The New Hilbert's Hotel Argument Defended

Joe Schmid and Troy Dana have recently advanced several criticisms of the New Hilbert's Hotel Argument formulated by us. In this paper, we respond by undercutting their proposed defeaters. First, we argue that they fail to refute the claim that Hilbert's Hotel entails a logical contradiction in the concrete world. Second, we contend that they do not successfully undermine the argument that past‐eternalism entails the possibility of Hilbert's Hotel. Finally, we show that their parody arguments targeting an endless future are unsuccessful.