I am new here and have not yet read every post in this thread ... but the concept of time is something I have some thoughts about. I must jump into the forum some where - so - this is it

Time ... exists in our heads (as someone here said) it is definitely a human experience. It is a function of dong a comparison between a past experience (memory) and a present experience.

All there is - is the present moment. A dynamically changing experience. And if we did not have the capability of memory - all we would know (fresh at each instant) is the here and now .. with no other reference point - we can not have an experience of time.

Q: Does 'time' exist?
A: Yes. But only as a human experience.

Q: Did time exist before humans existed?
A: No it did not.

There are two tricks to understand the answer to the question.

The first is to realizes that time is specifically a human experience - like sound. Like touch. Like taste. Like sight. Time does not exist until there is a human with perception and memory. The comparison of our current perception ... with our memory ... gives us our experience of what we call 'time'.

When we hear sound - the sound itself does not exist "out there" - our experience of sound is that it is the result of the transduction of what-we-perceive (waves etc..) via the sense of hearing (ears) into a human experience.

Let us trace the path.

The dog barks... which means air rushes through his throat (no sound yet) setting up vibrations (no sound yet) in the air which travel as a wave (alternate compressed air) to our ear drums (no sound yet) and that sets off impulses in our nerves which carry electrical signals to our brains (no sound yet) .. and somewhere somehow (we know not how) that soundless energy is then transduced into an existential experience that we humans have (NOW we have sound!).

The second 'trick' is in the definition of what it is to exist (to-exist) which defines an act (action) that a human experiences. Existence (to-exit) is also (as sound is) a human experience .. traduces to us by way of our senses. Without the involvement of our senses ... existence ... is only a theory and a contingent potentiality with no reality yet. It requires our human senses and the transduction of that into an existential human experience (we can call it observation as in the 'measurement problem' of quantum psychics) to have something ... to-exist.

Put the cat inside the box and ask the question "Does the cat exist inside the box?" and the answer is most definitely ... No.


!!!

WHY?

... because ... while we can predict that we will experience the cat again when the box is opened ... for the span of time in which we do not directly experience the cat ... the cat does not exist! Why? How can I say that???

Because existence is a condition that is defined by ... having a human experience.

Perhaps the cat IS in the box for the span of time that we can not see into the box to confirm that fact. Perhaps the cat was sent off into another dimension and only came back at the moment we re-open the box. Perhaps the cat fell through a trap door that we did not know about and when we open the box the cat is not there. Perhaps god performed a miracle and vanished the cat... the point is that the existence (to-exit) of the cat is predicated on our ... human experience ... of it. The box (blocking our senses) makes it so that we do not have an experience of the cat - no experience = no existence. It is simple if we use the words correctly.

To use the word 'exist' in any other way than to describe a human experience ... is a misuse. However ... we do this all the time due to the practical situation that it makes life easy. It is a theory that seems to work pretty well for us in daily life even if we are sometimes wrong.

We can also use instruments or thought to postulate the existence of something that we have no direct experience of - for example the obits of other planets postulated the existence of Pluto ... but until we actually observed it Pluto did not exist - the only thing that did exist was our theory that Pluto existed.

All we have to do is use the word 'exit' correctly.

Someone sez "I am going to the store." but gets hit by a car and never gets to the store. The reality is that he was never going to the store .. he was going out to get hit by a car (however he did not know that), But we could perhaps argue according to his own intention verses the final and real results.

For ANYTHING to exist - it must have a location. Which is another way of saying that it must be definable by its limitations. For anything to=exist that thing must be limited ... according to the capability of our senses. These limits (which are really according to our senses only) define its - location - from other things.

And the limitations of anything - are limitations only according to our own human sense perceptions ... and THAT fact pins it tightly and directly to - a human experience.

Our human sense perceptions can be augmented by instruments (telescopes, microscopes, math, what have you) but the key here again is that these instruments traduces to our senses - an experience! These instruments transduce something into our range of sense perception and by doing that it gives us an expereince.

Q: Does time - exist?
A: Yes. But only as a human experience.

Q: Did time exist before there were any humans? (after all there were other animals before humans)
A: Time IS a HUMAN experience.

That question can not be answered for two reasons (and it is not that we cant; find and answer - it is that no answer esists for that question - the question itself can not be asked).

