WOW deep stuff! There's a whole Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article (sixteen pages long in 12pt type!) about time. Needless to say, my entry won't be anywhere near as comprehensive. Which I'm sure you'll all agree that's a shame. Ha! Well, here goes. As usual this discussion was inspired by the History of Philosophy podcast, this time it was an episode about Aristotle's view of time. I've done a quick search on my blog alone and found that I've used the word "time[s]" approximately 126 times (before this entry of course, I've used the word six times in this entry alone!). Of course not all those usages were the simple noun, time.
We use the word all the time, but what do we really know about time? "I don't have enough time." "I ran out of time." "A stitch in time saves nine." "Time flies." Numerous other casual references to time pop up in conversation all the time. What do they all mean? Is time measurable movements as Aristotle seems to define it? Is time an empty void to be filled as Plato seems to define it? Both seem to be acceptable ideas/definitions of time. And when it comes down to brass tacks does it really matter? The argument is, sort of, moot. It's a discussion piece but it ends up in the same regression to which epistemology eventually runs, there's the skeptical answer that no matter how you slice it, you can never know for certain that you're experiencing what you're actually experiencing and that it's not all a figment of your imagination/dream/Matrix/brain-in-a-vat. It's very similar when it comes to time.
We can number or measure time, we call it a watch or clock. We experience the passing of time, assuming that we can trust our senses, at least we can see change over time which is how we perceive as time changing. Is that what time is? Change? Something more substantive? Does time actually exist? If there weren't any minds to perceive time, would it still exist, if it exists in the first place? I certainly don't have any answers, in fact, I really only want to bring up the questions about this. What do you all think? Do you have the answers? Sorry to be pessimistic, but philosophers have been arguing/considering these thoughts for years and no one really has all the answers, so I doubt you (though you altogether form a formidable intellectual force) will be able to answer these questions.
One parting thought, these questions of the existence of time bring up the concept of infinity that I've discussed before. Aristotle, because his concept of time relates to movement requires that time be infinite. Here's my synopsis of the argument. If time is the measurements related to movement then it has to be infinite, because if there was something that moved the first movement of time, then there had to be time before time. So, if time is something moving or at least related to movement then it must be infinite. I'll sum up my view, as I've already mentioned. Infinity in time is related to space in that physical universe cannot be infinite and therefore time cannot be infinite. God, however, is outside space and time and is the infinite unmoved mover, and uncaused first cause of all causes. That's just my view, no real answers just what I think. Good luck with your search for your answers.
We use the word all the time, but what do we really know about time? "I don't have enough time." "I ran out of time." "A stitch in time saves nine." "Time flies." Numerous other casual references to time pop up in conversation all the time. What do they all mean? Is time measurable movements as Aristotle seems to define it? Is time an empty void to be filled as Plato seems to define it? Both seem to be acceptable ideas/definitions of time. And when it comes down to brass tacks does it really matter? The argument is, sort of, moot. It's a discussion piece but it ends up in the same regression to which epistemology eventually runs, there's the skeptical answer that no matter how you slice it, you can never know for certain that you're experiencing what you're actually experiencing and that it's not all a figment of your imagination/dream/Matrix/brain-in-a-vat. It's very similar when it comes to time.
We can number or measure time, we call it a watch or clock. We experience the passing of time, assuming that we can trust our senses, at least we can see change over time which is how we perceive as time changing. Is that what time is? Change? Something more substantive? Does time actually exist? If there weren't any minds to perceive time, would it still exist, if it exists in the first place? I certainly don't have any answers, in fact, I really only want to bring up the questions about this. What do you all think? Do you have the answers? Sorry to be pessimistic, but philosophers have been arguing/considering these thoughts for years and no one really has all the answers, so I doubt you (though you altogether form a formidable intellectual force) will be able to answer these questions.
One parting thought, these questions of the existence of time bring up the concept of infinity that I've discussed before. Aristotle, because his concept of time relates to movement requires that time be infinite. Here's my synopsis of the argument. If time is the measurements related to movement then it has to be infinite, because if there was something that moved the first movement of time, then there had to be time before time. So, if time is something moving or at least related to movement then it must be infinite. I'll sum up my view, as I've already mentioned. Infinity in time is related to space in that physical universe cannot be infinite and therefore time cannot be infinite. God, however, is outside space and time and is the infinite unmoved mover, and uncaused first cause of all causes. That's just my view, no real answers just what I think. Good luck with your search for your answers.
 |
| If the tsunami/waterlevel ever gets this high, pretty much the whole island is screwed. |
