When I watch my mind, thoughts seem to arrive in an instant. Then it takes time to convert them into language; that's the part we call "thinking". But the part where something complex spontaneously pops into consciousness accounts for more than thinking does. I think language is far more responsible for our perceiving time than we assume.
@@nanashi7779its how they were taught in indoctrinated schools. If we start to homeschool our children with purposeful thoughts they will excel in todays time future
The solution is that time is a seamless flow. It can't be separated into past, present and future. The discretisation of time into stationary chunks of any kind is an abstraction from the perpetual process that is experienced by all that exists
The present is everything and cannot be measured, whereas the past and the future are merely our fundamental conceptions for coming to terms with and understanding that the present constantly changes. That is to say, the past and the future are merely our ways of conceiving that everything changes.
Time itself doesn't exist. All there is, is the ever present now. Time is our perception of our own mortality, as it is limited. The universe does not take consideration of our mortality. You're welcome, I solved it long ago.
A paradox indeed since no one can deny the present. Think of it as you may, it is nevertheless something. This is another way of putting something I think about. If you divide sections of time down to infinity, what are you left with? Oh yes, that's right: the present.
For Aristotle the following true: There is no motion or change in a point in time [an instant (a now) with no temporal dimension]. The present is when we experiencing something. But any experiencing has an extent of time. That is, there is no experiencing without some time. Therefore, there are two internal limits; one between the past and present, the other between the present and the past.
Its funny how they tried to fool us by letting them think for us. But once we do some critical thinking for ourselves we’ll understand that, yea past and future don’t exist only present. But if we take a step back to analyze the concept of future-past.. we understand that the present is in physicality and that future/ lies in our mind
"Nothing" is an exaggeration designed to illustrate a point. The present is not literally nothing. Modernists are too literal. They miss the point. Value the present BECAUSE it exists, it is real, but it is fleeting.
Does time have an end? In that case, the moment after the end of time can’t possibly exist. If the moment efter the end of time doesnt exist then naturally the end of time itself doesnt exist either. Basically the end of time doesnt exist since it has no time to exist. Time is infinite.
Aristotle's view of time is so old. There is actually no paradox because Aristotle interpreted time in terms of the A-theory view of time, which is indeed false because it was disproved by McTaggart's perennial work "The Unreality of Time" a century ago. The A-theory is the view that time consists of Past, Present, and Future. But PPF is merely our subjective point of view time, namely in terms of tensed properties, and these properties are contradictory. An event cannot have the properties of PPF. So the A-theory is false. But B-theory is different. There is no paradox if you adopt the B-theory view of time, that is, time is real, it exists. But time exists in terms of events ordered by earlier-than/later-than relations, and so has a direction. So, for example, Cesar Crossing the Rubicon happened earlier than Bill Clinton being elected president of the US. But no one in their right mind should believe past times don't exist at all, because then you are forced to say that Cesar crossing the Rubicon is false and never happened. But does anyone really believe this? Of course the present SEEMS "more real" to us than the past. But no one in their right mind should believe that Cesar crossing the Rubicon is unreal in the same way that unicorns are unreal. So there is a huge difference between real/unreal that people who deny the reality of the past are not explaining. It's another reason why A-theory is false. Aristotle was just confused because he couldn't think of time without tense. We have a preference for the present time (however fleeting) over other times since the present time appears "more real" to us than other times. But the appearance is an illusion, and it's why the philosophical view of presentism is false, including the A-theory view of time. The present time is no more than past times. But time itself, according to the B-theory, exists and is real. (Although B-theorists have two different ways of going. Either eternalism, the the view all times are equally real, or the growing-block view, that only the past and present exist, but the future does not.) Again, no paradox. The only time paradox I think of is time travel. Suppose you get into a time machine, travel back in time, and kill your grandfather before you were born. How is this possible? For, killing your grandfather before you were born would make your ability to travel back in time impossible to do that in the first place. The only way out of this paradox is to hypothesize different timelines or branches of time, so that in one time you were born and got into a time machine, but then traveled to a different timeline killing your grandfather. Also read Michael Tooley's famous Time, Tense, and Causation where explains this as well.