What other animals experience ... I do not know. There is no way to transfer their animal expereince (sensnes /brain / etc) to me. While some of our senses are shared in physiological make up - the minds, memories, etc.. (the psychology) and MEANING oor any expereince - are far too dissimilar.

It is impossible for me to know the experience that even the closes animal (ape) might have of what I might call 'time'. It is also impossible for an ape to know my human experienced of time. The animal expereince and the human expereince can be like - but they can not be the same.

I would expect that higher animals do have an experience that can be likened to my own experience of 'time' - but - it is not a human experience they are having .. and 'time' is defined as a specifically human experience.

Which leads one to the next question...

Q: Can the past - be changed?

First off - this question is not legitimate. It is like asking "Can blue be up?" or "Can up be a solid?" ... it simple is apples and oranges.

BUT - in the sense intended for the question .. the answer is ... yes. The past does change. It changes often. It can 'change' depending upon the choices we make at every present moment.

What has been observed (now in memory) can definitly change in its causality. And the reality of anything is dependednnt upon its causality. A simle way to say this would be to say that the meaning of anything can change. Because casuality is entirely dependent upon (you guest it) a human expeeince of - meaning. What it MEANS to my human mind.

Q: But how can it change? when something that has happened psychically - seems to be done - accomplished - and unchangeable?

The answer to that question goes back to the fact that to-exist depends entirely upon a human experience and what the core of that experience is .. is what it means to us humans.

Both the past and the future - are contingent potentialities - which depend entirly upon the freedom of 'me' in the present moment (or the lack of that freedom).

If anyone is interested in how and why I say that the past can be changed ... I will explain that by a simple thought experiment involving a table and a falling line of dominoes.

Thank you for taking the time to read this. I invite objections.

-Raymond

Belinda wrote:A minor objection: the cat also perceives even though her concepts are limited to cat concepts.

Do you really believe that there is no existence beyond, outside of , above or beneath(choose the metaphor) our perceptions? If so, what is it outside of our eyes and nervous systems that causes us to see?

I hold that there is continual input from the outside environment even though we can never know what the outside environment is like apart from perceptions of it.

Hi Belinda ... you couldn't sleep either huh?

I hold that these questions are really word puzzles. And to put the puzzle together (if it can be put together) one must pay attention to what the words mean.

All words are based upon our human experience of the natural world - which means some experience of either our senses or an experience had in our mind. An expereince of psyche and/or soma.

The meaning of the word existence points to having a human mental experience of something .. a knowing expereince (we knoooooow the expereince).

This means that what we do know - has existence. And what we do not knoow - can not be said to exist. It is that simple.

Do you see?

The hinge pin of this word puzzle ("Does time exist?") is the word 'exist' ... which describes our having an expereince oooof something (somehow and in some way either by psyche or soma).

And so we should think of existence no further than that (the knowing of a human experience of something).

Further .. in the question ("Does time exist?") we are also tallking about - time - which is also specifically a knowing of an experinnce (an expperince had within our human nature which experiennce is caused by a comparison of the state of a current expereince compared to a past state now in memory).

These expereinces are relative. Just like another human expereince {hearing a sound} ... so that when we are expereinnging a particular sound - that sound has existence. And when we are not expereincinng a particular sound ... that sound does not exist.

Got to get ready for work now ... I expereince today as a work-day

-Raymond

As my last contribution to this thread ...

Ti buttress my position that time is an existential human experience and exists only as such...

When ever we wish to determine the truth of a theory - we perform an expiriment (we test it experientially).

By this experience of the results we determine if some state does exist or does not exist (or we see what dooes exist by way of results).

Therefore .. the determination of what does exist and what does not exist is a judgment based upon - our experience through our perception.

The bottom line is that existence is a determination of our human experience.


-DeMeriden

Belinda wrote:I quite understand what you are saying Demeriden. I nevertheless think that there is something 'out there' even if the something is chaotic.

I agree with you more than you know just yet.

I believe there is an external reality (I will leave that un-defined just yet) and the source of that reality is what we call God (and I will leave God undefined as yet). I also believe that this reality is the very best therapy for us.

I do make a difference between the 'God' that institutional religion presents to us - and the 'real' God. The former is a representation (not the real thing) and has been distorted for various reasons ... while the the other is a dynamic, existential, and experiential reality (the real thing). Because I believe the ultimate source of reality to be God (if you find one .. you are standing next to the other) ... I feel no necessity to talk about God much. I think reality speaks for itself and no one needs any more religious baggage. So I prefer to talk about reality.

I plan (so far) to be involved in this forum and I will probably be posting on a weekly basis. If you follow me (read my posts) you will probably find that I do not fit into the usual labels. But I hope you will eventually find that to be both interesting and refreshing

My background research has been Mediterranean cosmogony (Egyptian, Greek, Semitic, and Roman myth) and classical philosophy (Plato through Augustine). A return to the foundations of Western philosophy. The greatest influence upon me has been the German {psychiatrist / philosopher / mystic} .. Erick Fromm .. and the second influence has been Carl Jung. My third ... meditation (which probably sparked my whole journey).

If everyone here is like you - I am sure I have come into the company of very intelligent and and gentle people


-Demeriden

Dewey wrote:Hi DeMeriden,

You say this "reality" is the very best therapy for us. Would you care to elaborate on that thought?

I would love to. Give me a bit of time to think of how to put it .. simply.

-DeMeriden

OK.. this is how I get there.

When I say “Reality is the best therapy” there are many angles by which this is true. I will have to limit my explanation to only a couple of reasons. And to talk about it at all means I must cut to the chase in such a short space.

Human Nature
Human nature is a composite of three natures.

1)Person (a knowing-ability)
2)Psyche (psychological mind of thoughts)
3)Soma (senses of the physical body)

Of these three natures – only one has the possibility of an external reality ... Soma ... which occupies time and space. Since Person and Psyche have no location either in time nor space ... the terms internal and external (which refer to a psychical location) have no real application ... but are none the less often used as a metaphor.

Each of these three natures has a function of mind (intellect / will / memory) which can deal with those things and events which are appropriate to it.

For example: the mind of the body perceives, make choices, and remembers. It automatically regulates blood flow, heart rate, digestion, hormone release, etc.. In its capacity as what we call the subconscious mind it forms habits.

Modes of Perception
In many ways we are like a man who sits alone in a dark movie theater .. watching the movie screen on the wall. I make the comparison that the movie screen is likened to our physical senses (sight, touch, taste, hearing) in as much as our physical senses act as a transducer. Example: external light waves hit our eyes (cones and such) and are transduced into electrical impulses sent to the brain and these neurological signals are somehow changed into our experience of sight. And so our physical senses stand as the movie screen between external reality and our experience of that reality.

To continue with the man in the theater metaphor ... external reality is projected onto the screen of the senses ... and we know external reality by what appears on the movie screen.

Do you understand the comparison here? It is that we do not know external reality directly but rather by what is projected onto the 'screen' of the senses. Very much like a man in a movie theater watching a screen upon which the movie is being projected onto it from behind the screen.

man => |movie screen| <= projector

Internal Projection
The senses (our movie screen) are very capable of displaying an accurate picture of external reality according to what is important to our physical nature.
At the same time ... the screen of the senses can display images of an internal origin. The subconscious mind can and does display upon the screen of the senses ... its own images. We know this as a result of sensor deprivation experiments where people are deprived of sensor stimulus for a span of time and what happens is the subconscious mind creates it own stimulus and projects it onto the senses. This is also the mechanism (internal projection onto the screen of the senses) at work to cause hallucinations, lucid dreaming, and the religious experiences of apparitions and visions.

Visualize and Auditory Projections
Although we are not always aware of it ... this dual projection ... happens all the time. The subconscious mind receives the sensory information and does a quick comparison of it with what is stored in memory as past experiences .. and the adjusts the perception according to its expectations. In other words the subconscious mind pre-digests the sensory information in order to present it to us in a familiar way.

Auditory Example: If we hear someone speaking in a language which we are entirely unfamiliar with – what we experience is a stream of sounds jumbled together and we have no idea which grouping of sounds are individual words. Yet is we listen to someone speaking in our own native language we experience it as individual words one after another. What happens is that our subconscious mind does the automatic separation for us by referring to memory of like past experiences and then adjusting the sensory perception accordingly. We have all experienced occasions when we thought we heard different words than we actually spoken ... the reality is we did hear the words we heard ... (thanks to this automatic subconscious pre-filtering) no matter that these were not the words actually spoken.

This subconscious mechanism is at work in auditory illusions such as hearing words when rock and roll songs are played backwards. In this illusion one often does not hear any words until told what to expect to hear and after that the subconscious mind arranges the sounds according to that expectation.

(refer to the 'tape loop' experiment).

Visual Example: Visual illusions are the result of this same mechanism. The subconscious mind receives the sensory information – does its lightening fast comparison with memory – and then adjusts the visual image according to what is expected and familiar. A well known example of this is that there is a blind spot in our field of vision due to an area in the back of the eye which does not have receptor cones .. however we do not see a blind spot as the subconscious mind fills in the spot with what it determines should be there.
http://www.moillusions.com/2006/03/find ... trick.html

The significant thing about any of these internal projections is that the internal stimulus is actually projected onto our senses ... the sense are stimulated by these internal signals ... and so the reality we experience upon the screen of our senses is a mixed signal .. a dual projection .. meddled together and we have no way to knowing (on a day to day level) to what degree external reality has been filtered and modified according to the expectations of our subconscious.

Which way is the dancer twirling? Watch it for a few minutes and she will appear to twirl the opposite way as the side of the brain which is processing the image grows dull to the monotonous stimulus ... and the other side of the brain takes over the processing.
http://www.maniacworld.com/Spinning-Sil ... usion.html

After you watched that horror movie in the dark of your living room ... and you saw that Shadow move out of the corner of your eye ... did you actually see that shadow move? Yes you did! You did see it .. however it moved in your own eyes and did not move (or perhaps did not even exist) in the external reality of the corner of your room.

When you were alone that times and you swear you hear someone call your name .. but no one was there or even near .... did you hear someone call your name? Yes you did! You ear drums actually moved ... but the stimulus came from your own imagination and not from any external source.

These 'illusions' actually take place upon the screen of the senses. You do see and hear them ... the cause is just not external.

Autism and Savant
Danial Tammet is autistic and has the rare condition of synestheisa where he experiences numbers as perceptions of textures, sizes, taste, emotions, and colors. It is not that he thinks of numbers in this way – it is that he actually perceives in his senses – numbers. The neurological connections between right brain and left brain .. did not develop normally .. and as a consequence numbers are projected in representations onto the screen of his senses. Mathematical problems are solved without his logical thinking – they are solved by his subconscious mind and the results are directly presented on the screen of his senses.

In the same way that I said our subconscious mind pre-processes language when we hear it spoke (changing it from a steady stream of sounds into an experience of hearing individual words) Daniels subconscious (with only a little help to learn the new language) skips logical thinking and presents the results of its pre-processing onto his experience of hearing. IN a normal person this would takes months – for Danial it takes only days.

Daniel can remember the numbers. He can say the number PI to an incredible number of digits ... at one time he said these digits from memory (it took about 2 hours if I remember correctly). If shown numbers on paper he can remember them all. Daniel describes his experience as walking through a landscape where each number has a shape, a texture, a color, a feeling and emotion. But if numbers are written in a jumbled style of shapes, textures, and colors on paper (which shapes etc.. are not the shapes he experiences for each) his ability breaks down ... proof that the internal projections onto his senses is being interfered with.

The Subconscious Mind
The habits of the subconscious mind can be likened to software of computer programming. The programs running can be either based on what does correspond with current external reality ... or ... based on past experiences that no longer correspond with current reality.

The person with a phobia has a subconscious program running that does not correspond with current reality. The projections caused triggering this program ... are stimulating his senses to such a strong degree that the projections of external reality are weakened or even disappear as they are replaced by the internal projections.

I do not think I need to go much further to display exactly how certain aspects of our subconscious mind can and do become a problems by distorting our perceptions of external reality.

The Cure
Various methods of re-programming the subconscious mind have various degrees of success. Psychotherapy, dream interpretation, hypnosis, positive thinking and affirmations, etc... have been proven to be somewhat successful some of the time under particular situations. And so we know that the subconscious mind can be re-programmed.

The difficulty is (however) that replacing one system of belief with another system of belief ...
has its own pitfalls. We know the dangers of Scientology, we know the dangers of religious fundamentalism, we know the dangers of fundamentalism in politics, etc..

The goal of any system of belief ... is to make the personality fit into a particular society .. but what if that society itself – is insane? Nazi, Communism, Pol Pot, and today super-Capitalism ... in a very true sense any system of belief that man has postulated – has fallen short of its goal – reality – and is eventually replaced.

Reality Programming[
To continue with the metaphor of re-programming the subconscious mind to computer software ...

On a personal level ... it is impossible that a person who has broken software (problematic subconscious habits) use that same software – to fix himself. The results of broken and faulty software will always be – broken and faulty software. If you continue to do what you have always done – you will always get the same results. No matter if the faulty programming was bequeathed to you by your parents, teachers, schools, government, religion, or by your own self ... it is the only programming you have and the only programming you may make use of in your efforts to fix yourself. In a very real way – like the woman in the gospels ... we have suffered at the hands of many doctors who tried to cure us.

The simple solution is .. to let reality itself do the re-programming. Reality itself is the best therapy.

When we came into this world we did not yet have the tools of the psychological mind yet. We had no names for objects and events. We had no memory of them. We did not have logic. We did not have beliefs. The computer was clean. The psychological mind of reasoning and judgments – would take time to develop in us – and time before the subconscious mind (a fantastic support system) would become corrupted with un-reality and the false.

At this first stages of life – the master programmer is our own existential experience of reality itself. We soak it up with the wide eyed full attention of a baby. In the complete safety of not being interfered with by the as-yet not developed psychological mind ... the projections of external reality upon our senses is not filtered nor changed in any way – as it comes into us.

This method that reality uses is called 'intentionality' in classical philosophy. It means that nature itself (through the means of us having the existential experience of dynamic reality) places within us – a tension. Be it a rock, fire, the sun, moon, day, night, mountain, tree, stream, etc... through our natural perception of it (unfiltered by the subconscious mind) reality itself places within us – itself.

This is the success of what Eastern philosophy often calls – mindfulness – being aware and attentive to her-and-now existential experience. We withdraw our habitual attention to thoughts (the psychological mind) and place it in the experiential without judgments and analytics.

This is also the success of meditation and what the West calls – contemplation – altho I will not explain or define that here.

In many ways ... meditation and contemplation and the practices associated with mystical traditions – return us to a condition of allowing reality itself ... to do the re-programming. WE progressively come closer to reality .. even if we may perhaps be moving father from current and widely held social beliefs. And so the person who begins meditation ... always has a choice to make ... to either continue his cooperation with reality ... or to fit in with the belief system of other groups.

The pitfall with any system or method of meditation is the tendency to forget that any meditative method is just a working theory which should not be adopted as reality itself ... and to keep replacing beliefs about reality with the experience of existential reality itself.

At this point – I must end. However – if any one wants me too I will describe a short and simple method of meditation which is given in the book “The Art of Loving” by the psychiatrist Erick Fromm. I think Fromm goes right to the heart of what makes any method of meditation – work.

-DeMeriden

wanabe wrote:this is what I'm talking about everyone is so brain washed into thinking time is a physical thing, that we think we can do things with it physically, like time travel. Time does not pass, events happen...

I un-washed my brain several years ago


The following is not 'teaching' it is rather my 'theory' and opinion. I have given the subject a lot of research and thought - and the following is my - current - conclusions in a theory I find useful.

The key for me was to understand 'eternal' as relationships. Not predicated on location (space), nor the Newtonian like concept of sequential, deterministic, mechanical ... time.

The senses of the body interpret perceptions in a reference of ... sequential time and space (sequence and location). And so the perceptions of the body are presented to the psychological mind ... in terms of sequential time and space location.

This fact of experience - does not by necessity mean that what is 'out-there' exists in sequential time and space. And so I can agree with your statement that time does not pass - events happen (or I would say become present).

Newtonian theory assumes it to be true that the external world (objects of the senses) are time and space bound ... but really all we should accept is that our perceptions present it to our mind ... in that way.

We should accept the fact that the senses of the body present its experiences ... to the psychological mind ... in a reference to time and space ... and go no further, make no further assumptions. End it there.

At this point in the tale we might possible say (as the Buddhist and Hindu) that our sense perception causes the illusion of time and space. This illusion (if we want to make that assumption) is called 'Maya".

