Originally posted by Ronson
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Philosophy 201 Guidelines
Cogito ergo sum
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Is time physical?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Stoic View Post
True. Seer and I generally don't see things the same way, so I figured presenting it from my own POV would be less likely to be helpful.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Stoic View Post
The way we normally use the word "physical", you would be correct. But philosophers don't generally use the word that way. (Of course, there is some disagreement among them on exactly how it ought to be used.)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ronson View PostWell, not just in the way you presented it but also your argument. Nearly every atheist I've spoken to says that for a "God" to be truly omniscient - to be able to see the future with certainty - would negate human free will. God's existence not withstanding, they reject the notion even being possible. Your presentation runs counter to that.
I don't think I'm that unusual among atheists in being okay with determinism.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Sparko View Post
Not each frame exists as it's own time. I said the film's length was time, and each frame was one event in time at a specific location in time.
Past, present and future are merely relative reference terms we use to refer to different times. It changes. Right now we talk about tomorrow as "the future" but tomorrow we will talk about it as "the present" and today will be "the past"
On the film, the present would be whatever frame is being projected on the screen, the past would be the frames on the take up reel, and the future would be the frames on the feeder reel.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by Stoic View Post
It's the flow of time, and not time itself, that is an illusion (if eternalism is the case).
If time, in the big picture, is not about flow or duration then what exactly is time?
Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by seer View PostIf time, in the big picture, is not about flow or duration then what exactly is time?
It would still be about duration (a measurement along the t axis), but not necessarily about flow.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Stoic View Post
It could just be another dimension, such that to specify the location of an event in space-time, you need x, y, z, and t.
It would still be about duration (a measurement along the t axis), but not necessarily about flow.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostThat would not give you duration, only flow can measure duration. Say that I had coffee last Tuesday morning - that is a meaningless distinction since that event isn't actually in the past tense, it still exists. So I will ask again, what is time?
The duration between Tuesday morning and Sunday morning is about five times the duration from sunrise to adjacent sunrise.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Stoic View Post
No, duration is measured by comparing different durations, just as distance is measured by comparing different distances.
The duration between Tuesday morning and Sunday morning is about five times the duration from sunrise to adjacent sunrise.
Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostDuration by definition is related to time: Duration;continuance in time.The time during which something continues.. With distances there is actual difference, with time that is not the case. All time exists at the same moment. No difference.
Yet both events still exist simultaneously. So again, what is time? It is not flow nor duration, what is it?
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ronson View PostMy instinct is to say that anything that is not made of physical matter is not physical. Time is not made of physical matter. If nothing physical existed in our universe then there would be no time, since it is a measurement of the physical but not physical itself.
That's the way it appears to me anyway.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by shunyadragon, 03-01-2024, 09:40 AM
|
161 responses
513 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
Today, 05:44 PM
|
||
Started by seer, 02-15-2024, 11:24 AM
|
88 responses
354 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
03-01-2024, 09:27 AM
|
||
Started by Diogenes, 01-22-2024, 07:37 PM
|
21 responses
133 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
03-25-2024, 10:59 PM
|
Comment