23
   

How do you define Time?

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Oct, 2009 02:19 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Maybe this one.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v97/imposter222/IMG_3960.jpg
0 Replies
 
letstalktheory
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Oct, 2009 08:35 pm
@tcis,
I see time as a word humans use to try and describe something we truly cannot comprehend. Time is merely the passing of moments, this leads to another question though as to what exactly a moment is defined as. I'd say a moment is whenever something happens. From a breathe, to the "moment" I hit the "o" key while typing moment earlier. So when looked at this way it seems time is not a force or anything tangible. It's simply humans trying to put something beyond our comprehension into a nice little shell that we can understand. So I believe there is no such thing as time, only a running collection of moments and instances that we live in and shape (to a point) around us.
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Oct, 2009 10:20 pm
@letstalktheory,
That makes sense. Time AND space may be seen as epistemological organizing principles. We don't see either time or space as things, i.e., as objects of persception. But we may see everything IN TERMS OF our apriori (Kant?) sense of time and space.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 06:24 am
@JLNobody,
Only humans worry about seconds - and it usually concerns sports events. Beyond the fact that most humans live on some sort of schedule - whether it be work or pleasure, time helps us to organize our lives to some extent.

When I worked, I didn't wear a watch, but after I retired, I bought a watch, because it was important to be prompt to catch airplanes, busses, and meeting times with the tour group. My last watch was a Seiko that doesn't require batteries; they call it "kinetic." I love it; it keeps good time, and keeps going and going and going...
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 09:47 am
Quote:
And then there came the exploitation of this. Religions became organized, and people assumed power over others by controlling their beliefs. Whenever we think about religion today it is this form of religion; but it isn't true religion, it's a means of control and power.

True religion, as I see it, is the quest you undertake to return to the state we were in before the evolution of a sense of self. To return to the garden of eden without leaving anything that makes us human behind. To again experience the world with an animals unthinking presence, merely existing in harmony with everything, but with this new sense of self intact.


You're coming close to Spengler Cyr.

But the problem is "how" we might return to the Garden of Eden without leaving behind our human-ness. It sounds attractive. It's what religious ecstasy is. The psychological conditions for approaching that state are ceremonies, rituals, music, architecture, incense,(ahem), dreamy movement etc stopping short, usually, of orgies, and providing a way back out of it, and to arrive at that for everybody a vast organisation is required which, because it can only be staffed by humans, exhibits all the "flaws" humans are subject to.

You are holding out a temptation and are unable to deliver it.

The obvious fact of organised religion is scientific evidence of a yearning for the state you envisage. No yearning-no organised religion. A little like a wing is scientific evidence of a yearning, so to say, in an organism to exploit the air as a niche to get a living in. Or the underground vaults in our case.

And how do anti-religionists propose to address this mass yearning to transcend the lonely self?

Just as Darwin did, they lose the taste for music and art has no meaning for them. So they are concentrating on material possessions on the "I'm better than you" basis and that has no natural orgasmic end point which is to say the state of notself is not only unreachable but is driven out. They have got as far as making music and art nothing but a material possession with status hierarchies the main objective.

It is literally a head up arse and masturbation of the ego situation I'm afraid. Which must be why those phrases so readily come to mind as clinching arguments in the intellectual quivers of the anti-religionists.

Religare means to bind, to unify, to organise. And you are in danger of making religion itself a material possession dedicated to the glory of your own charisma.

Bernini depicted St. Theresa in the notself state.

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 10:21 am
@spendius,
The garden of eden is about "humanness." YOu do know about the rib and how eve was created, don't you? LOL
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 10:24 am
@cicerone imposter,
I've heard a few. There was one on the Bad Jokes thread recently.

I think God was ribbing us with a ribald jest.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 05:48 pm
@spendius,
spendi, You seem to engage in ribaldry in most of your posts - degrading women.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 05:53 pm
@cicerone imposter,
How can I be degrading women when the rib story is a load of nonsense by your own admission. You need to accept the rib myth in order to say I have degraded women.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 05:54 pm
You silly moo.
0 Replies
 
Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Oct, 2009 10:11 pm
New definition...

Time = something we give to Spendius unearned.

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Oct, 2009 10:15 pm
@Eorl,
Excellent definition.
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Nov, 2009 09:16 am
@spendius,
Hey. Pardon my long absence.

Quote:
Religare means to bind, to unify, to organise. And you are in danger of making religion itself a material possession dedicated to the glory of your own charisma.


