The Existentiial implications of the Block Universe model

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
Post Reply
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

The Existentiial implications of the Block Universe model

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

Hello Philosophers!

Jack and I were exploring various ideas associated with cause and effect, and as a result stumbled on the idea of trying to make the Block Universe theory more relatable to our human condition. Meaning, what does it really mean to think about time in the third-person as it were, where the past, present and future all all one. What would that be like? In a purely objective fashion, we are trying to create a model where we are looking in from the outside; a transcendence of sorts. For those who are familiar with the philosophy of Unity of Opposites, that idea may make make better sense. Of course we can only imagine or actually conceive of such a reality in theory, but since we all like to think outside the box (no pun intended), here's a good starting point. (This is an open thread for brainstorming all possibilities):
It's a bit longer that usual, but perhaps good for weekend viewing... !
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: The Existentiial implications of the Block Universe model

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

Key Concepts:

Presentism:


Philosophical presentism is the view that only present entities exist (or, equivalently, that everything is present).[1] According to presentism, then, there are no wholly past or merely future entities whatsoever. In a sense, the past and the future do not exist for presentists—past events have happened (have existed) and future events will happen (will exist), but neither exist at all since they do not exist now. Presentism is a view about temporal ontology that contrasts with eternalism—the view that past, present, and future entities exist (that is, the ontological thesis of the block universe theory)—and with no-futurism—the view that only past and present entities exist (that is, the ontological thesis of the growing block theory).[2]

Presentists and eternalists make competing claims about temporal ontology. According to presentism, only present things exist. According to eternalism, past and future things, such as dinosaurs and human outposts on Mars, exist as well. These are theories about what there is, just like actualism, possibilism, Platonism, nominalism, Meinongianism, idealism, materialism, theism, atheism… (2006: 75)


Eternalism


In the philosophy of space and time, eternalism[1] is an approach to the ontological nature of time, which takes the view that all existence in time is equally real, as opposed to presentism or the growing block universe theory of time, in which at least the future is not the same as any other time.[2] Some forms of eternalism give time a similar ontology to that of space, as a dimension, with different times being as real as different places, and future events are "already there" in the same sense other places are already there, and that there is no objective flow of time.[3]

It is sometimes referred to as the "block time" or "block universe" theory due to its description of space-time as an unchanging four-dimensional "block", as opposed to the view of the world as a three-dimensional space modulated by the passage of time.


Growing Block Universe:


The growing block theory of time holds that the past and present are real, and the future is unreal. The passage of time comprises new things coming into existence: as the present moves forward, and what was once present becomes past, the ‘block’ of reality grows.

According to the growing block universe theory of time (or the growing block view), the past and present both exist, and the future as yet does not. The present is an objective property, to be compared with a moving spotlight. By the passage of time more of the world comes into being; therefore, the block universe is said to be growing. The growth of the block is supposed to happen in the present, a very thin slice of spacetime, where more of spacetime is continually coming into being. Growing block theory should not be confused with block universe theory, also known as eternalism.

The growing block view is an alternative to both eternalism (according to which past, present, and future all exist) and presentism (according to which only the present exists). It is held to be closer to common-sense intuitions than the alternatives
.

And of course, the short fun paradox of Time from Aristotle:
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: The Existentiial implications of the Block Universe model

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

I will open the discussion with two (*synthetic a priori) propositions:

The 'privileged status of reality" (from the paradox of time video) of the present moment must be understood through the objective 'reality' of the Block Universe.

Or, the 'privileged status of reality' is a subjective truth that is only real to the subject (solipsism/metaphysical idealism) and exists only experientially (i.e., time flies when you are having fun).

Philosophical question: what slice of time represents the present?

*Key concept:

Kantian synthetic a priori example: "all events must have a cause".
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: The Existentiial implications of the Block Universe model

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

Existential Implication of the Will to be (thinking aloud possibilities):


Our birth is out there in space-time. Your death, too, is in space-time. Every moment of your life is out there, somewhere, in space-time.

So says the block universe model of our world.

According to the block universe theory, the universe is a giant block of all the things that ever happen at any time and at any place. On this view, the past, present and future all exist — and are equally real.

