The Hole Argument was originally formulated by Einstein and it haunted him as he struggled to understand the meaning of spacetime coordinates in the context of the diffeomorphism invariance of general relativity. This argument has since been put to philosophical use by Earman and Norton (Br J Philos Sci 515–525, 1987 ) to argue against a substantival conception of spacetime. In the present work I demonstrate how Earman and Norton’s Hole Argument can be extended to exclude everything and not merely substantival manifolds. These casualties of the hole demonstrate that the Hole Argument hinges essentially on our notion of determinism and not on the diffeomorphic freedom of general relativity. Just as Earman and Norton argue that we should not let our metaphysics run roughshod over the structure of our physical theories, so I will argue that, in particular, we should not uncritically allow our metaphysics to dictate what our physical theories must determine. The central conviction which drives the arguments of this paper is that deterministic theories are not required to determine for future moments what they cannot determine for any present or past moments. I provide two arguments to the effect that a physically informed notion of determinism does not require general relativity to determine substantival facts. Consequently the Hole Argument cannot be used against substantival spacetime. The position that I advocate is an instance of “sophisticated determinism.”

中文翻译：

---

反对一切的论据

空穴论证最初是由爱因斯坦提出的，当他在广义相对论的微分同胚不变性的背景下努力理解时空坐标的含义时，它一直困扰着他。此后，Earman 和 Norton (Br J Philos Sci 515–525, 1987) 将这一论点用于哲学用途，以反对实质性的时空概念。在目前的工作中，我展示了如何将 Earman 和 Norton 的 Hole 论证扩展到排除一切，而不仅仅是实体流形。黑洞的这些伤亡表明，空穴论证主要取决于我们的决定论概念，而不是广义相对论的微分同胚自由。正如厄尔曼和诺顿争辩说我们不应该让我们的形而上学对我们的物理理论结构进行粗暴对待，所以我会争辩说，特别是，我们不应该不加批判地让我们的形而上学支配我们的物理理论必须确定的东西。推动本文论点的核心信念是，确定性理论不需要为未来时刻确定它们无法为任何现在或过去时刻确定的东西。我提供了两个论据，即决定论的物理上知情的概念不需要广义相对论来确定实质性事实。因此，空洞论证不能用于对抗实体时空。我主张的立场是“复杂决定论”的一个例子。推动本文论点的核心信念是，确定性理论不需要为未来时刻确定它们无法为任何现在或过去时刻确定的东西。我提供了两个论据，即决定论的物理上知情的概念不需要广义相对论来确定实质性事实。因此，空洞论证不能用于对抗实体时空。我主张的立场是“复杂决定论”的一个例子。推动本文论点的核心信念是，确定性理论不需要为未来时刻确定它们无法为任何现在或过去时刻确定的东西。我提供了两个论据，即决定论的物理上知情的概念不需要广义相对论来确定实质性事实。因此，空洞论证不能用于对抗实体时空。我主张的立场是“复杂决定论”的一个例子。