  Priest’s qualification to the LCC is that it applies only to atomic sentences and their negations: otherwise we would have to admit the case where a disjunction \(p \vee q\) held right up to a limit in virtue of \(p\) holding at the rational points and \(q\) holding at the irrational points: this would be capricious behaviour in which we can make no sense of the past determining the future. We would also admit problems if we allowed the LCC to apply to tense operators: Future-\(p\) can obviously hold up to a limit without holding at the limit.