"Imagine a regular chunk of cement," "It has three dimensions but we live in four dimensions: the three spatial dimensions plus one time dimension. A block universe is a four-dimensional block, but instead of being made of cement, it is made of spacetime. And all of the space and time of the Universe are there in that block."

We can't see this block, we're not aware of it, as we live inside the cement of spacetime. And we don't know how big the block universe we live in is: "We don't know if space is infinite or not. Or time - we don't know whether it has a beginning or if it will have an end in the future. So we don't know if it's a finite chunk of spacetime or an infinite chunk."


Philosophical question #2: Does this mean that if my Will to do things is already determined, like in the length of a play or song, and someone or something else has written the script, what would it be like to be outside the block as a 'purely objective observer' outside of space-time? Would traveling at the speed of light, in theory, somehow provide for that understanding (time stops at the speed of light)? And, what is timelessness and eternity?

Premise: mathematical models of objective truth's don't change with time.
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: The Existentiial implications of the Block Universe model

Post by Atla »

You won't get far by imagining the block universe as a literal block, it's obviously a hypersphere.
True philosophy points to the Moon
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: The Existentiial implications of the Block Universe model

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

Atla wrote: June 17th, 2022, 2:49 pm You won't get far by imagining the block universe as a literal block, it's obviously a hypersphere.
Are you sure ?
:P


“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: The Existentiial implications of the Block Universe model

Post by Atla »

3017Metaphysician wrote: June 17th, 2022, 3:05 pm
Atla wrote: June 17th, 2022, 2:49 pm You won't get far by imagining the block universe as a literal block, it's obviously a hypersphere.
Are you sure ?
:P


Nothing is sure, but the Kantian/Newtonian concepts of space and time are a bit outdated. Also, what's the point of betting on inherently illogical pictures of reality, wasting one's time.
True philosophy points to the Moon
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: The Existentiial implications of the Block Universe model

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

Atla wrote: June 17th, 2022, 3:20 pm
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 17th, 2022, 3:05 pm
Atla wrote: June 17th, 2022, 2:49 pm You won't get far by imagining the block universe as a literal block, it's obviously a hypersphere.
Are you sure ?
:P


Nothing is sure, but the Kantian/Newtonian concepts of space and time are a bit outdated. Also, what's the point of betting on inherently illogical pictures of reality, wasting one's time.


Are you suggesting that the proposition "all events must have a cause" is outdated?

Please share your thoughts if you are able.
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
snt
Posts: 110
Joined: June 2nd, 2022, 4:43 am

Re: The Existentiial implications of the Block Universe model

Post by snt »

3017Metaphysician wrote: June 17th, 2022, 3:25 pm Are you suggesting that the proposition "all events must have a cause" is outdated?

Please share your thoughts if you are able.
I just read the article https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-hume-causality/ that describes an inspirational insight that Kant received from the work of David Hume, which involves Hume's rejection of causality after which an ongoing argumentative battle about the nature of causality arose between Kant and Hume that presumably would define modern philosophy.

According to Kant, experience is derived from the a priori true (pure) nature of causality (as necessity of space and time).

"For Kant, the concepts of both causality and necessity arise from precisely the operations of our understanding—and, indeed, they arise entirely a priori as pure concepts or categories of the understanding. It is in precisely this way that Kant thinks that he has an answer to Hume’s skeptical problem of induction: the problem, in Kant’s terms, of grounding the transition from merely “comparative” to “strict universality” (A91–92/B123–124).

Succession is necessary; … the effect does not merely follow upon the cause but is posited through it and follows from it. The strict universality of the rule is certainly not a property of empirical rules, which, through induction, can acquire nothing but comparative universality: i.e., extensive utility.
"

At question would be: is the idea of a Universal law valid? Is causality a necessity derived from the a priori synthetic concepts space and time? Is conscious experience derived from that necessity?

I would beg to differ. I would base my critique on the idea of a pure form of consciousness (as potential) and not as it has manifested to provide capacities such as reasoning. In order to go beyond ideas of the understanding to address the fundamental nature of reality, the idea of a Universal law seems ill suited.

