Time
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-10-2012, 10:20 PM
RE: Time
you believe that a thing/entity/property/dimension...(YOU DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE FUCK IT IS) exists somewhere out there, we can't sense it with any of the 5 senses, no human ever has and you say it's impossible to do so. You also claim that the perception of time is different than "real time".


You don't know what it is, you admit that one can't sense it, you admit that whatever method we use to perceive it are not related to it.....YET YOU KNOW IT EXISTS? yeah you are dumb ass.

Hey do you believe in the tooth fairy?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 10:26 PM
RE: Time
What people or cultures categorize as events varies. To us the economy collapsing could be an event, to some other culture in some other nation it wouldn't even be noticed or recognized as an event.

We could call evolution an event, people in the 1600's wouldn't categorize those things that happened during evolution as an event.

To us Iran getting a nuclear weapon might be an event that starts x war. To people in Iran, Israel and U.S. surrounding the area with nuclear weapons over decades could be the event that stats x war.


next
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 10:32 PM
RE: Time
"you are doing it retroactively".

She says she believes in the tooth fairy, but is SO dumb, she doesn't even know she doesn't.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
"And you quit footing the bill for these nations that are oil rich - we're paying for some of their *squirmishes* that have been going on for centuries" - Sarah Palin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 10:35 PM
RE: Time
(01-10-2012 10:32 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  "you are doing it retroactively".

She says she believes in the tooth fairy, but is SO dumb, she doesn't even know she doesn't.


Your reasons for not believing in the tooth fairy are my reasons for not believing that time is an independent (woo woo mystical thing) outside human minds.


unless you do believe in the tooth fairy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 10:42 PM
RE: Time
and yes, what people call an event is done retroactively by assembling knowledge of things and memories of things together to retroactively categorize events into linear (time) sequence.

Nobody ever calls something an event as it is happening, it is always done after the fact through memories and recollections.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 10:54 PM
RE: Time
I'm typing this. It is an event as I type it. I'm going to a Philosophy talk. It will be an event held at 6 PM tomorrow.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
"And you quit footing the bill for these nations that are oil rich - we're paying for some of their *squirmishes* that have been going on for centuries" - Sarah Palin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2012, 11:18 PM
Time
Does anyone know what time it is? I can't find my watch.

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Erxomai's post
02-10-2012, 12:27 AM (This post was last modified: 02-10-2012 02:20 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Time
Someone tell this idiot, there IS no "retroactively", if time does not "exist", as a reality, apart from the original memories.
As long as 99.9999 % of all the Physicists on the planet agree with me, and not one actual name of one actual current Philosopher was offered,
I guess a kook, is just that.
Kooks will be kooks. Popes will be popes. There ain't no persuading a Jimmy Swaggert. They believe because they believe.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
"And you quit footing the bill for these nations that are oil rich - we're paying for some of their *squirmishes* that have been going on for centuries" - Sarah Palin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-10-2012, 03:52 AM
RE: Time
(02-10-2012 12:27 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Someone tell this idiot, there IS no "retroactively", if time does not "exist", as a reality, apart from the original memories.
As long as 99.9999 % of all the Physicists on the planet agree with me, and not one actual name of one actual current Philosopher was offered,
I guess a kook, is just that.
Kooks will be kooks. Popes will be popes. There ain't no persuading a Jimmy Swaggert. They believe because they believe.


If we as a culture believe that pearl harbor happened then yes we as a culture are retroactively examining it through past memories of others written downand placing meaning on those recollections.


are you really that stupid? did you not know that you didn't know about pearl harbor when you were born? you had to be taught and you got a collection of other peoples memories and interpretations and I assume you chose to believe that it happened.

Retroactively..... did you seriously not know what that meant?

And I am not saying that things didn't happen or exist in the past, I am saying they did, and we use the concept of time in ways I just mentioned to make sense of past things.


What an event is, differs according to philosopher and is a whole different topic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Event_%28philosophy%29 I thought it was common knowledge that philosophers had far more advanced notions of time than the 1700's quantum physicists.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-10-2012, 06:54 AM
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 continue to conflate 'time' with 'sense of time'. You are very confused.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: