Past, Present and Future - do they exist?

If you want . . . 's'up to you . . .

0 Replies

It's not up to me, I'm not God.

0 Replies

Neither is god . . .

0 Replies

There is only the Eternal Now.

0 Replies

DrewDad wrote:

There is only the Eternal Now.

What makes you think that?

0 Replies

It's true that we are always trapped in an 'eternal Now'. We don't experience the past, we experience memories of the past in the present. And we don't experience the future, we experience the present.

However, we have a definition of the past (that what happened) and a definition of the future (that what will happen). In those definitions there is a past, a present and a future.

0 Replies

Quote:

However, we have a definition of the past (that what happened) and a definition of the future (that what will happen). In those definitions there is a past, a present and a future.

Mindgames, and they exist in the now. Past=memory, future=hopes. So it is right, there is only the eternal now.

I've been shouting that in here for almost a year Mad

0 Replies

Cyracuz wrote:

Quote:
However, we have a definition of the past (that what happened) and a definition of the future (that what will happen). In those definitions there is a past, a present and a future.

Mindgames, and they exist in the now. Past=memory, future=hopes. So it is right, there is only the eternal now.

I've been shouting that in here for almost a year

That's what I said: we only experience the present. However, the semantic definition of 'past' and 'present' fits what it describes.

I've been shouting that in here for almost forty minutes Mad

0 Replies

You lot seem to agree (correct me if I'm wrong) that we can talk about the past and present, but all that truly exists is the present, right? You're presentists. Here are a few potential problems/questions about presentism...

1. What is now? What is the present?
Suppose this horizontal line is time, and the vertical line is the present:

-------------|-------------->

The vertical line is just a point - it has no duration. How can a point actually exist?

2. If past things no longer exist, how can they have a relation of beforeness to present things, which do exist. So for example, how can my birth be before whatever I'm doing right now as yo uread this, if whatever I'm doing right now exists, but my birth no longer exists?

3. How can there be any truth about the past if the past no longer exists? How can it be true that I woke up this morning?

4. What exactly do we mean by existence when we say that only (temporally) present things exist? We can't mean 'exists now' because then we would just be saying 'what exists now, is now.' We can't mean 'existed now, or did exist, or will exist' because then the past and future would be present. So perhaps we mean exist in the same way we would say that the number 2 exists - in a tenseless way. But if the existstence we are talking about is tenseless, then contradictions occur... I exist now, but in the future I will not exist. At that future 'present,' it must be tenselessly true that I do not exist - but it has already been tenselessly true that I do exist. I can't exist and not exist.

So if only the present exists, what do we mean by 'exist'?

0 Replies

You lot seem to agree (correct me if I'm wrong) that we can talk about the past and present, but all that truly exists is the present, right? You're presentists. Here are a few potential problems/questions about presentism...

1. What is now? What is the present?
Suppose this horizontal line is time, and the vertical line is the present:

-------------|-------------->

The vertical line is just a point - it has no duration. How can a point actually exist?

2. If past things no longer exist, how can they have a relation of beforeness to present things, which do exist. So for example, how can my birth be before whatever I'm doing right now as yo uread this, if whatever I'm doing right now exists, but my birth no longer exists?

3. How can there be any truth about the past if the past no longer exists? How can it be true that I woke up this morning?

4. What exactly do we mean by existence when we say that only (temporally) present things exist? We can't mean 'exists now' because then we would just be saying 'what exists now, is now.' We can't mean 'existed now, or did exist, or will exist' because then the past and future would be present. So perhaps we mean exist in the same way we would say that the number 2 exists - in a tenseless way. But if the existstence we are talking about is tenseless, then contradictions occur... I exist now, but in the future I will not exist. At that future 'present,' it must be tenselessly true that I do not exist - but it has already been tenselessly true that I do exist. I can't exist and not exist.

So if only the present exists, what do we mean by 'exist'?

0 Replies

thats funny, because I was thinkin the same thing the other day... I don't think there is, but peoples minds are set in that time (past/future) so I guess it did have to exist... if you robbed a bank yesterday , 5 days later you'll get arrested...

0 Replies

It's the front of a wave, not a point. Sheesh.

0 Replies

Agrote, that's a misconception. You are operation with the assumption that time is linear. It appears linear to us, but is it?

