For the discussion of all things philosophical.
https://canzookia.com/
Actually, unless you are suggesting we are so different to most of the animal kingdom, we actually do have an inherent comprehension of time, even if it so mundane as to our circadian cycles.
No, I don't think that we are different from animal.attofishpi wrote: ↑Thu Jan 17, 2019 1:36 pmActually, unless you are suggesting we are so different to most of the animal kingdom, we actually do have an inherent comprehension of time, even if it so mundane as to our circadian cycles.
Motion of anything with mass cannot occur without time and the Universe is in a constant state of motionbahman wrote:
We apparently do not have any sensory system for time
Time to me is a quality of experience which allows change to be experiences in a proper rate. Without it there cannot be any experience change or all changes experienced simultaneously.
And, what is that "proper" rate?
I am not sure that you have a full grasp on this.
The rate that we experience changes. It is similar for all conscious being in a frame of reference and in the same gravitational force.
I think we adopt to this change through evolution.
What is two point of reference? Two points in time?
We experience temporarility. Without temporality all changes would happen simultaneously.
Yes.
Yes.
What do you mean?
So, again what is the "proper" rate?
I am not really sure what you are saying here exactly?
Whatever is CHOSEN to be.
No, because there is NO actual thing, let alone a physical thing, as 'time', from My perspective.
Of course human beings experience change. For any thing to NOT change is inexplicable. But change is only what human beings really experience, if they call change "temporality", then that is another matter. If a human being experiences 'time' and NOT change, then that is due to other matters, like self-talk and how the brain works.
There is only ONE event in continual constant-change.
The rate that you experience it.
The rate becomes slower in higher gravitational field.
Yes.
Our lives condition. Our brain mainly and our body partially adopt to it.
So you believe that time is not real. It is part of our experience though.Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 amWhatever is CHOSEN to be.
For example, one point can be when the sun was in a certain position, from a certain position on earth, to when it is next in that exact same position, from the exact same position on earth, or any thing else.
Another example, one point of reference can be when that agreed upon car left a certain position to when it arrived or crashed in another position.
Those two different positions (points of reference) in both examples can be talked about and agreed upon, which takes a bit of discussing. Or, human beings can just a measuring tool that they have devised, with agreed upon measured distances on it, and just say at from "this time" to "this time", which makes discussing much simpler and quicker.
Unfortunately though human beings then start SEE and BELIEVING things that are actually NOT really True.
Could we agree that we experience time? If so where this experience comes from? Let's put all the discussion about devises and how we measure time aside.Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 amNo, because there is NO actual thing, let alone a physical thing, as 'time', from My perspective.
The agreed upon human devised and created tool of a clock, with human made measured distances with agreed upon set values, used to reference things, is so ingrained in the human being now, that the actual understanding of it and how it works is just taken for granted. The word 'time' has become so commonly used that human beings have started believing that there is an actual thing as 'time' existing.
We know that something like color does not exist in reality. But there is light which somehow stimulate our sensory system and somehow the color is experienced. For experience of time however there is not such a external thing. So the question is where such a impression comes from?Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 amOf course human beings experience change. For any thing to NOT change is inexplicable. But change is only what human beings really experience, if they call change "temporality", then that is another matter. If a human being experiences 'time' and NOT change, then that is due to other matters, like self-talk and how the brain works.
Human beings also experience a sun revolving around them on a thing called planet earth. Is this reality?
Human beings experience lots of things, which have been given names and called some thing in particular. But how much of what human beings experience is actually True, Right, and Correct?
Okay, if this were even remotely to be correct, then whatever rate I experience change, then that is the "proper" rate, correct?
So, which is the "proper" rate?
To me, it does not really make sense to say that our brain "mainly" and our body "partially" adopt to "it"?bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:42 pmYes.
Our lives condition. Our brain mainly and our body partially adopt to it.
No I do NOT believe that, NOR do I believe any thing else. Nor do I disbelieve any thing also.bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:42 pmSo you believe that time is not real. It is part of our experience though.Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 amWhatever is CHOSEN to be.
