The past is remembered, sure. But that does not mean that the past is just memory. — Banno

Past is in memory but also in the record. If there was no forum, and you lost all your memory, then you wouldn't know the OP existed.

If the past were just memory, there could be no misremembering. One misremembers when what one remembers of the past is not what happened in the past. — Banno

Exactly, that is why past doesn't exist. You were keep saying nine days ago the OP started. Now it is ten days. Hence your memory was wrong. What you said didn't exist.

If the claim is that the past does not exist, then the OP cannot belong in the past. — Banno

The OP is in the forum, not in the past. You think it is in the past, because you remember seeing it.

Now, what could someone mean by saying that the past does not exist? — Banno

It means it is in your memory, but it doesn't exist in reality.

Yep. Exactly. Therefore something belongs in the past. Therefore there is a past.

Now, what could someone mean by saying that the past does not exist? — Banno

It depends what you mean by "exist". Past is just in your memory. It doesn't need to exist. You are saying it exist, because you remember it.

Why would my body have to exist in space, but I can still age without time? — Bob Ross

You don't need to age at all, if you don't remember your age. You are only aging because you think you are aging. You body will still get old, but that is not aging.

It is not a concept: it is a pure intuition of our sensibility; and so is space. A concept is kind of idea comprised of attributes; whereas an intuition is a seeming. An a priori concept, e.g., is quantity; an a priori intuition is space. — Bob Ross

We already have intuition. Saying time is intuition is like saying we have intuition intuition. Not making sense.

The OP was nine days ago. Therefore something was nine days ago. — Banno

It passed. It belongs in the past.

You seem to think this relevant. It is not clear how. But it is not at all clear how you are intending to use "exists". — Banno

If you cannot go back to the past, then how is it real? How can it exist?

I don't know why space is a requirement for me to be real; and, if it does, then why time wouldn't. — Bob Ross

Because without space, your physical body won't exist. But without time you would happily exist like you had been when you were a child with no knowledge of time.

It is true that you made your OP nine days ago. Therefor nine days ago exists.

Sure, it's in the past. Some events are in the past. Therefore there is a past. — Banno

Is it possible that you could go back to 9 days ago?

:strong: :grin:

Then Please Help Me Create Roko's Basilisk :naughty: — Arcane Sandwich

You just say, Roko's Basilisk is caused by uncaused cause. Therefore it changes. Therefore it exists. :nerd:

but why would space be real if you hold time as merely a priori? — Bob Ross

Kant said that, because time is a concept? In Kant, time is definitely internal mental condition (a priori) for human understanding. A priori here means it is innate, and doesn't rely on experience on the empirical world.

Any world events, objects or matter can be conceptualised, and time is a typical case of the conceptualisation. You could make time into 5th dimension keep adding the other aspects to it, and make space-time, into space-time-consciousness, and say it is 5th dimension. All are the result of conceptualisation.

Concepts are parts of reality. :)

P1) Physical and experience exist and they are subject to change — MoK

Does experience exist? Whose experience are you talking about here, and what experience? Does experience change? From what to what does it change?

No, I'm quite sure that time is 1D, because a 1D time plus a 3D space allows your physical theory to have a 4D spacetime. — Arcane Sandwich

Time is just a concept.

Watch the video Arcane. Time can also be 3D according to the video presenter Dr. Schooler.

I can keep living quite happily without time, but I cannot live without space. To move around and go to places, we need space. I am 100% certain that no one can exist without space, unless he/she is a soul or spirit.

Pardon. The same argument can be made about time, Corvus. — Arcane Sandwich

Not quite. I was quite happy existing when I was a child, and didn't know what time was. Space? No space, no body.

Wrong thread. Post deleted.

Hmmm, I think Mww would agree that objects being real checks out, but why would space be real if you hold time as merely a priori? — Bob Ross

If space didn't exist, then you wouldn't exist. You exist (I presume), hence space exists. : MT

So we agree it is nine days since you claimed time does not exist. — Banno

My claim still exists in the OP, but the time 9 days ago doesn't seem to exist anymore. It passed. No longer existing. Only the now seems to exist. Even the now passes away as soon as it exists, strictly speaking. In this case, can it exist? What is it that exists here? The claim, the OP or 9 days ago? Or the now?

It is not contrary at all. I have my own argument for it. — MoK

What is your argument for it? Just to reconfirm. Please elaborate with the reason why it is valid with supporting examples and evidence from real world. Thanks.

You refer me to the battle realism VS idealism. For me there is always a delay of everything existing that prevents its presence from being absolutely or absolutely identical to itself, but it is still constitutive. This delay is given by the relational being of things. And this is impossible to be given without time and space. This is applicable to consciousness which in turn is referred to an outside that constitutes it. Therefore time and space are conditions of consciousness. Therefore, time is something real and existent. — JuanZu

What about saying time is a general concept? The video above says time is a 3 dimensional entity which is made up with subjective, objective and alternative time. That too, is saying nothing much more than time is a complex multi dimensional concept.

You won't see any of the objects or existence or entities called time, but time has multi layered conceptual structure which contains various aspects of the temporal events and traces from human experience in the real world.

All I am saying is that people falsely equate God, who is the creator of the creation from nothing, by uncaused cause. — MoK

I am not sure what "uncaused cause" means. Shouldn't you prove or demonstrate what uncaused cause means before progressing into the argument? I can understand "unknown cause", but "uncaused cause" sounds like a contradiction to me.