Quote:

1. What is now? What is the present?
Suppose this horizontal line is time, and the vertical line is the present:

-------------|-------------->

The vertical line is just a point - it has no duration. How can a point actually exist?

This is more accurate, though not entirely:

|------------------------------|

Quote:

2. If past things no longer exist, how can they have a relation of beforeness to present things, which do exist. So for example, how can my birth be before whatever I'm doing right now as yo uread this, if whatever I'm doing right now exists, but my birth no longer exists?

Because of continuance and causality. You were born, and that is evident by the fact that you're here. The curious part is that you were actually born in this moment, as were all of us. Now it has expanded to include more, that's all. Time doesn't move, we do.

Quote:

3. How can there be any truth about the past if the past no longer exists? How can it be true that I woke up this morning?

Are you serious? You didn't wake up in the past. You woke up when the present was this morning.

This is all very simple. Sounds as if you want to confuse yourself. Smile

0 Replies

past present and future.. are all illusions but illusions exist

therfore they do exist!!!

0 Replies

DrewDad wrote:

It's the front of a wave, not a point. Sheesh.

That'd be Possiblism rather than Presentism - you're saying the past exists, right? the past is the rest of the wave...

Cyracuz, another problem for presentism:

You would say that only temporally present things exist, right? So Charles Darwin does not exist, but Steven Hawkings does. (Correct me if this isn't what you believe). What do we mean by 'exist' here? Surely we don't mean exist in the present tense, "exists now," because then all we'd be sayign is, "what exists now, is now." Also, we can't mean by 'exist,' "has existed, does exists, or will exist," because then the past and future would be 'now.'

So we must mean 'exist' in a tenseless sense. Things that are temporally present exist tenselessly, just as the number 2 exists tenselessly. So it is tenselessly true that I exist now, but say in a hundred years I am dead, it will then be tenselessly true that I do not exist. It can't be true that I exist and do not exist - and we can't just say that I'm existing at one time and not at another, because we are using a tenseless form of the term 'exist.'

That's a tricky problem that arises with Presentism, because Presentists believe that only now-things exist, and anything not now does not exist.

0 Replies

Quote:

You would say that only temporally present things exist, right? So Charles Darwin does not exist, but Steven Hawkings does.

This is why I am stressing that past and future exist within the present. Charles Darwin didn't exist in the past. He lived his life in the present, the same present that you and I and steven hawking live in. Now, in the meantime, the world in this present has changed, and what remains of Darwin is what he left behind. So, in a sense he still exists, because we remember him, we remember a past where he lived. Is it so hard to understand that this linear thinking is an entirely human aspect, and that the entire reason you do not understand this is that you cannot shake the notion of a linear time.

0 Replies

Cyracuz wrote:

Now, in the meantime, the world in this present has changed, and what remains of Darwin is what he left behind. So, in a sense he still exists, because we remember him, we remember a past where he lived.

That's not good enough though, is it. We can have false memories, abotu people that didn't exist. If I falsely remember a dragon living in my garage, that doesn't mean it was true. So it's not good enough that we remember Darwin for him to have existed.

Your theory of time is very unclear. You say the past and future exist within the present - how is that possible? You say that Darwin lived within the same present as us. Surely you're just misusing the word present to mean 'time' or something?

Yes I have trouble imagining non-linear time - you'll have to explain it better to me.

0 Replies

Can we throw solipsism into this mix as well?

0 Replies

Quote:

Your theory of time is very unclear. You say the past and future exist within the present - how is that possible? You say that Darwin lived within the same present as us. Surely you're just misusing the word present to mean 'time' or something?

No, I am not misusing the word "present". There is only one instant in wich change can occur, and that instant is called the present. Darwin's change from infant to old man took place within this instant, same as do all our cycles of change. Everything happens simultaneously, and though I was not born on Darwins time, things took place back then that led up to me being born, changes happening in the instant that were crucial to the event of my birth.

Everything I have experienced did not happen in the past. They happened in the present, and the only reason for me to assume that time is linear is that I perceive things one after the other. But, as I said, everything happens at once, and when we only see parts of the processes we make erroneous assumptions.

0 Replies

Past, Present and Future - do they exist?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know