There is no 'Matter of Fact' [Analytic].

[Skepdick]

No they don't (not most of them at any rate). They exist external to people now, and they existed outside of minds, and will exist outside of minds.

Show me where 2022 is.
Show me 2020 is.

Time is local and relative to the observer. Retard.

[Terrapin Station]

No they don't (not most of them at any rate). They exist external to people now, and they existed outside of minds, and will exist outside of minds.

Show me where 2022 is.
Show me 2020 is.

Time is local to the observer. Retard.

When is temporal, not where.

[Skepdick]

When is temporal, not where.

When and where are the same thing in spacetime.

[Terrapin Station]

When is temporal, not where.

When and where are the same thing in spacetime.

They're not the same thing.

[Skepdick]

They're not the same thing.

In which logical system?

Why are you talking to idiots like me and not claiming your Nobel prize already?

[Terrapin Station]

They're not the same thing.

In which logical system?

In no logical system. Ontologically, they're not the same thing.

Why are you talking to idiots like me

Maybe the best question you've asked yet, but I've basically answered it in the past.

[Skepdick]

In no logical system. Ontologically, they're not the same thing.

You continue to be confused. Time is not ontological. Time is epistemic.

There's no ontological 2020.
There is no ontological 2022.
There's only an ontological NOW.

In any coordinate system location IS identity.

When (1838) and where (1838) is the same location. Therefore it's the same thing.

[Terrapin Station]

You continue to be confused. Time is not ontological. Time is epistemic.

Wrong. Time really exists.

[Skepdick]

Wrong. Time really exists.

OK. Where's your Nobel prize?

[Terrapin Station]

Wrong. Time really exists.

OK. Where's your Nobel prize?

As if saying that time really exists is something novel or controversial.

[Skepdick]

As if saying that time really exists is something novel or controversial.

It's a claim.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

[Terrapin Station]

It's a claim.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

So the extraordinary evidence that time is just epistemic then?

[Skepdick]

So the extraordinary evidence that time is just epistemic then?

I'd accept epistemic time without evidence. Because I am a charitable guy.

You want to make it ontological. Go for it. Show me your Nobel prize.

[Terrapin Station]

So the extraordinary evidence that time is just epistemic then?

I'd accept epistemic time without evidence. Because I am a charitable guy.

You want to make it ontological. Go for it. Show me your Nobel prize.

So extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence unless you just so happen to be a charitable guy, haha.

[Skepdick]

So extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence unless you just so happen to be a charitable guy, haha.

Que?

I haven't made any claims. I know how to measure time, because we, humans invented invented clocks. Which part of this, do you think requires justification?

You are the f****** idiot who is trying to promote time to ontological status. And now you are trying to recover from your monumental fuckup by trying to stick me with the burden of proof.