For example, one point can be when the sun was in a certain position, from a certain position on earth, to when it is next in that exact same position, from the exact same position on earth, or any thing else.
Another example, one point of reference can be when that agreed upon car left a certain position to when it arrived or crashed in another position.
Those two different positions (points of reference) in both examples can be talked about and agreed upon, which takes a bit of discussing. Or, human beings can just a measuring tool that they have devised, with agreed upon measured distances on it, and just say at from "this time" to "this time", which makes discussing much simpler and quicker.
Unfortunately though human beings then start SEE and BELIEVING things that are actually NOT really True.
No, because then that would contradict My view and what I have been saying.bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:42 pmCould we agree that we experience time?Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 amNo, because there is NO actual thing, let alone a physical thing, as 'time', from My perspective.
The agreed upon human devised and created tool of a clock, with human made measured distances with agreed upon set values, used to reference things, is so ingrained in the human being now, that the actual understanding of it and how it works is just taken for granted. The word 'time' has become so commonly used that human beings have started believing that there is an actual thing as 'time' existing.
WHERE the experience of "time" comes from is WHERE I said in my last post, which you are responding to now. That is from the human brain, for reasons given in that same last post.
Okay, but are you also prepared to put all the discussion about 'time' being a real thing aside also?
Am i included in this 'we'?bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:42 pmWe know that something like color does not exist in reality.Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 amOf course human beings experience change. For any thing to NOT change is inexplicable. But change is only what human beings really experience, if they call change "temporality", then that is another matter. If a human being experiences 'time' and NOT change, then that is due to other matters, like self-talk and how the brain works.
Human beings also experience a sun revolving around them on a thing called planet earth. Is this reality?
Human beings experience lots of things, which have been given names and called some thing in particular. But how much of what human beings experience is actually True, Right, and Correct?
This could also explain HOW and WHY what i stated about human beings experiencing change, but because of self-talk and how the brain works, some people BELIEVE that they are experiencing 'time' instead.
But there is an external thing. It is called change.
The impression of 'time' comes from the brain, as thought, but originally came from the body experiencing changes first.
yes. The rate changes depending on where is the experiencer. That is why I used the proper.
No, experiencers which are in the same gravitational field experience the same rate. Otherwise they experience different rate.Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 20, 2019 1:41 pm If yes, then if you, or any one else, were to say that they experience a different rate of change, then I could just tell you, or them, that what you experience is NOT the "proper" rate of change, because my rate of change is the proper one and you/they will just accept that. Is this correct?
By proper I mean related to gravitation field.
Condition is it.Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 20, 2019 1:41 pmTo me, it does not really make sense to say that our brain "mainly" and our body "partially" adopt to "it"?
1. WHAT is the "it" that the brain and body adopt to? (This was the original question here. You did NOT answer that question).
Because I think that brain has huge capacity to evolve further unless the smart one doesn't marry. Just think of huge literature which has been produced by human being. Change to our bodies doesn't seems necessary to me.
Yes.Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 am 3. To state the human beings are adopting to "some thing", through evolution, is just stating the blindingly obvious. If human beings did NOT adopt, then they would just be dead. The word 'evolution' actually infers changing/adopting. So, through evolution, ALL things change and adopt.
Condition is the "thing".
I see what do you mean and I don't agree with it. Time is real. One of the latest experiment shows that the existence of gravitational wave which confirms that time is real too. Otherwise time doesn't wave.Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 amNo I do NOT believe that, NOR do I believe any thing else. Nor do I disbelieve any thing also.bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:42 pmSo you believe that time is not real. It is part of our experience though.Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 am Whatever is CHOSEN to be.
For example, one point can be when the sun was in a certain position, from a certain position on earth, to when it is next in that exact same position, from the exact same position on earth, or any thing else.
Another example, one point of reference can be when that agreed upon car left a certain position to when it arrived or crashed in another position.
Those two different positions (points of reference) in both examples can be talked about and agreed upon, which takes a bit of discussing. Or, human beings can just a measuring tool that they have devised, with agreed upon measured distances on it, and just say at from "this time" to "this time", which makes discussing much simpler and quicker.
Unfortunately though human beings then start SEE and BELIEVING things that are actually NOT really True.
