For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
No, wasn't my intention at all. Sorry if it came across that way.
Truth is not complicated. You only make it so.jayjacobus wrote: ↑Thu May 03, 2018 10:53 am And it's a surprise that you have a son because you reason like a teenager.
Your logic was offense to me.AlexW wrote: ↑Thu May 03, 2018 11:08 amNo, wasn't my intention at all. Sorry if it came across that way.
What did I say that offended you? I was just explaining how I see time - is it really offending just because its different to how you see it?
Truth is not complicated. You only make it so.jayjacobus wrote: ↑Thu May 03, 2018 10:53 am And it's a surprise that you have a son because you reason like a teenager.
Tallis states: "All animals, all material objects, are caught up in events that seem to have a temporal location, a temporal order, and a temporal duration. Outside of human life, however, this is implicit rather than explicit. We alone table time and clock it."Philosophy Now wrote: ↑Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:23 am Raymond Tallis keeps his eye on time.
https://philosophynow.org/issues/84/Seeing_Time
I have posted this in the other thread as well, just to make this easier to read, here it is again:jayjacobus wrote: ↑Thu May 03, 2018 1:58 pm Your logic was offense to me.
But your premises are not acceptable.
Your logic is all over the place.
And your conclusion (There is no absolute time) doesn't follow either your premises or your logic.
I dont think an animal (or human) performing certain activities at certain times during a day or night is a reasonable proof that there is something like time.A_Seagull wrote: ↑Thu May 03, 2018 9:47 pm Just because other animals don't have much use for tables or cuckoo clocks, this does not mean that they don't have a viable concept of time. The Sun moving across the sky makes an excellent clock and is used by many animals. Other animals have an internal clock that is used for hibernation.
The position of the sun in the sky mimics the positions of the hour hand of an analogue clock (or rather it is the other way around), a clock in the sky for all to see.AlexW wrote: ↑Fri May 04, 2018 1:51 am Hi A_Seagull,I dont think an animal (or human) performing certain activities at certain times during a day or night is a reasonable proof that there is something like time.A_Seagull wrote: ↑Thu May 03, 2018 9:47 pm Just because other animals don't have much use for tables or cuckoo clocks, this does not mean that they don't have a viable concept of time. The Sun moving across the sky makes an excellent clock and is used by many animals. Other animals have an internal clock that is used for hibernation.
The sun sets, predators become active and start to hunt. No concept of time required.
Time only appears to manifest if you start to plan ahead... "I will have to go hunting when the sun sets... How long to go..? Ah.. the sun is still high, some more time to snooze..." See, time requires a projecting forward (or a memory of the past) to exist. Without a past or a future time is non existent. Time is as such dependent on thought as thought is the only place where the past and future exist.
You seem to misunderstand my point. In your logic you use "you" (which is me) in a way I consider offensive not because you oppose my theory. And you are still doing it.AlexW wrote: ↑Fri May 04, 2018 1:40 amI have posted this in the other thread as well, just to make this easier to read, here it is again:jayjacobus wrote: ↑Thu May 03, 2018 1:58 pm Your logic was offense to me.
But your premises are not acceptable.
Your logic is all over the place.
And your conclusion (There is no absolute time) doesn't follow either your premises or your logic.
You become upset, not because I oppose your theory, but because you don't see or understand where I am coming from. See, you subscribe to a dualistic view of reality where separation rules whereas I see the world from the unified perspective where everything is an expression of the undivided whole. This non-dual perspective/knowledge is based on how reality is directly experienced whereas the dualistic perspective, while at times practical, is not more than an abstraction (and as such ultimately untrue).
If you investigate the primary map you will find that reality knows nothing about time. You will find eternity in the now, pure presence, unified being... but no separation. The only place where you can find time is in the overlay to the primary map / reality that thought has created.
Ok... I don't really understand your point, but I will strive to avoid the word "you" when addressing you from now on.jayjacobus wrote: ↑Fri May 04, 2018 5:00 am In your logic you use "you" (which is me) in a way I consider offensive not because you oppose my theory.
Newton: Absolute, true and mathematical time, of itself, and from its own nature flows equably without regard to anything external.jayjacobus wrote: ↑Fri May 04, 2018 5:00 am Plus your conclusion (there is no absolute time) still doesn't follow you arguments.
Which is fine the way we work and live, but in reality there are no locations. In the absolute there is only the here/now (which is everywhere/always).
I do know that I don't (plan ahead) simply because there is no separate I/self to do that.
AlexW wrote: ↑Fri May 04, 2018 5:40 amjayjacobus wrote: ↑Fri May 04, 2018 5:00 am In your logic you use "you" (which is me) in a way I consider offensive not because you oppose my theory.
You use "you" improperly. You use it to make statements about me that are not true. That should be understandable.AlexW wrote: ↑Fri May 04, 2018 5:40 amOk... I don't really understand your point, but I will strive to avoid the word "you" when addressing you from now on.jayjacobus wrote: ↑Fri May 04, 2018 5:00 am In your logic you use "you" (which is me) in a way I consider offensive not because you oppose my theory.
Newton: Absolute, true and mathematical time, of itself, and from its own nature flows equably without regard to anything external.jayjacobus wrote: ↑Fri May 04, 2018 5:00 am Plus your conclusion (there is no absolute time) still doesn't follow you arguments.
How I see it: Adding anything to the absolute (time, distance whatever one might think of) is redundant. If some-thing is absolute, it is by definition unlimited, infinite, eternal - otherwise it wouldn't be absolute.
To add a quality to the absolute (e.g. that it is moving or flowing) is not more than an idea. Once we enter the non-dual, which is where the absolute resides, all descriptions, added qualities and properties lose their meaning.
Which is fine the way we work and live, but in reality there are no locations. In the absolute there is only the here/now (which is everywhere/always).
Consciousness is a blank reality.jayjacobus wrote: ↑Fri May 04, 2018 12:00 pm
If there is only the here and now, consciousness lives in a blank reality.
I was actually referring to being instinctive.