Hope to see you more often in the forum for discussions. Good luck & cheers.

I’ve recently discovered something in Nietzsche’s work that appears to ‘grow beyond’ the current thinking on the relation between affect (emotion, mood , feeling, becoming, value) and truth (perception , cognition, reason, identity, empiricism). — Joshs

C G Jung says Nietzsche's Zarathustra in TSZ was referring to Jesus in the bible in his 2 volume seminar transcripts of his study group talks.

Human minds? I would prefer 'the observer' or just 'mind'. To say 'human minds' is already in some basic way to objectify, to stand outside. — Wayfarer

But what other minds could know about time apart from human minds?

Have another look at this post from five days ago - notice that I start that post by saying the OP is 'mistaken'. What I mean is, It's not that time doesn't *exist*. It exists, but we're mistaken about the nature of time - that is what is at issue, and it's a deep issue. — Wayfarer

Yes, that was the point of the OP. I agree with your point here.

How Long Is One Day on Other Planets?
The Short Answer:
Planet

Day Length

Mercury 1,408 hours
Venus 5,832 hours
Earth 24 hours
Mars 25 hours
Jupiter 10 hours
Saturn 11 hours
Uranus 17 hours
Neptune 16 hours

- Info from NASA Science, Space Place

It's now eight days since the OP. Does time still not exist? — Banno

It just means the earth has rotated itself 8 times since the start of the OP. Now 9 times. Is there anything more to it? And of course, you counted it, and noticed it.

That's an interesting way of conceptualizing what Logic is. — Arcane Sandwich

Symbolic logic from the textbooks are the engines in the model cars for the model tracks.
In the real word, no one says P, P^Q, P->Q.

Applying logic to the real world for finding the objective truths in the world are the engines in the real cars for us getting A to B for commuting daily, carrying the loads, delivering the goods, and the real racing cars in the real racing tracks. :smile:

Here, I am trying to establish that the uncaused cause and God are different. — MoK

Metaphysical theories can be established only via the refutations and arguments against their critics, not by avoidance of the critics. Keep arguing rationally and logically until the sound conclusions are reached is the way of the establishment.

The moon is dusty and full of craters; that's what happens when you leave cheese out! — PoeticUniverse

"If the moon is made of cheese" is a nonsense premise, hence it was rejected outright with whatever follows from it. :)

I need to see an argument before I can tell you whether or not I think it follows. — Janus

It was a simple statement with no complexities in its point. But you pointed out something doesn't follow in the statement, which indicates you have an argument why it doesn't follow. You couldn't have said it doesn't follow without your argument why it doesn't follow. :)

Wow, many posts on this topic. Will get back to the points in due course when time permits here. Time exists for sure, but in the form of general concept from the probable assumption, which could be refuted.

Meanwhile here is an interesting video about time for quick reference from a psychologist and brain scientist, Jonathan Schooler Ph.D.

Further, we commonly claim to experience it, but in no way do we sense it. The reality of time remains a deep mystery. — Metaphysician Undercover

It looks like time is a concept to me. It is like a general concept "human". We say "human" often in the arguments and daily conversations. But actually when you try find out who human is, there is no one called human in the world.

There are Johns, Marys, Janes, Peters, and Pauls, and a Metaphysician Undercover who also has his own real name. But there is no one called human. But all of the folks living in the world are humans. Isn't it the case with time?

There are intervals, durations, instances, moments, pasts, presents, futures, years, months, days, and seconds and light years ...etc. But there is no time in reality. And yet all those concepts are the subconcepts of time.

As I said, you are not interested in discussing the OP. That is all right to me. — MoK

I never said that. As you confirmed you said it, and it sounds too hasty judgements based on your feelings, beliefs, opinions and interests again. :roll: :smile:

to discuss that the idea of uncaused cause and God are not one, — MoK

The idea of uncaused cause? Isn't it a contradiction? It sounds like timeless time or unmoved movement.

Philosophy is to point out contradictions and clarify them whether they are acceptable for the arguments and contexts. You seem to be happy to accept the contradictions disguised as significant contribution (whatever that means) without philosophical clarification. :wink:

However, it's very interesting to note that we study the flow of time from its effects, and we do not directly experience the flow of time through sense observation. We infer logically, that the flow of time is real and independent, from the evidence of sense observation. We see evidence that things were changing prior to our presence. — Metaphysician Undercover

I am not sure if time flows is logically correct way of saying it. Because if something flows, then it must be stoppable, and it must be visible or detectable directly. Time doesn't have the qualities which flowing normally gives. All there are in time are intervals, durations, instances, moments, years, months, hours and seconds. Hence could time be just a general concept calling all these temporal elements?

We know that time 'flows' absent of human awareness, because we see evidence of it. We see evidence that things were changing (therefore time was flowing) before we were here, and this allows us to extrapolate, and talk about the flow of time, without the human mind being there, at that time, to perceive the resulting changes. — Metaphysician Undercover

But seeing things were changing is not time itself, is it? You are just seeing changes of things. Where is time, if you didn't measure the duration or intervals of time taken for the changes?

That's what I mean. — Wayfarer

There will be changes, motions and movements for sure as always have been since the beginning of the universe with the weather, nights, mornings and days, explosions and comets flying. But time? It needs human mind to exist. Are we being extreme idealists here?

I am just a learner of Logic. I believe that Logic is very important subject in philosophy, although some argue logic is not philosophy. Logic is the engine of all philosophical arguments.