There is no paradox. The past had ceased to exist and the future will come into existence but is not is existence now. What exists is the present only. So what does it divide?? How can a existent separate a non existent thing. The question of seperating doesnt arises here.
except it is not Aristotle's paradox. Aristotle was trying to prove that time never begins and so eternal, what is said here is from 9th book of Augustine "Confession"
The fact and I mean FACT (this is why I hate school system e cause you must wait until higher education degree level after maths a level and choosing a math degree and then only do they go into quantum physics) well we might need to be at higher education to cover the topics of HOW we arrived at proving this or that …. Yes but we do not need to understand the how it is proven to share with human knowledge from kindergarten level WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT OUR EXISTENCE….. it is proven mathematically that the PAST and the FUTURE - all of time is present at all times it just is there like photographs in a rollerdex .. we experience it linearly in our physical bodies in this 3 dimensional world as we go from oast to future- but in fact it’s solid all there always and we even discovered the frame rate of life like in films….and get this : the future can affect the past the same way the past affects the present and future you can actually travel around it (it is a circle) look up oroborus .. snake eating it’s tail.. both ways
It's just a theory what you've just explained. And If we consider the future to be predetermined then there'll be a lot of issues. Past can be predetermined...but we can't say that future is predetermined....not till it's proven with solid facts...I mean real solid facts....not any other theory.
( statement : the past is a hour gone. the future is an hour to come . tge present is the minute i am in) . other than that is word games and nonsense . write volumes, but the simple statement made remains undefetable.
Full Video: ua-cam.com/video/9o9h4OIHAdk/v-deo.html
Can't click on this link 😢
When I watch my mind, thoughts seem to arrive in an instant. Then it takes time to convert them into language; that's the part we call "thinking". But the part where something complex spontaneously pops into consciousness accounts for more than thinking does. I think language is far more responsible for our perceiving time than we assume.
Fascinating paradox. And yet even more paradoxical is the fact that we exist always in the ever present NOW
What the fucc Aristotle then how can I sleep now at night?
😂😂
Like a fkn rock.
So am I existence of nonexistent ! How horrifying the paradox of life is!
I think therefore I am”
No
@@mariusleroy8895the issue with Descartes quote is he’s presupposing he knows what “I” is, this doesn’t solve the problem of consciousness
The solution is the block theory of time. There is no past, present or future. Everything exists in one eternal now.
That's right.
This may be true, but humans undoubtedly lack the capacity to perceive it as such
Block theory's problem is determinism
Future is already there
Which is not true 😢
@@nanashi7779its how they were taught in indoctrinated schools. If we start to homeschool our children with purposeful thoughts they will excel in todays time future
The solution is that time is a seamless flow. It can't be separated into past, present and future. The discretisation of time into stationary chunks of any kind is an abstraction from the perpetual process that is experienced by all that exists
The present is everything and cannot be measured, whereas the past and the future are merely our fundamental conceptions for coming to terms with and understanding that the present constantly changes. That is to say, the past and the future are merely our ways of conceiving that everything changes.
Isn’t this Zeno of Elea’s paradox rephrased in Aristotle’s words?
When you smooth in it of itself, can't be over ruled or overlapped
So how do I live my life normally now
Time itself doesn't exist. All there is, is the ever present now. Time is our perception of our own mortality, as it is limited. The universe does not take consideration of our mortality. You're welcome, I solved it long ago.
A paradox indeed since no one can deny the present. Think of it as you may, it is nevertheless something. This is another way of putting something I think about. If you divide sections of time down to infinity, what are you left with? Oh yes, that's right: the present.
For Aristotle the following true: There is no motion or change in a point in time [an instant (a now) with no temporal dimension]. The present is when we experiencing something. But any experiencing has an extent of time. That is, there is no experiencing without some time. Therefore, there are two internal limits; one between the past and present, the other between the present and the past.
Its funny how they tried to fool us by letting them think for us. But once we do some critical thinking for ourselves we’ll understand that, yea past and future don’t exist only present. But if we take a step back to analyze the concept of future-past.. we understand that the present is in physicality and that future/ lies in our mind
Nobody
That random homeless person I met on the street:
Yes.
A view re time: Time doesn't have an existential reality.
Just the eternal now
its probability of events
@@JokeFranic What?
@@Philosophy_Overdose time - probability of events (how probable is that past-present-future)
Time is experience.
We live in a eternal present.
Lol so many of have done this very same thing .especially when we were kids
"Nothing" is an exaggeration designed to illustrate a point. The present is not literally nothing. Modernists are too literal. They miss the point. Value the present BECAUSE it exists, it is real, but it is fleeting.