My own thoughts are that eternity (the presence of all time and all events as contingent potentials) operates as relative. Like the psychological mind does.

Memories can be link to events of senatorial perception - or not. If I ask you "What is your mother's name?" your mother becomes instantly present to your psychological mind - no time sequences nor location involved.

Either experienced as present - or not present.

Q: What changes the state?
A: Your relationship to the mental object.

If it is important to you it becomes present. If it is not important to you it stays submerged in the deep darkness we call continent potentiality.

Any lag in memory is in reading the memory (an act associated with neurology and chemicals) ... reading its details. But the memory itself is either fully present - or not present. Under hypnosis you can recall details you never knew you know about it.

Two states - dependent on a change in relationship as to if it is currently important to you or not.


In the narrations of Genesis this concept is given in the image of all events and things hidden from our knowing and in a state of contingent potentiality.

This is the abyss ... a pit which is so deep that the bottom is in darkness and our eyes are incapable of making out any details at that distance anyway. Yet - there IS something down there! Many things! But you can know what ... unless they rises up into your vision (your knowing it) a metaphor for something 'come into be-ing'.

This is also the meaning of the dove/wind/spirit of God flying over the surface of the waters. In the Hebrew the picture drawn is like a gull flies just above the water ... its shadow skimming on the surface of the water. The concept here is that all things and events are in the water (eternity with all things and events as contingent potentiality) but we can not know them (our eyes can not see below the surface) and the shadow of the dove/wind/spirit casts its own shadow (its image) onto the waters - which act brings all things and events into be-ing (our knowing). And so here again is that idea of ... present to our knowing ... or not present.

And so in this view .. time is the act or action of knowing by sense perception. And what is known is brought into being ... out of all contingent potentialities ... according to what is important to us.

Do we perceive what is important to us and are blind to the rest? That actually seems to be the way our senses work.

The senses receive all kinds of signals and information - a flood! Yet of the flood the senses only transduce some of it - and of that we only pay conscious attention to even a smaller bit that we are interested in ... and disregard the rest. Which is another way to say that what becomes present to us is what is important to us at any moment.

This would seem to say that what comes into being (into existence, into time, into experience) out of all contingent potentialities - is that which is important to us at any moment.


That is as far as I will go and I make no further assumptions.

(so it seems to me)

-DeMeriden

wanabe wrote:by definition time (the system of those sequential relations that any event has to any other, as past, present, or future; indefinite and continuous duration regarded as that in which events succeed one another.)

= series of events, right we can agree on this?

How about this ...

--- re-stated---
Time: is the experience of sequential relationships that any senatorial event has to another senatorial event of past, present, or future. A defined duration in which senatorial events succeed one another to our observation.
--- end ---

we have no way to accurately measure time because we can't see all events right?

("we have no way to accurately measure time") I totally agree. Time is an expeince which is entirely relative to the observer and as such there exists no external and objective bench mark that is not arbitrarly chosen.

One year ... according to which sun? which solar system? which planet? Why is our sun and our planet (its day and night) the 'master clock'??

Once we have admitted the arbitrary choice of our own solar cycle year - all time devisions based on it (day, hour, minute, etc..) are also arbitrary because of that choice.

In a field that is entirely relative to the experience of the observer - no master clock exists.

events happen because of other events happening, not because of time right?

May I suggest that ...
We observe cause/effect as result of our sense perceptions transducing 'external' stimulus to our psychological minds ... as wrapped in a framework of time and space.

Cause and effect are attributes of time and space - without the framework of an experience of time and space ... there is no sequence of any kind ... and so there is no cause and effect sequence.

I refer you to my thought experiment of the line of falling dominoes ... as proof that cause and effect (past and future) are dependent upon our freewill choices at any present moment.

I am not sure (?) that I related that 'dominoes' thought experiment here in this forum.

(I am not a teacher - these are just my opinions).

-DeMeriden
(I am trying to find my way home)

wanabe wrote:i think saying there is no cause and effect because there is no time, is wrong. time does not control when you take a dump, its what you eat that determines this...cause of dump is type of food put in body. cause effect right?..please explain?DeMeriden?

I maintain that a cause always precedes (in time) the effect. One can not apply the terms {cause and effect} without a relationship cast within a time frame.

