More Fuss About Formulation: Sider (and Me) on Three-and Four-Dimensionalism

Jun 23, 2026

Upload by Aurora

Sider argues that four-dimensionalism admits a clear and coherent formulation while three-dimensionalism cannot be adequately formulated. Christopher Hughes contends that Sider’s concerns about formulating three-dimensionalism are misplaced. Hughes proposes an alternative three-dimensionalist formulation not covered by Sider’s rejected options, then offers a “matching” formulation of four-dimensionalism, claiming it captures the view better than Sider’s own account. The paper also addresses the intelligibility worries raised by van Inwagen.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages18

Reading Time45 min

Abstract

Sider’s Problem for Formulating Three-Dimensionalism

“Wholly Present” and Competing Definitions

Hughes’s Alternative Three-Dimensionalist Formulation

A “Matching” Formulation of Four-Dimensionalism

Comparison with Sider’s View

FAQs

How does Hughes evaluate his “matching” formulation of four-dimensionalism?

Hughes provides a “matching” formulation of four-dimensionalism and argues that it captures four-dimensionalism better than Sider’s own formulation. He presents this as an improvement over Sider’s account.

Jun 23, 2026

Upload by Aurora