Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Existence]

What do you mean by the "past exists"? I understand events happened prior to the present. But the past is not a place. It exists only in memory and events. Do you mean something more?

It is more than a memory: there exists a past and a future; in some other time people are living our past, and in another time they are living our future.

If I believed this, it would at best be that all time runs parallel to it's self. Similar to the findings of quantum mechanics. And if so than there is no past no future just parallel events.

[Belinda]

I agree with Existence that the past is not an entity,it is a concept which is probably limited to humans as far as we know.

[Admiral usher]

The past cannot be altered, simply because the present cannot effect the past. The future is a product of the present. The present is unrestrained, whereas the past is bounded.

[The past cannot be altered, because the present cannot effect the past] doesn’t necessarily equate to [the future cannot be altered, because the future depends on the present, which depended on the past].
In other words:

[Present] depends on [Past].
[Future] depends on [Present].
[Future] doesn’t necessarily depend on [Past] because [Future] depends on [Present]. [Present] is unrestrained, unlike [Past].

Causality:

Let me put my 2 cents in.In speaking about time I will not use that word because it would be circular reasoning to use time to prove its alteration.
I think the world in a series of events or instances.Each instant being of equal instances.
When there is an increase in the speed of an object then this changes things.

I don't think we step into the future or into the past.I just think that an instant takes shorter instant.Its analgous to a rubber band being stretched.

The greater the length of the rubberband the process of instances slows up as the rubberband stretches out.This is caused when the body in motion is excellerated approaching the speed of light.

Picture yourself sitting on this rubberband.To go from point a to point b would take a longer instant when it is stretched out
Now when an instant takes a shorter period its like a wet piece of string drying out and shrinking.Instances grow shorter and therefore take less of an instant.

There is no going into the past or into the future just a longer or shorter instant for events to happen.

I think of these instances as a line with infinite spaces.That is there are no points in space because a line can be infinitly be divided into more points.
The more points as when the rubberband stretches out the longer it takes to go from point a to b.

The less points of space occur when the string shrinks and it therefore takes a shorter instant.

These instances do not flow they merely go from point to point.I hope my 2 cents make sense.
Admiral usher



I don’t feed the cat.
The cat dies.

What actually caused the cat to die?

The cat’s death was caused by an infinite array of prior causes. There can be ascribed to the cat’s death no definitive cause. No?

[Tofreethemind]

@Ellatha

Thank you for explaining time, the past, present and the future. You dialogue with Dellaire11 actually explained it better. So thanks to Dellaire11 too.

I am trying to understand the context of your first statement.

It has long since occurred to me that all that exists in reality must be capable of existing in the mind, however all things that exist in the mind must not necessarily exist in reality.

The jury is still out on the concept of reality. In quantum physics, reality changes if it is observed. Leading to questions like, "if nobody was watching it, would the moon still exist?". The concept of time would therefore change based on what reality is. Is it possible that the illusion you speak of is nothing more than a mind game.

[Existence]

If I live a conscious life. A life where only the moment I am in is the only reality I know. Where the past is a memory and the future is a thought. Neither exist. Would that mean that time did not exist. So it wouldn't matter what happened prior to that moment, and there is no guarantee that there will be another moment. If the only moment that was real was that conscious moment,there would be no need for the notion of time.

[DmityWatts]

What about the idea of the Eternal Now? Rather than these terms, which you could argue has a self fulfilling effect, of past, present and future, that rather there is one moment, forever occurring, and it is in this moment that everything is 'happening' and it is only in this that anything can be 'happening'.
The idea that there is a past, or a future, cannot be so in my mind.
The past has gone, the future is yet to be, so there can only 'be' the present or Now. The past is not happening therefore it can not exist and likewise with the future.

[Belinda]

The Eternal Now is an interesting idea. Just imagine in the Eternal Now, your most embarassing moment is eternally present with you. Horror!

[Existence]

I want to thank you Belinda and DmityWatts, I have only recently started reading philosophy books and essays. I am only now finding out that I am not alone in my thinking. I had not heard of Eternal Now until your post. I found this on the internet,

http://www.helium.com/items/945280-the-eternal-now

It is very much along the lines of how I perceive time, only without the God reference. It goes far beyond a single embarrassing moment. I believe time creates a space we fit ourselves into. I believe without confining ourselves to times limits we would be able to pursue our passions without sacrificing those around us. Instead of being exclusionary all life would be inclusive and appreciated.

[DmityWatts]

The Eternal Now is an interesting idea. Just imagine in the Eternal Now, your most embarassing moment is eternally present with you. Horror!

My point exactly

[DmityWatts]

The Eternal Now is an interesting idea. Just imagine in the Eternal Now, your most embarassing moment is eternally present with you. Horror!

And what bliss it would be to do the opposite.

[Belinda]

True, DmityWatts! Nietzsche said that the superman is one _who never yet existed but who if and when he comes along will be able to say that he'd be happy about eternal recurrence if he were able to say this.

Me, I am not the superman and prefer to live my life with a beginning and an end.

[DmityWatts]

True, DmityWatts! Nietzsche said that the superman is one _who never yet existed but who if and when he comes along will be able to say that he'd be happy about eternal recurrence if he were able to say this.

Me, I am not the superman and prefer to live my life with a beginning and an end.

Im not talking about eternal recurrence at all in any way. I
Im trying to talk about the phenomenology of time really like Husserl, and then Heideggar with his analysis of language, something quite the opposit.

[DmityWatts]

True, DmityWatts! Nietzsche said that the superman is one _who never yet existed but who if and when he comes along will be able to say that he'd be happy about eternal recurrence if he were able to say this.

Me, I am not the superman and prefer to live my life with a beginning and an end.

I’m not talking about eternal recurrence in any way.
I’m trying to talk about the phenomenology of time really like Husserl, and then Heidegger, something quite the opposite.
Im not saying that we can live in one moment at all, more there is one objective moment and that these terms are just ways for us to understand it, however it completly distortes the perception of time in itself.