I demonstrate that the theory of persistence defended in Sider [2001] does not accommodate our intuitions about counting sentences. I develop two theories that improve on Sider's: a contextualist theory and an error theory. I argue that the latter is stronger, simpler, and better fitted to some important ordinary language judgments than rival four-dimensionalist theories of persistence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sarah Moss (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: