Time
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-10-2012, 02:11 PM
RE: Time
(01-10-2012 01:15 PM)I and I Wrote:  No, people, things and places exist outside our minds, and in order to make sense of all the things that happen with the things outside our minds we use time to compartmentalize and understand the things around us. When you say event 1 happened before event 2 you are using time and memory to place things in a linear order so you can understand things better, you are doing it retroactively.
"Unwittingly," or "inherently," would be more accurate.

Classification is how we make sense of our experience of the dimensions of reality. I am trying to convince the world that there are six, or seven, dimensions of reality that things can be categorized into:

Reality - known and unknown
Nature - all that is known
Technology - all that is made by man
Individuals - all that defines the individual from the organization
Organizations - Society - systems of people
Abstractions - Ideology - Culture - what people perpetuate by organization
Change - Time

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 02:12 PM (This post was last modified: 01-10-2012 08:51 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Time
(01-10-2012 01:15 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(01-10-2012 12:39 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Well then. She just refuted herself. If there are "events" then time exists, outside her mind. If one "event" *happened*, in a different *frame*, then "event 1", is not identical to "event 2". WTF does she think an "event" is for christ sake ?





No, people, things and places exist outside our minds, and in order to make sense of all the things that happen with the things outside our minds we use time to compartmentalize and understand the things around us. When you say event 1 happened before event 2 you are using time and memory to place things in a linear order so you can understand things better, you are doing it retroactively.

LISTEN TO YOURSELF !!!
"DOING IT RETROACTIVELY"
Absolutely.
Refuted again by her OWN words.

"RETROACTIVELY"
You just said "retroactively". Repeat that 25 times. Then hit yourself on your head 25 times.

It means that there is an absolute time 3, DIFFERENT from time 1 and time 2.

Tell, us, O Troolololololo, "what is an 'event' ?". YOU introduced the word. Now define it.


What you are talking about is a topic in Cognitive Neuro-science, but the topic involves "events" or intervals of short duration. Even Philosophers do not attempt to say there is no absolute difference between "today" and "tomorrow". Even they are not that stupid. You are saying there is no absolute difference between today and the day AFTER you will be dead, when your brain will have STOPPED proccessing "events". If THAT is the fairy story you are attemping to make us believe, .... good luck.

And now, folks, I'm going to take my own advice, and do my Bible reading for the say, and do as it says :
"Do not answer a fool with his own stupidity, or you will be like him." Proverbs, 26:4 Tongue

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist
Isaiah 45:7 "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things" (KJV)

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
01-10-2012, 02:15 PM
RE: AW: Time
(01-10-2012 12:28 PM)I and I Wrote:  There is no entity/dimension/property like time that exists outside our physical bodies in any kind of physical form.

I believe that the discovery of what ever it is they detected with that particle accelerator in the Swiss Alps this past year is the physical entity of change - it exists ever presently.

Humanism - ontological doctrine that posits that humans define reality
Theism - ontological doctrine that posits a supernatural entity creates and defines reality
Atheism - political doctrine opposed to theist doctrine in public policy
I am right, and you are wrong - I hope you die peacefullyCool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 02:27 PM
RE: AW: Time
(01-10-2012 02:15 PM)TrainWreck Wrote:  
(01-10-2012 12:28 PM)I and I Wrote:  There is no entity/dimension/property like time that exists outside our physical bodies in any kind of physical form.

I believe that the discovery of what ever it is they detected with that particle accelerator in the Swiss Alps this past year is the physical entity of change - it exists ever presently.

No it isn't. The Higgs Boson is the particle which arises from the Higgs Field, and it is what imparts mass.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist
Isaiah 45:7 "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things" (KJV)

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 06:58 PM
RE: Time
(30-09-2012 05:41 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(30-09-2012 04:06 PM)Chas Wrote:  We perceive time just as we perceive distance; your question is a non sequitur to what either Bucky or I have said.


I agree with that statement and I would add that distance is not a "thing" that exists outside the human mind, distance is the concept with which we use to say "the chair is over here on the left and the table is on the right" What we call distance or time is used in correlation of real objects and events in the world. If we had not concept of distance than we wouldn't have survived as a species but distance like time is not some external independent entity/property/dimension.

Has anyone here ever heard of Immanuel Kant, Rene Descartes, Hegel, Heidegger, Deleuze?

Oh and why can't you answer whether or not it's possible to perceive "real time"?

It's like arguing with the theists "oh so you mean you can't experience god but you KNOW he exists"? what the fuck?

Kant's time refuted : http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/20...1268773277
From ; http://philosophy.uchicago.edu/faculty/f...%207-8.pdf

"The understanding, therefore, by assuming appearances, grants the existence of things in themselves also; and to this extent we may say that the representation of such things as are the basis of appearances, consequently of mere being of the understanding, is not only admissible, but unavoidable. "

Descartes believed in ("external to the brain") time : http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/dissertations/AAI3403121/

Hegel never said, anywhere, anyplace, that time was entirely a subjective experience.
In fact in, in The Phenomenology of Spirit, he can be seen to assume precisely the opposite.