I also neither believe nor disbelieve that time is part of My experience. I do accept however that, to YOU, time is real and a part of YOUR experience.
From what I have SEEN, however, I do SEE change within the one thing called "the Universe", and that this change is what some human beings call "time".
I do experience time when I focus on it. My problem is how this experience constructed.Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 amNo, because then that would contradict My view and what I have been saying.bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:42 pmCould we agree that we experience time?Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 am No, because there is NO actual thing, let alone a physical thing, as 'time', from My perspective.
The agreed upon human devised and created tool of a clock, with human made measured distances with agreed upon set values, used to reference things, is so ingrained in the human being now, that the actual understanding of it and how it works is just taken for granted. The word 'time' has become so commonly used that human beings have started believing that there is an actual thing as 'time' existing.
I don't know how time is constructed.
Yes. I already mentioned about gravitational wave.
Am i included in this 'we'?Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 amWe know that something like color does not exist in reality.bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:42 pmHuman beings also experience a sun revolving around them on a thing called planet earth. Is this reality?Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 am Of course human beings experience change. For any thing to NOT change is inexplicable. But change is only what human beings really experience, if they call change "temporality", then that is another matter. If a human being experiences 'time' and NOT change, then that is due to other matters, like self-talk and how the brain works.
Human beings experience lots of things, which have been given names and called some thing in particular. But how much of what human beings experience is actually True, Right, and Correct?
You in fact can experience time when you only focus on it. So you don't experience time but motion if your mind is busy with something else.
So you are saying that our brain constructed the impression of mind?Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 amThe impression of 'time' comes from the brain, as thought, but originally came from the body experiencing changes first.
All of this is really quite simple really. What the human body experiences, is grasped, through any or all of the fives senses, transmitted to the brain, becomes stored knowledge from that experiential learning, which then becomes a 'thought' (or knowledge), in one way or another.
Already gained thought/knowledge then influences how 'we' (human beings) then LOOK AT things from then on, as well as how 'we' (human beings) SEE things from then on also. How 'we' (human beings) then OBSERVE, (SEE and UNDERSTAND) things is ALWAYS depended upon and relative to the brain and what thought (knowledge) that it ALREADY has stored within it. What 'we' (human beings) then express (or output) can ONLY come from what has been input or put in, which obviously can, and does, come from an external source.
So, just like light "somehow stimulates" the sensory system and "somehow" color is experienced, so is change "somehow stimulating" the sensory system and "somehow" 'time' is experienced.
But as explained earlier, but just in minute detail for now, that because of self-talk, experiential learning, assumptions based on past experiences, and how the brain actually works by only being able to output only what has already been input, then because the senses of the human body experience change, and the only way to understand that better was to compartmentalize that change into separate segments, which eventually were given the name of "time", that is HOW so called "time" is experienced by human beings.
Yes. I didn't say "now" also.bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jan 20, 2019 7:47 pmyes. The rate changes depending on where is the experiencer. That is why I used the proper.
No, experiencers which are in the same gravitational field experience the same rate. Otherwise they experience different rate.Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 20, 2019 1:41 pm If yes, then if you, or any one else, were to say that they experience a different rate of change, then I could just tell you, or them, that what you experience is NOT the "proper" rate of change, because my rate of change is the proper one and you/they will just accept that. Is this correct?
By proper I mean related to gravitation field.
Condition is it.
Because I think that brain has huge capacity to evolve further unless the smart one doesn't marry. Just think of huge literature which has been produced by human being. Change to our bodies doesn't seems necessary to me.
Yes.Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 am 3. To state the human beings are adopting to "some thing", through evolution, is just stating the blindingly obvious. If human beings did NOT adopt, then they would just be dead. The word 'evolution' actually infers changing/adopting. So, through evolution, ALL things change and adopt.
Condition is the "thing".
I see what do you mean and I don't agree with it. Time is real. One of the latest experiment shows that the existence of gravitational wave which confirms that time is real too. Otherwise time doesn't wave.Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 amNo I do NOT believe that, NOR do I believe any thing else. Nor do I disbelieve any thing also.
I also neither believe nor disbelieve that time is part of My experience. I do accept however that, to YOU, time is real and a part of YOUR experience.
From what I have SEEN, however, I do SEE change within the one thing called "the Universe", and that this change is what some human beings call "time".
I do experience time when I focus on it. My problem is how this experience constructed.
I don't know how time is constructed.
Yes. I already mentioned about gravitational wave.
Am i included in this 'we'?Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 amWe know that something like color does not exist in reality.bahman wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:42 pm
Human beings also experience a sun revolving around them on a thing called planet earth. Is this reality?
Human beings experience lots of things, which have been given names and called some thing in particular. But how much of what human beings experience is actually True, Right, and Correct?
If i am, then i would NOT say that I knew this before just now.
You in fact can experience time when you only focus on it. So you don't experience time but motion if your mind is busy with something else.
So you are saying that our brain constructed the impression of mind?Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 amThe impression of 'time' comes from the brain, as thought, but originally came from the body experiencing changes first.
All of this is really quite simple really. What the human body experiences, is grasped, through any or all of the fives senses, transmitted to the brain, becomes stored knowledge from that experiential learning, which then becomes a 'thought' (or knowledge), in one way or another.
Already gained thought/knowledge then influences how 'we' (human beings) then LOOK AT things from then on, as well as how 'we' (human beings) SEE things from then on also. How 'we' (human beings) then OBSERVE, (SEE and UNDERSTAND) things is ALWAYS depended upon and relative to the brain and what thought (knowledge) that it ALREADY has stored within it. What 'we' (human beings) then express (or output) can ONLY come from what has been input or put in, which obviously can, and does, come from an external source.
So, just like light "somehow stimulates" the sensory system and "somehow" color is experienced, so is change "somehow stimulating" the sensory system and "somehow" 'time' is experienced.
But as explained earlier, but just in minute detail for now, that because of self-talk, experiential learning, assumptions based on past experiences, and how the brain actually works by only being able to output only what has already been input, then because the senses of the human body experience change, and the only way to understand that better was to compartmentalize that change into separate segments, which eventually were given the name of "time", that is HOW so called "time" is experienced by human beings.
Ok.Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 20, 2019 11:20 pmYes. I didn't say "now" also.bahman wrote: ↑Sun Jan 20, 2019 7:47 pmyes. The rate changes depending on where is the experiencer. That is why I used the proper.
No, experiencers which are in the same gravitational field experience the same rate. Otherwise they experience different rate.Age wrote: ↑Sun Jan 20, 2019 1:41 pm If yes, then if you, or any one else, were to say that they experience a different rate of change, then I could just tell you, or them, that what you experience is NOT the "proper" rate of change, because my rate of change is the proper one and you/they will just accept that. Is this correct?
By proper I mean related to gravitation field.
Condition is it.
Because I think that brain has huge capacity to evolve further unless the smart one doesn't marry. Just think of huge literature which has been produced by human being. Change to our bodies doesn't seems necessary to me.
Yes.Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 am 3. To state the human beings are adopting to "some thing", through evolution, is just stating the blindingly obvious. If human beings did NOT adopt, then they would just be dead. The word 'evolution' actually infers changing/adopting. So, through evolution, ALL things change and adopt.
Condition is the "thing".
I see what do you mean and I don't agree with it. Time is real. One of the latest experiment shows that the existence of gravitational wave which confirms that time is real too. Otherwise time doesn't wave.Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 am
No I do NOT believe that, NOR do I believe any thing else. Nor do I disbelieve any thing also.
I also neither believe nor disbelieve that time is part of My experience. I do accept however that, to YOU, time is real and a part of YOUR experience.
From what I have SEEN, however, I do SEE change within the one thing called "the Universe", and that this change is what some human beings call "time".
I do experience time when I focus on it. My problem is how this experience constructed.
I don't know how time is constructed.
Yes. I already mentioned about gravitational wave.
Am i included in this 'we'?
If i am, then i would NOT say that I knew this before just now.
I agree.Age wrote: ↑Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:09 amYou in fact can experience time when you only focus on it. So you don't experience time but motion if your mind is busy with something else.