Kant's theory is assumptuously based on the concept reason and he never went into depth about the nature of reason.

plato.stanford.edu on Kant's reason mentions the following:

"we might note that Kant rarely discusses reason as such. This leaves a difficult interpretative task: just what is Kant’s general and positive account of reason?

The first thing to note is Kant’s bold claim that reason is the arbiter of truth in all judgments—empirical as well as metaphysical. Unfortunately, he barely develops this thought, and the issue has attracted surprisingly little attention in the literature.
"

If this is the case from an academic Kant scholar perspective then what should be made of the idea that reason is 'given' by nature to serve a purpose?

Kant: "Nevertheless, reason is given to us as a practical faculty, that is, one that is meant to have an influence on the will."

There is evidence that conscious experience in time can exert an effect on physical reality in the past. One of the several ways that that is possible is through Quantum Post Selection. That would imply that the idea of "all events must have a cause" is invalid.
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: The Existentiial implications of the Block Universe model

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

snt wrote: June 19th, 2022, 11:44 am
3017Metaphysician wrote: June 17th, 2022, 3:25 pm Are you suggesting that the proposition "all events must have a cause" is outdated?

Please share your thoughts if you are able.
I just read the article https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-hume-causality/ that describes an inspirational insight that Kant received from the work of David Hume, which involves Hume's rejection of causality after which an ongoing argumentative battle about the nature of causality arose between Kant and Hume that presumably would define modern philosophy.

According to Kant, experience is derived from the a priori true (pure) nature of causality (as necessity of space and time).

"For Kant, the concepts of both causality and necessity arise from precisely the operations of our understanding—and, indeed, they arise entirely a priori as pure concepts or categories of the understanding. It is in precisely this way that Kant thinks that he has an answer to Hume’s skeptical problem of induction: the problem, in Kant’s terms, of grounding the transition from merely “comparative” to “strict universality” (A91–92/B123–124).

Succession is necessary; … the effect does not merely follow upon the cause but is posited through it and follows from it. The strict universality of the rule is certainly not a property of empirical rules, which, through induction, can acquire nothing but comparative universality: i.e., extensive utility.
"

At question would be: is the idea of a Universal law valid? Is causality a necessity derived from the a priori synthetic concepts space and time? Is conscious experience derived from that necessity?

I would beg to differ. I would base my critique on the idea of a pure form of consciousness (as potential) and not as it has manifested to provide capacities such as reasoning. In order to go beyond ideas of the understanding to address the fundamental nature of reality, the idea of a Universal law seems ill suited.

Kant's theory is assumptuously based on the concept reason and he never went into depth about the nature of reason.

plato.stanford.edu on Kant's reason mentions the following:

"we might note that Kant rarely discusses reason as such. This leaves a difficult interpretative task: just what is Kant’s general and positive account of reason?

The first thing to note is Kant’s bold claim that reason is the arbiter of truth in all judgments—empirical as well as metaphysical. Unfortunately, he barely develops this thought, and the issue has attracted surprisingly little attention in the literature.
"

If this is the case from an academic Kant scholar perspective then what should be made of the idea that reason is 'given' by nature to serve a purpose?

Kant: "Nevertheless, reason is given to us as a practical faculty, that is, one that is meant to have an influence on the will."

There is evidence that conscious experience in time can exert an effect on physical reality in the past. One of the several ways that that is possible is through Quantum Post Selection. That would imply that the idea of "all events must have a cause" is invalid.


snt!

Thank you for taking the time to parse some of those distinctions between a posteriori (Humean empiricism) and the a priori (Kantian metaphysics).

Those are 'wonderful' questions (no pun intended, as you will see) that, I believe, will uncover Kant's postulation over what exactly causes one to propose that " all events must have a cause" to begin with, and provide for that Existential implication over one's own quality of life. Let me address that most important quality (Qualia) of cognition:

You asked: Is conscious experience derived from that necessity?

And along with some of your linked sound bites (thank you again):

....Nevertheless, reason is given to us as a practical faculty, that is, one that is meant to have an influence on the will.