Deluze never proposed that time was an entirely subjective experience.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/deleuze/#SH4c

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist
Isaiah 45:7 "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things" (KJV)

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 09:30 PM
RE: Time
(01-10-2012 06:58 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(30-09-2012 05:41 PM)I and I Wrote:  I agree with that statement and I would add that distance is not a "thing" that exists outside the human mind, distance is the concept with which we use to say "the chair is over here on the left and the table is on the right" What we call distance or time is used in correlation of real objects and events in the world. If we had not concept of distance than we wouldn't have survived as a species but distance like time is not some external independent entity/property/dimension.

Has anyone here ever heard of Immanuel Kant, Rene Descartes, Hegel, Heidegger, Deleuze?

Oh and why can't you answer whether or not it's possible to perceive "real time"?

It's like arguing with the theists "oh so you mean you can't experience god but you KNOW he exists"? what the fuck?

Kant's time refuted : http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/20...1268773277
From ; http://philosophy.uchicago.edu/faculty/f...%207-8.pdf

"The understanding, therefore, by assuming appearances, grants the existence of things in themselves also; and to this extent we may say that the representation of such things as are the basis of appearances, consequently of mere being of the understanding, is not only admissible, but unavoidable. "

Descartes believed in ("external to the brain") time : http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/dissertations/AAI3403121/

Hegel never said, anywhere, anyplace, that time was entirely a subjective experience.
In fact in, in The Phenomenology of Spirit, he can be seen to assume precisely the opposite.

Deluze never proposed that time was an entirely subjective experience.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/deleuze/#SH4c


Never said I agree with Kant, never said I agree with Deleuze, in fact I posted a video of a guy explaining deleuze notion of time and I specifically said I don't agree with all of that. Nice try though.

Hegel used absolute knowledge which most people after Hegel describes as time. And no, I don't agree with Hegel on everything he said.

I used Descartes/Kant/ Hegel to show the progression in Human thinking when it comes to how humans interact with the outside world subjectively. Your version along with modern science is that of the cartesian (descartes) notion of how a human relations to the outside world, this was before Kant came along and proposed that concepts were used and that relation to the outside world isn't strictly and individual subjective experience, then hegel came along and expanded on/refuted Kant on that same topic.

You believe Human+Time, that humans are affected by a woo woo something that is outside their mind. Kant would then come along and say that it was more complicated than that, in order for humans to relate to the outside world we as humans need to have concepts in order put meaning on and categorize meaning in order to make sense of the outside world, meaning of and understanding of something isn't just an individual subjective experience. Then Hegel came along and refuted that by saying that it's human+world(concepts)=mind, hegel stated that the world around us affects us, world+human, then the humans make sense of this world by concepts, beliefs, ideologies that are taught to us by pre-existing ideas from the society around us. For Hegel it was world-Individual-World. This is known as that Copernican turn.


Everything we know or learn is not a subjective experience strictly because the methods in which we use to understand and categorize things are taught to us from society. Where did any and all ideas of time come from? YOu? no boy it came from the society around you and you learned it. so the very thing that you learned was dependent on society around you to teach you, you then turn around and say that time is outside of human minds (AFTER YOU LEARNED IT FROM PRE-EXISTING WORKS OF OTHER MINDS).

If you as an individual can't sense time AND any other mind can't sense time, then guess what, it is a very high probability that it doesn't exist, just like no individual or any other group of any other minds has ever seen or felt a god....so guess what, it doesn't exist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 09:35 PM
RE: Time
Modern science is based on the idea that first there is a perception and then there is reality and that by working out toward this perception we can somehow get to know reality. This too is a rather old and played out belief.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 09:47 PM (This post was last modified: 01-10-2012 09:53 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Time
(01-10-2012 09:35 PM)I and I Wrote:  Modern science is based on the idea that first there is a perception and then there is reality and that by working out toward this perception we can somehow get to know reality. This too is a rather old and played out belief.

If you get sick, you go to the doctor. Fail.
And you're going to replace it with what exactly ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist
Isaiah 45:7 "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things" (KJV)

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 09:49 PM
RE: Time
(01-10-2012 09:30 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(01-10-2012 06:58 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Kant's time refuted : http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/20...1268773277
From ; http://philosophy.uchicago.edu/faculty/f...%207-8.pdf

"The understanding, therefore, by assuming appearances, grants the existence of things in themselves also; and to this extent we may say that the representation of such things as are the basis of appearances, consequently of mere being of the understanding, is not only admissible, but unavoidable. "

Descartes believed in ("external to the brain") time : http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/dissertations/AAI3403121/

Hegel never said, anywhere, anyplace, that time was entirely a subjective experience.
In fact in, in The Phenomenology of Spirit, he can be seen to assume precisely the opposite.

Deluze never proposed that time was an entirely subjective experience.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/deleuze/#SH4c


Never said I agree with Kant, never said I agree with Deleuze, in fact I posted a video of a guy explaining deleuze notion of time and I specifically said I don't agree with all of that. Nice try though.

Hegel used absolute knowledge which most people after Hegel describes as time. And no, I don't agree with Hegel on everything he said.

I used Descartes/Kant/ Hegel to show the progression in Human thinking when it comes to how humans interact with the outside world subjectively. Your version along with modern science is that of the cartesian (descartes) notion of how a human relations to the outside world, this was before Kant came along and proposed that concepts were used and that relation to the outside world isn't strictly and individual subjective experience, then hegel came along and expanded on/refuted Kant on that same topic.

You believe Human+Time, that humans are affected by a woo woo something that is outside their mind. Kant would then come along and say that it was more complicated than that, in order for humans to relate to the outside world we as humans need to have concepts in order put meaning on and categorize meaning in order to make sense of the outside world, meaning of and understanding of something isn't just an individual subjective experience. Then Hegel came along and refuted that by saying that it's human+world(concepts)=mind, hegel stated that the world around us affects us, world+human, then the humans make sense of this world by concepts, beliefs, ideologies that are taught to us by pre-existing ideas from the society around us. For Hegel it was world-Individual-World. This is known as that Copernican turn.


Everything we know or learn is not a subjective experience strictly because the methods in which we use to understand and categorize things are taught to us from society. Where did any and all ideas of time come from? YOu? no boy it came from the society around you and you learned it. so the very thing that you learned was dependent on society around you to teach you, you then turn around and say that time is outside of human minds (AFTER YOU LEARNED IT FROM PRE-EXISTING WORKS OF OTHER MINDS).

If you as an individual can't sense time AND any other mind can't sense time, then guess what, it is a very high probability that it doesn't exist, just like no individual or any other group of any other minds has ever seen or felt a god....so guess what, it doesn't exist.

You FAILED to define an event.
Before any consciousness arose countless events happened, fool.
The day AFTER you die, events will continue.
You are full of shit so deep, you couldn't get out if you tried.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist
Isaiah 45:7 "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things" (KJV)

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 10:03 PM (This post was last modified: 01-10-2012 10:24 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Time
(01-10-2012 09:30 PM)I and I Wrote:  
(01-10-2012 06:58 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Kant's time refuted : http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/20...1268773277
From ; http://philosophy.uchicago.edu/faculty/f...%207-8.pdf

"The understanding, therefore, by assuming appearances, grants the existence of things in themselves also; and to this extent we may say that the representation of such things as are the basis of appearances, consequently of mere being of the understanding, is not only admissible, but unavoidable. "

Descartes believed in ("external to the brain") time : http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/dissertations/AAI3403121/

Hegel never said, anywhere, anyplace, that time was entirely a subjective experience.
In fact in, in The Phenomenology of Spirit, he can be seen to assume precisely the opposite.

Deluze never proposed that time was an entirely subjective experience.
http://www.iep.utm.edu/deleuze/#SH4c


Never said I agree with Kant, never said I agree with Deleuze, in fact I posted a video of a guy explaining deleuze notion of time and I specifically said I don't agree with all of that. Nice try though.

Hegel used absolute knowledge which most people after Hegel describes as time. And no, I don't agree with Hegel on everything he said.

I used Descartes/Kant/ Hegel to show the progression in Human thinking when it comes to how humans interact with the outside world subjectively. Your version along with modern science is that of the cartesian (descartes) notion of how a human relations to the outside world, this was before Kant came along and proposed that concepts were used and that relation to the outside world isn't strictly and individual subjective experience, then hegel came along and expanded on/refuted Kant on that same topic.

You believe Human+Time, that humans are affected by a woo woo something that is outside their mind. Kant would then come along and say that it was more complicated than that, in order for humans to relate to the outside world we as humans need to have concepts in order put meaning on and categorize meaning in order to make sense of the outside world, meaning of and understanding of something isn't just an individual subjective experience. Then Hegel came along and refuted that by saying that it's human+world(concepts)=mind, hegel stated that the world around us affects us, world+human, then the humans make sense of this world by concepts, beliefs, ideologies that are taught to us by pre-existing ideas from the society around us. For Hegel it was world-Individual-World. This is known as that Copernican turn.


Everything we know or learn is not a subjective experience strictly because the methods in which we use to understand and categorize things are taught to us from society. Where did any and all ideas of time come from? YOu? no boy it came from the society around you and you learned it. so the very thing that you learned was dependent on society around you to teach you, you then turn around and say that time is outside of human minds (AFTER YOU LEARNED IT FROM PRE-EXISTING WORKS OF OTHER MINDS).

If you as an individual can't sense time AND any other mind can't sense time, then guess what, it is a very high probability that it doesn't exist, just like no individual or any other group of any other minds has ever seen or felt a god....so guess what, it doesn't exist.

Why is your English useage so horrific ? How old are you ? Did you ever go to school ? Are you home-schooled ?

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein Certified Ancient Astronaut Theorist
Isaiah 45:7 "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things" (KJV)

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: