Further Treatises on Time... (Humans)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Sunday, March 13, 2011, 15:52 (4800 days ago) @ dhw

For Matt
> 
> You have argued that only the present exists, and the future and past do not. I agree and have never disagreed.
> 
> You have argued that the division*** of time into minutes, years, centuries etc. is man-made. I agree and have never disagreed.
> 
> Please can we leave these arguments behind, and focus solely on what follows.
> 
> MATT (to David): Time only exists to us BECAUSE we have memories. It isn't part of the fabric of reality, we only perceive it as such.
> 
> dhw: How do you know "the fabric of reality"? How do you know that our perceptions do not coincide with it?
> 
> MATT: Because both physicists since Einstein and religious leaders of all kinds have actually agreed on exactly THIS thing. [...] Modern physics starts out with the qualifier "Everything you think you know about the nature of reality is either wrong or backwards."
> 
> I admit to being stubborn and ignorant, and I fear I shall now be called arrogant, but here goes. If Einstein, your Buddhist, Hindu and Muslim mystics, Plato, and my friend xeno tell me that my future death will precede my present old age which has preceded my middle age which preceded my having children which preceded my getting married which preceded my youth which preceded my childhood which preceded my birth, I will not only disbelieve you all, but I will recommend you get treatment as soon as possible. The sequential concept of time is as real as anything I know, and it conforms to the definition of time as: "the continuous passage of existence in which events pass from a state of potentiality in the future, through the present, to a state of finality in the past." You have told me to throw this definition away because it is "vernacular" (though it is not dissimilar to your own earlier image of time as a "river"). But it does not endow past and future with present reality, it makes no mention of man-made divisions into units, and it corresponds to experiences, perceptions and observations that permeate every area of life.
> -I'm out of ideas on how to convey this to you; in my own life I reject the feeling of continuity of time as false. It is a feeling, that has no basis in reality. Our brains fill in the gaps, give us the impression of time. The notion of time is further reinforced by the fact that our existence isn't eternal. (Which I'm sure will suffer you some more heartburn...) -I've discussed both Einsteinian relativity and time at the quantum level; time is rejected by both disjoint studies in physics. -When I spoke before of the river, I believe I was using it as a parable: time-lessness is something that I've ascribed to prior to getting involved with Buddhism. In fact I think even in that parable I discussed that the only opportunity you have to change anything in the river is right where your hand is; but the future doesn't exist (upstream is unknowable) and downstream your hand simply creates a wake in the present that slowly dissipates. But this view of time breaks down entirely when you study physics. -> I asked by what criteria you judged the reality of interstellar space to be more "real" than your passage from birth through life to death. You responded: "I don't see where I made the claim that one was 'more real' than the other. They are equally real." Then why do you not accept that time as defined above IS "part of the fabric of reality"?
> -Because physics is the penultimate study of the fabric of reality, and time as continuity is denied there. Borrowing from David's methodology in his book, this is a finding that also happens to coincide with esoteric traditions throughout religious history. As David is troubled by a Prime cause, I think it is valuable to discuss time, since it underpins all notions of cause and effect.-Time as "I was born, I have memories of the past" (past= trappings of language) isn't what I'm contesting. What I'm contesting is the notion that time is a part of objective reality. That time is only understood via an observer, and that the universe does not function by or use time, we gain from physics. Time--purely--is a man made construct that feels real. Like a book; a movie, or a play. Time as a continuity only exists because we remember parts of events and our brains fill in the gaps. That book references this study.-> *** On a lighter (darker?) note, I lived and worked in Ghana for four years, and my wife is African. I can confirm that in general the African attitude towards man-made/woman-made divisions of time is not the same as the European or American!-lol... I always joke with my African friends about their being on 'African time.' I just know to invite them a good few hours before I really want them to show up !

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"