....understanding, in such a way that their use is limited only to experience, because their possibility has its ground merely in the relation of the understanding to experience, however, not in such a way that they are derived from experience, but that experience is derived from them, a completely reversed kind of connection which never occurred to Hume. (ibid.)


Much like in Voluntarism where it is the Will that takes primacy over reason, we are hard-wired to wonder. And things like wonder, will, intentionality, intuition, are all metaphysical qualities (Qualia) of conscious existence. It is that which allows one to advance one's own theory about things like time and space, and other metaphysical features of existence that the Will itself provides for.

The Will is "derived" from our cognitive necessity. That derivation is our logical necessity that exists a priori which is a fixed innate need, that for some reason, we think that "all events must have a cause". Think of it as the software operating system in the brain, that has a fixed, a priori, innate/intrinsic system of programmed thinking.

To Kant's credit, he thought that to dichotomize the a priori and a posteriori (Hume's empiricism) would not provide for a complete picture nor capture the complete phenomenon of the foregoing cognitive process. That integration of the two, known as the synthetic a priori, is something that human nature is endowed with (wonder, curiosity, will, intuition, ad nauseum) which of course allows one to initially advance a given thought or theory. To that end, physical science always uses synthetic propositions to advance theories which in-turn can be tested empirically.

Hence we have a synthesis of a logical process in the brain (cognition), that incorporates the fixed innate sense of wonder from which, Existentially, we cannot escape. Something beyond pure reason give us intuition to sense that there must be a cause to every-thing that exists. Most of us know, while pure reason does provide for things like the apperception of mathematics, as well as the logic (formal logic) associated with the infamous ontological argument, etc., it does not really tell us about the nature of our existence, right? That synthesis, then, transcends pure reason.

And so as it relates to the OP Existential implications of the Kantian metaphysics, the next question could be, does the Will to wonder, and have intuition, infer biological survival advantages, and if not, does is confer enhancement of one's own quality of life (scientific discoveries themselves)? In other words, is that sense of transcendence (transcendental inquiry) provide for anything?

Thank you again for your post, it's a good start to this inquiry...
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
User avatar
3017Metaphysician
Posts: 1621
Joined: July 9th, 2021, 8:59 am

Re: The Existentiial implications of the Block Universe model

Post by 3017Metaphysician »

Here's what I wrote in another thread, which may be another way of 'thinking/looking outside the box', as it were:


Thank you for those clarifications. One reason why I participated in this discussion was that I found it appealing to postulate the blurring of the subject-object divide. To have a 'true' merging or integration (of opposites) of subjective desires (intentionality) into an objective realm of Being, seems reminiscent of the ability to construct or observe a block universe. That it to say that we could stand back, third person, and somehow become aware of all things happening at once (a sense of timelessness/eternity).

In doing so (in that cosmological way), we can conceive of an awareness:

Our birth is out there in space-time. Your death, too, is in space-time. Every moment of your life is out there, somewhere, in space-time. So says the block universe model of our world. According to the block universe theory, the universe is a giant block of all the things that ever happen at any time and at any place. On this view, the past, present and future all exist — and are equally real.


So in a Humanistic way, if we (can) transcend the subjective, how can retain our Being? Pragmatically, one could start with the philosophical notion of Stoicism and work from there...one of many tenets which align with your notion of letting go of certain things, much like Taoism. And leads to other notions of destiny as well. Are we destined to experience a unity between the subject-object dichotomy, I wonder? You yourself, already have suggested a human need for doing so (consider the synthetic a priori in logic that causes one to wonder about things). This may be universal to some if not many, who are also seeking ways to capture a non-duality of Being, or Nondualism proper. To this end, this interconnectedness, pure awareness, pure consciousness, is very appealing:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nondualism

Kind of like the ideas associated with Einstein's block universe theory, philosophically, could Nondualism become part of that forgoing transcendence of Time (reminiscent of Kant's noumenal world) in an ontological way?

Just some more thoughts...
“Concerning matter, we have been all wrong. What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” "Spooky Action at a Distance"
― Albert Einstein
Post Reply

Return to “Epistemology and Metaphysics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021