Well, isn't all organized religion basically a material possession dedicated to the glory of someone's charisma?
I am talking about personal understanding, and my eden is not a place of perpetual bliss. What it is I cannot say, since whatever I said wouldn't be what I mean Wink
The important thing is that we find out for ourselves...
JLNobody
 
  1  
Reply Tue 10 Nov, 2009 12:36 pm
@Cyracuz,
"Religion" derives from religare so long as we take the so-called mystical perspective, seeing it as the means by which we unify ourselves with God or "ultimate reality." The problem with this perspective, as I see it, is that we cannot unite ourselves with the Ultimate; we can only realize that we are already one with it, i.e., our true nature is our unity with all things. That realization is our religious stature. In other words, there is no need for unification, only for liberation from the illusion of separateness, i.e., ego.
When I meditate I do not try to accomplish anything other than to see what is the case at each moving moment, even if that is the feeling of separateness--which is actually a paradoxical realization of existential unity.
0 Replies
 
Mishawu
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 12 Nov, 2009 01:26 am
@tcis,
time is how fast an experience ends.our universe as a whole is made up of time and space.space gives time,experience,phase or change to move in.So time is how long an experience,change,phase (or whatever you want call it) occupies space.In reality space and time are the same because they both go through an infinite cycle of change.
0 Replies
 
Mishawu
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Nov, 2009 02:24 am
@tcis,
Time is how fast an experience ends.Our universe as whole is made up of time and space.Space gives space for experience,phase,instant or change (aka time)to move in.So time is how long an experience,phase,instant,time (or whatever you want to call it) occupies space.In reality both space and time are the same because they both go through an infinite cycle of change.
0 Replies
 
Mishawu
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Nov, 2009 02:34 am
@tcis,
Time is how fast an experience ends.Our universe as a whole is made up of space and time. Space gives space for experience,phase,instant or change(aka time) to move in.So time is how long an experience,phase,instant,change,time(or whatever you want to call it) occupies space.In reality both space and time are the same because they both go through an infinite cycle of change.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Nov, 2009 03:10 pm
Oswald Spengler wrote this-

Quote:
The problem of Time, like that of Destiny, has been completely misunderstood by all thinkers who have confined themselves to the systematic of the Become. In Kant's celebrated theory there is not one word about its character of directedness. Not only so, but the omission has never even been noticed. But what is time as a length, time without direction? Everything living, we can only repeat, has "life," direction, impulse, will, a movement quality (Bewegtheit) that is most intimately allied to yearning and has not the smallest element in common with the motion (Bewegung) of the physicists. The living is indivisible and irreversible, once and uniquely occuring, and its course in entirely indeterminable by mechanics. For all such qualities belong to the essence of Destiny, and "Time"---that which we actually feel at the sound of the word, which is clearer in music than in language, and in poetry than in prose---has this organic essence, while Space has not. Hence, Kant and the rest notwithstanding, it is impossible to bring Time with Space under one general Critique. Space is a conception, but time is a word to indicate something inconceivable, a sound symbol, and to use it as a notion, scientifically, is utterly to misconceive its nature. Even the word direction---which unfortunately cannot be replaced by another---is liable to mislead owing to its visual content. The vector-notion in physics is a case in point.

For primitive man the word "time" can have no meaning. He simply lives, without any necessity of specifying an opposition to something else. He has time, but he knows nothing of it. All of us are conscious, as being aware, of space only, and not of time. Space "is," (i.e. exists, in and with our sense-world)---as a self extension while we are living the ordinary life of dream, impulse, intuition and conduct, and as space in the strict sense in the moments of strained attention. "Time," on the contrary, is a discovery, which is only made by thinking. We create it as an idea or notion and do not begin till much later to suspect that we ourselves are Time, inasmuch as we live. And only the higher Cultures, whose world conceptions have reached the mechanical-Nature stage, are capable of deriving from their consciousness of a well-ordered measurable and comprehensible Spatial, the projected image of time, the phantom time, which satisfies their need of comprehending, measuring and ordering all. And this impulse---a sign of the sophistication of existence that makes its appearance quite early in every Culture---fashions, outside and beyond the real life-feeling, that which is called time in all higher languages and has become for the town-intellect a completely inorganic magnitude, as deceptive as it is current. But, if the characteristics, or rather the characteristic, of extension---limit and causality---is really wizard's gear wherewith our proper soul attempts to conjure and bind alien powers---( ...reference to Goethe...) ---if all law is a fetter which our world-dread hurries to fix upon the incrowding sensuous, a deep necessity of self-preservation, so also the invention of a time that is knowable and spatially representable within causality is a later act of this same self-preservation, an attempt to bind by the force of notion the tormenting inward riddle that is doubly tormenting to the intellect that has attained power only to find itself defied.


His italics.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Nov, 2009 03:18 pm
@spendius,
spendi, We all know you well enough to know that you mark time by how many pints you're able to consumer at the local pub.
0 Replies
 
amirwaraich
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Jun, 2011 03:39 pm
@Tiaha,
time is '' INTERVAL BETWEEN TWO HAPPENINGS''
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Why does time not exist? - Discussion by edgarblythe
Putting Time In Perspective - Discussion by Olivier5
What happens when time stop? - Question by 5D
Time simply does not exist - Discussion by xxxx
The elusive NOW - Discussion by Rickoshay75
Time - Question by Genius600
simple relativity question - Question by ralphiep
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/25/2024 at 03:28:34