If one takes a dump after eating ... 'after' is the time frame. Therefore ... eating (what-ever) can be the cause of the dump.

If one takes a dump before eating ... 'before' is the time frame and therefore eating is not the cause of the dump.

Any determination of cause to effect must be made by a relationship within a time fame.


Having said that ...

There is a use of the terms of {cause and effect} that is used in a metaphysical sense and does not indicate a relationship of a time sequence. The terms are borrowed from our experience of the physical world and applied without reference to a time frame ... time sequence is understood as negated.

When used in the metaphysical sense {cause and effect} has the meaning of 'pre-exist' which in turn needs to be understood as a 'metaphysical foundational principle' which is required for something else to-exist.

The Physical Sense of Time Frame
If we think of a house being built within a time frame sequence ... the foundation of the house is laid in time before the roof can exist. So ... we can say that the foundation causes the roof to exist.

The Metaphysical Sense - without Time Frame
If we look at a house all at once as already standing and we do not consider how it was built in a time sequence ... we notice that the foundation 'causes' the roof to-exist ... and what is meant is that the roof can not exist without the foundation performing the act of holding it up. The foundation pre-exists the roof by its act of holding the roof up there.

Origin (early Christian philosopher) most often used the term 'pre-exist' in the metaphysical way - while those who later misunderstood him as having postulated a time before time existed ... could not think of pre-exist without a sequential time frame.

so perhaps we are misunderstanding each others use of .. cause and effect ... ?


off to bed with me now..

Jarle10 wrote:Why must the cause precede in time?

The cold weather causes me to dress up properly before exiting the door. I have not experienced the cold weather yet, but I dress up because I don't want to freeze. In this example, the causing event becomes ambigous.

Knowledge from Previous Sense Experience
I would agree with Belinda ... either you (or your parents or somebody) had some type of previous knowledge in some way about cold weather and that past caused you to dress warmly.

If no one had known what cold weather was - you would have been the first to freeze your butt off and would have dressed warmly thereafter.

Conceptual Knowledge
We can not know what we do not know about previously. Socrates questioning the slave boy to a math answer - was meant to prove that the boy had previous knowledge of the answer even if the boy had no previous math training.



Restated: In the physical world of sense experiences .. cause always precedes effect in time.

Action=cause and re-action=effect. A sequence in time.


-DeMeriden


FURTHER NOTES: In Plato's "Meno" he recounts a dialogue between Socrates and a fellow Athenian on the subject of whether virtue can be taught. A recurring theme in Socrates' thought was that all the knowledge we are capable of possessing is already within us, and the process of reasoning something out is really just an act of recollection, i.e., remembering things we already (in some form) knew.

Magellan's Invisible Ships
One day, the fleet sailed into the bay of an island and, to the amazement of all aboard, the natives onshore paid no attention whatsoever. They simply went on about their daily chores without the slightest shred of concern for these foreign invaders. When Magellan's crew got into their longboats and neared shore, the natives finally did react, and with even greater terror than had been witnessed elsewhere. When the priests ultimately calmed the natives and learned their language, they realized something extraordinary. These particular natives were so primitive that they didn't react when the ships came into the bay -- because they actually couldn't physically perceive them! The ships were so far beyond their consciousness that they literally could not see them.
(plagiarized from http://edgenews.com/simon/magellan.html)

The cause of this type of phenomena is a fascinating explanation. It will rock your socks. I can give it if you want it.

wanabe wrote:when things happen its not because of time passing. its because some other out side force acted on it... one does not get old from "time" passing. one gets old from cell damage. via chemicals, radiation etc...Carbon dating compares the ratio of carbon-12 to carbon-14 atoms in an organism

Dear wanabe .. in re-reading your original post .. I think I get your picture better

(let me mumble to myself for a minute here)...

Humm... Time does not cause someone to get old ... but it is the framework within which these 'outside forces' happen and work.

The causes (of aging) takes place within the framework of our experience of time .. but time itself .. is not the cause of aging.

OK.. I get that .. where to next?



-DeMeriden

wanabe wrote:it is possible to have a society which uses time, but does not recognize it as anything more than what it is, a made up concept, this hypothetical society would not use time in any scientific calculations)

In my study of Mediterranean cosmogonies .. it is clear that they did not use (and had no real knowledge of) our current mechanical concept of time.