He said 'the past does not exist'... Wouldn't the past exist until the end of time?
Does time have an end? In that case, the moment after the end of time can’t possibly exist. If the moment efter the end of time doesnt exist then naturally the end of time itself doesnt exist either. Basically the end of time doesnt exist since it has no time to exist. Time is infinite.
Eeeuuuuugh Aristotle
Aristotle's view of time is so old. There is actually no paradox because Aristotle interpreted time in terms of the A-theory view of time, which is indeed false because it was disproved by McTaggart's perennial work "The Unreality of Time" a century ago. The A-theory is the view that time consists of Past, Present, and Future. But PPF is merely our subjective point of view time, namely in terms of tensed properties, and these properties are contradictory. An event cannot have the properties of PPF. So the A-theory is false.
But B-theory is different. There is no paradox if you adopt the B-theory view of time, that is, time is real, it exists. But time exists in terms of events ordered by earlier-than/later-than relations, and so has a direction. So, for example, Cesar Crossing the Rubicon happened earlier than Bill Clinton being elected president of the US. But no one in their right mind should believe past times don't exist at all, because then you are forced to say that Cesar crossing the Rubicon is false and never happened. But does anyone really believe this? Of course the present SEEMS "more real" to us than the past. But no one in their right mind should believe that Cesar crossing the Rubicon is unreal in the same way that unicorns are unreal. So there is a huge difference between real/unreal that people who deny the reality of the past are not explaining. It's another reason why A-theory is false. Aristotle was just confused because he couldn't think of time without tense.
We have a preference for the present time (however fleeting) over other times since the present time appears "more real" to us than other times. But the appearance is an illusion, and it's why the philosophical view of presentism is false, including the A-theory view of time. The present time is no more than past times. But time itself, according to the B-theory, exists and is real. (Although B-theorists have two different ways of going. Either eternalism, the the view all times are equally real, or the growing-block view, that only the past and present exist, but the future does not.)
Again, no paradox. The only time paradox I think of is time travel. Suppose you get into a time machine, travel back in time, and kill your grandfather before you were born. How is this possible? For, killing your grandfather before you were born would make your ability to travel back in time impossible to do that in the first place. The only way out of this paradox is to hypothesize different timelines or branches of time, so that in one time you were born and got into a time machine, but then traveled to a different timeline killing your grandfather.
Also read Michael Tooley's famous Time, Tense, and Causation where explains this as well.
Do not the effects of the past exist then
only now exists and the neurological connections you made in the past
There is no paradox. The past had ceased to exist and the future will come into existence but is not is existence now. What exists is the present only. So what does it divide?? How can a existent separate a non existent thing. The question of seperating doesnt arises here.
except it is not Aristotle's paradox. Aristotle was trying to prove that time never begins and so eternal, what is said here is from 9th book of Augustine "Confession"
This clip was cut too short
🤣
The fact and I mean FACT (this is why I hate school system e cause you must wait until higher education degree level after maths a level and choosing a math degree and then only do they go into quantum physics) well we might need to be at higher education to cover the topics of HOW we arrived at proving this or that …. Yes but we do not need to understand the how it is proven to share with human knowledge from kindergarten level WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT OUR EXISTENCE….. it is proven mathematically that the PAST and the FUTURE - all of time is present at all times it just is there like photographs in a rollerdex .. we experience it linearly in our physical bodies in this 3 dimensional world as we go from oast to future- but in fact it’s solid all there always and we even discovered the frame rate of life like in films….and get this : the future can affect the past the same way the past affects the present and future you can actually travel around it (it is a circle) look up oroborus .. snake eating it’s tail.. both ways
Do you want a labour to do work or a philosopher to do work😂😂
It's just a theory what you've just explained.
And If we consider the future to be predetermined then there'll be a lot of issues.
Past can be predetermined...but we can't say that future is predetermined....not till it's proven with solid facts...I mean real solid facts....not any other theory.
no paradox here other than the word "paradox" reproduced in speech.
( statement : the past is a hour gone. the future is an hour to come . tge present is the minute i am in) . other than that is word games and nonsense . write volumes, but the simple statement made remains undefetable.
812 ✝️✌️😇🤓☮️😎🙌🌎🪶🌙🕊️🧭🌍🌍🌍🎼