Greta wrote: ↑January 14th, 2020, 11:12 pm
Your name is "creation". You are really aggressive. And you ask questions that could be answered by a quick search.
That all suggests to me that you are a creationist who has come here to fight with secularists. Thus, it would seem to me that you "cheer" for aggressive theism. If my assumption is "completely wrong", then I apologise.
There is absolutely NO need to apologize, but your assumptions could not be more completely wrong.
I am as far removed from theism as could be, so making assumptions of just one word can lead people so far removed from the truth that they start believing the exact opposite is true. If you see me as being really aggressive, then I must be writing in some particular way that I am completely unaware of. So, because I do not see this aggressiveness at all in anything I write, then providing examples of where I appear 'really aggressive' to you, then I will be able to change my writing in a way so that I do not appear as so aggressive to you again. But the main reason I directly ask people questions here is because of what they, themselves, have usually said. By the way, if and when I read answers, by a quick search, and I see the flaws, faults, falsehoods, inaccuracies, contradictions, and/or incompatibilities in them, and I begin to point them out here, I am usually instantly informed that I do not know what I am talking about and/or that that is not what is purported.
So, anything I try to do is just plain WRONG anyway.
Greta wrote: ↑January 14th, 2020, 11:12 pm
Due to your aggressive patronising, though, I have largely avoided interacting with you so as to not distract from more substantial chats, but if you insist:
Was human beings only living in the 'present', like all animals do, and not having some made up construct of 'time' not obviously already KNOWN?
No one has to look to far at all to observe this happening and SEE this obvious fact.
If that was the case, they would struggle with temporal terminology in the Portuguese language, which more of them are learning. However, the tribal people apparently pick up the concepts quickly. That suggests that they already did have a concept of time, just a different one.
I think it will be found that ALL, what are classed as, aboriginal or "tribal" cultures do not have a perception of 'time', as there is absolutely no need for one. We had no need for 'things', like most peoples, in the year known as 2020, think they have a 'need' for things. We just more or less live like all other animals do. This not caring about the past and not worrying about the future can still be clearly seen in societies/cultures that have a more basic way of living, or have a not so much of a separated from our original way of life, lifestyle. We tend to live 'in the moment' far more than those who are so far removed from the natural way and truth of things.
Are you aware that, if you could transport a tribe of people from say 10,000 years ago to the days of when this is written, then you could very easily teach them absolutely any language at all, and have them driving planes, trains, and/or automobiles, and have them understanding the same concept of "time", which most people have in the year known as 2020, in relatively no time at all, and so very quickly in relative terms? Within a generation or two, besides physical features, you may even not be able to recognize where they actually came from. The way they talk and THINK would be more or less the exact same as all the others around them.
Besides all of these, what I call, obvious facts. What I was actually meaning, which I did purposely wrote it the way I did, (because I want to make it absolutely clear how far people can stray from what I am actually talking about and meaning when they do not clarify with me BEFORE they start making assumptions), was in relation to you, yourself, when you were a very young child.
You and ALL children are born without any concept of "time" and could not care less about any such thing as before or after, and earlier or later. ALL young children think about or live in is the NOW.
The very reason babies and young children can cry so much when they want something, is because, to them, that is literally their WHOLE world. If they do not get what they want NOW, or what they want is taken from them NOW, then, to them, their whole world is literally shattered.
So,
Was (VERY YOUNG) human beings only living in the 'present', like all animals do, and not having some made up construct of 'time' not obviously already KNOWN?
No one has to look to far at all to observe this happening and SEE this obvious fact.
Just may have been in reference to something that was NOT what you were first were assuming and believing it was? But because very young human beings, individually, are absolutely no different from very young human beings, collectively, I was meaning in both ways. That is; Humanity as a whole and each human being individually.
One of them is obviously just far easy to observe, and SEE.
Greta wrote: ↑January 14th, 2020, 11:12 pm
The word 'time' and what most people associated that word to is just a made up construct, which is held in concept or thought only. The human made up word 'time' only actually refers to measurements taken by human beings, by the human made up increments, on the human made contraptions like those called "clocks".
Duration is just a construct and NOT some actual real thing. But most human beings in this day and age, when this is written, are still a long way of learning and understanding this.
What makes you think that you are the only one to perceive this?
I do not.
I used the 'most' word here in relation to human beings, so that was to show that I do NOT think that I am the only one to perceive this.
Greta wrote: ↑January 14th, 2020, 11:12 pm
Have you not read others' postings?
No.
I have read other's postings.
Greta wrote: ↑January 14th, 2020, 11:12 pm
Time-as-a-construct has been discussed numerous times in this thread, and others.
True.
And what is your view, what is 'time', to you?
Greta wrote: ↑January 14th, 2020, 11:12 pm
Also note that natural "clocks" exist, not just the human variety (orbits, rotations and radioactive decay), just mostly not measured by anyone.
Okay, so when people say "natural clocks" am I wrong in thinking that people are talking about absolutely every physical action?
If yes, then what exactly are they talking about and referring to? How does one separate a "natural clock" from what is not a "natural clock"? And, is one rotation of the earth around the sun 1 "tick" or many "ticks"? What makes a "natural clock" a 'natural clock', and, what exactly is 'it' that makes something a "natural clock"?