Everything was measured by repeating cycles (Lunar months). Even tho according to our mechanical-time days are longer or shorter - for them the new day began at sunset and was divided into a few parts. The length of each hour depended upon the season. Cycles and ... cycles of cycles Time was measured by harvest, floods, moon, stars, birth, and who was he current king.

Perhaps we would all have been better off if the man who invented the first real mechanical clock - had been killed for it

Dear wanabe ...

I hear ya that time has no real existence ... and in a view that is true. That particular view discounts the fact that we humans do actually experience time (I claim it is totally a human experience). And as my current boss sez (he is Spanish) ... "Das OK." your perspective has value.

So in that view - you are absolutely right! Time itself - does not exist - in the same way a table or chair or even the universe exists. We say it is not material and has no physical properties yet we treat it as if it does (thanks to Newton and DeCartes!)

And .. I hear ya that events as isolated from the BIG total event - do not exist. But it is all in what perspective is being used.

It is all a difference of perspective. And one of the problems of talking philosophy is shifting perspectives (one person using one perspective and another using another perspective).

Now .. I would suggest that the perspective you are using when you say that time does not exist .. is a perspective which assume it to be an object or at least have an objective existence apart from any human experience. That view is quite Newtonian ... you do realize.

That perspective assumes that time existed before any human existed. The big bang took place, things cooled, dinosaurs walked the earth... and then so-many-years later along comes humans and we humans step into the already running stream of time. Again - how Newtonian,

I claim (here we go..) that that perspective .. that theory .. is faulty .. yet don't jump to the conclusion that I have adopted any other usual contrary theory.

I know well that that big bang, and proof of dinosaurs, and erosion, continents shifts etc.. all have proof .. but I think we are reading into these ... the wrong theory.

We consistently take the wrong perspective just because the mechanical concept of time existing as an objective reality - is such a subconscious habit - it sticks to our subconscious like glue.

Q:What is next?

I have no time tonight .. but I would like to present some thoughts ... I would like to prove that time has no beginning and has no end. You yourself can readily accept this in the sense that you say time does not exist at all.

In order to crawl out of our pit .. is so darn hard .. that we need to take steps and can not jump right to the final conclusion right away ... or else it does nothing to enlighten us (we know .. but do not understand). We do not get that "Ah Ha!" feeling.

I would like to present two though experiments .. the first examining if there can be a beginning of time (supposedly with the big bang) and secondly as to if we can change the past - and is so - what is it that changes.

Both experiments indicate that time .. is a human experience .. and it flows from the present moment. Past and future are both contingent upon the present moment.

From there .. I might move to current quantum ideas that the catalyst for contingency is - thought - and the 'measurement problem' where reality is not solidified until it is observed. But again - do not automatically assume that I subscribe to the new age concept that we all just think up our reality.

But I am not sure knowing that (that thought has somehow something to do with shaping reality) does us any good without blowing apart other ideas which stick to us like glue. We need that "Ah Ha!" which arrives when it all becomes clear. Only the Ah Ha! does us good.

Of course - when we get it - we become the odd ball in a sea of popularly held beliefs.

Now I have to get to bed. Forums can be addicting and a real detriment to sleep

-DeMeriden

Dear Blinda ...

You say things very well ... you have had training? majored in philosophy somewhere?


And I want to say to everyone that I am so thrilled to have stumbled into this forum. You -all- are so though filled. My brain gets a real work out here. (one, two, one, two, stretch, breath, relax)

=DeMeriden

How about this ....

Time has no independent existence apart from an experience of it. Time is relative to the observer.

Very non-Newtonian.

I fall back onto the belief that time (like sound and sight) is a mental experience and a framework in which our senses transduce and present .. exterior 'events' to consciousness .. as sequential.

I would suggest that the sequential-ness is due to the limitations of our senses and to our own tendency to isolate some particular experience in the stream as important to us and so we mentally mark it as an event within the stream.

I think I am going to settle on that for a bit.

-DeMeriden

Has anyone else here seen the latest pictures of the underwater structure off of the coast of Japan? and if so - does anyone else here realize the impact this has upon our discussion here? (The concept of time as independent and mechanical which Darwin's theory utilizes - can be severely questioned).

-DeMeriden