible to know, and the future simply doesn't exist to be known.
Time is fundamentally defined by causation, not just temporal order
The author, Michael Tooley, argues that the fundamental nature of time is rooted in causation, not merely the abstract 'earlier than' or 'later than' relationships that constitute the B series of time. While some view the 'earlier than' relation as a primitive and basic concept, Tooley contends that it must be analyzed and understood through the lens of causation. He suggests that concepts like 'earlier than' cannot be analytically basic because they deal with events at different times, making them unsuitable for a foundational understanding that doesn't rely on external factors. Instead, causation, which can be more directly experienced or observed, serves as a more fundamental basis for understanding temporal order. This perspective challenges the idea of time as a simple, linear progression and instead links its very fabric to the cause-and-effect relationships that unfold within it.
The growing block theory posits a non-existent future
Tooley advocates for the 'growing block' theory of time, a view that contrasts with presentism (only the present exists) and the eternalist block universe (past, present, and future all exist). In the growing block model, past events are real and have occurred, and present events are also real. However, future events have not yet come into existence. The passage of time, in this view, is characterized by the continuous addition of new events to the block of reality, causing it to 'grow.' This means that the future is not predetermined or already existing but is actively coming into being as events are caused. This theory offers a dynamic view of reality where time's flow is an essential feature, and the present moment is where new reality is actualized.
Causation is an observable concept, unlike 'earlier than'
A key argument for prioritizing causation over the 'earlier than' relation is its perceived direct observability. Tooley illustrates this with an example: the experience of willing to snap one's finger and then snapping it. Some might take this as direct awareness of a causal link. He then presents a thought experiment involving two demons to show that one could have the exact same subjective experience of willing and snapping, yet no causal link might exist (due to external interventions). This distinction highlights that while experiences can be qualitatively identical, they might not always pick out the same underlying reality, particularly regarding causation. Therefore, causation, as a concept that can be more reliably identified through experience, is a better foundation for understanding time's structure than the abstract 'earlier than' relation, which is susceptible to such experiential ambiguity.
The reality of the past and present is supported by causal inference
The growing block theory asserts that past events are as real as present ones. Tooley supports this by suggesting that we often infer the existence of past causes for present complex events. For instance, flicking a switch that illuminates a room implies a prior, simpler event (the flick) that caused the complex outcome. Even if the a priori probability of a complex event occurring spontaneously is extremely low, the existence of a simple preceding cause makes it highly probable. This reasoning extends to the present, where current events are understood as having been caused by prior states of affairs. Thus, the reality of the past is not just an assumption but a logical consequence of how we understand causality and the unfolding of events in the present.
The challenge of divine omniscience and future knowledge
The discussion pivots to the implications of the growing block theory for traditional conceptions of God, particularly regarding omniscience. If the future does not yet exist, then how can an omniscient God know it? Tooley explores the idea that if God sees future events, there must be a causal relationship between those events and God's mind. This raises the possibility of backward causation, where future events could somehow cause present or past knowledge in God. While Tooley finds this notion challenging, he does not entirely dismiss the possibility of oppositely directed causal chains, suggesting that such scenarios might be conceivable under specific cosmological conditions (like a divided universe with unidirectional observation). This line of reasoning suggests that traditional notions of divine omniscience might need re-evaluation if the future is genuinely indeterminate and not yet real.
Alternative theological perspectives on God and the future
In response to the challenge of divine omniscience, Tooley considers how some religious philosophers reconcile God's knowledge with the non-existence of future events. One perspective is that God's omniscience is defined as knowing all that is possible to know. Since future events do not exist, they are not part of 'everything' that can be known. Therefore, God can still be considered omniscient because the future simply isn't there to be known. Another approach suggests that God's knowledge of the future might be derived through understanding present events and applying the laws of nature to predict future occurrences, rather than having direct, absolute knowledge of a non-existent reality. These interpretations attempt to maintain the concept of an omniscient God within a framework where the future is not a pre-existing entity.
Mentioned in This Episode
●Organizations
●Concepts
●People Referenced
Common Questions
The speaker favors a causal theory for the direction of time, suggesting that the 'earlier than' relation is not a primitive concept but is instead based on causation. This means understanding causation is fundamental to understanding temporal direction.
Topics
Mentioned in this video
One of the Abrahamic religions mentioned in the context of discussing God's relationship with time.
One of the Abrahamic religions mentioned in the context of discussing God's relationship with time.
One of the Abrahamic religions mentioned in the context of discussing God's relationship with time.
More from Closer To Truth
View all 51 summaries
33 minA Life Devoted to Parapsychology | Jeffrey Mishlove
22 minWhat Are the Laws of Nature? | Michael Tooley
41 minAsk Me Anything with Susan Schneider & Robert Lawrence Kuhn: Can You Upload Your Mind? (Part 3)
21 minWhat Is Time in the Wolfram Physics Project? | Stephen Wolfram
Ask anything from this episode.
Save it, chat with it, and connect it to Claude or ChatGPT. Get cited answers from the actual content — and build your own knowledge base of every podcast and video you care about.
Get Started Free