Step 1: Epistemology
Step 2: Logic
Step 3: Metaphysics
Step 4: Aesthetics.
Step 5: Ethics.

And finally, anyone who thinks men can enslave women should start this enslavement from their own mothers. I think the vast majority of men don't have any intension or desire of enslaving their own mothers, if they are alive. — ssu

Nobody wants to enslave their own mothers (I guess sisters neither) but those mothers are already "enslaved" by their husbands, thus, the fathers of these men. So this is the main paradox of the issue which creates a vicious circle: husband enslaves their wife and have a boy. This boy would never want to enslave their mother but he will end up marrying with a woman who would want to enslave and so on...

Btw here it is Mother's Day, so greetings to all mothers! — ssu

Greetings to your mummy! Here the Mother's day is on the first Sunday of may.

A has to be false. — Hillary

Well I still don’t understand it

:up:

This begins to sound like the Liar paradox, where, if a sentence is true, it's false, and, if it is false, it's true
A very similar paradox, allowed by the possibility of the same kind of temporal loop, can become a reductio ad absurdum for time travel

Ah, paintings, or art about time? — Hillary

Both.

it is hard to bring a lovely conclusion out of this. — ithinkthereforeidontgiveaf

It is hard because we live separately and it will be so because it looks like we are different just for nature facts

No, I mean the opposite. I say that time could be a good motivation to create art. I am not referring about Ancient Greeks but all the ages. For example: a painting about an autumn afternoon because it makes you feel nostalgic

What do you exactly mean? — ithinkthereforeidontgiveaf

I mean, politician’s speeches tend to be vacuous. We all know that they use some words just to gain some votes but we do not really know if they really believe on it. They are just words. It could have some impact among the voters but if they do not reach the main goals, the citizens would not longer believe on their principles.
So, in this vicious context, someone would ask: What does feminism stands for? How worthy is it?

[Just to clarify what I said previously]

When I typed: we walk through time, I guess it sounded pretty poetic. As Virgil stated: tempus fugit. What I wanted to share is that time is very important, or at least influential, to humans when they do so artistic works. Since a paint to write a poem

Is the most coherent conclusion that we have to just "Live at war" indefinitely? — ithinkthereforeidontgiveaf

I think not but, at the same time, men and women tend to be pretty separated from each other. We are clearly different. This is not necessarily to makes us be on war all the time. I just want to say that we are more different that we even used to.
Another problem: politicians use this complot to reach votes. Ergo, it is a topic that in the future would lose some credibility among the society

His argument cogito ergo sum was just that in his French eyes. — Agent Smith

:lol: :death:

A hasta be false. — Agent Smith

What!?



So (if I understand it well) you want to make a new project of applying cogito ergo sum in a new scenario: the objects themselves which can hold some truths

Yes, I understand your argument and it is very well defended. I guess procreation could be the main fact of why women tend to be protected along the history

Evolution itself is not intelligent — ithinkthereforeidontgiveaf

Do you really think so? Evolution could be very intelligent itself. This is why (with along all circumstances) the humankind has survived against all chaotic circumstances.

We can explain it in different manners. But time has an impact on us. Wether we are the ones who walk through it or it is the time which does so.
It is not the same when you are only 5 years old, or 25 or 65...
Time makes an impact in our life

What has happened has happened. What has not happened, has not happened. There is no reversing it or going back.

Exactly :100: :up:



You are right :up: I guess we should see time as pure forwarded pathway to walk through. Past is just some experiences we have lived and learned about

To be honest with you... I wish one day I end up dying as Mishima (三島 由紀夫). His death and suicide was perfect and aesthetic. I don't know how to express myself but I have the same thought and feeling like him

Me

Agreed. I wish I can reach your intelligence

The American calling Japan a dictatorship :rofl:
YOUR COUNTRY IS THE ONLY ONE IN THE HISTORY WHICH USED NUKE WEAPONS
so do not speak about others states...

Smh... You will never understand me...

Danger Danger! Who will then decide who has the right to speak? — universeness

The mods of this forum, supposedly...

You do not know about nothing but you have the right to speak whatsoever topic. I hate democracy

laws of nature

How do you define laws of nature according to your personal beliefs ?

We can't afford to make the same mistake again and again, but it looks like that's exactly what we're really good at. — Agent Smith

Exactly, it looks like we do not know how to learn of bad experiences.

George W. Bush — Agent Smith

We should not expect nothing from a politician :down:

Data can be stored in both our knowledge and primarily emotions. For example: Imagine you get burned by touching a hot pot. After suffering the wound of burning yourself, you create a special data of not doing again.
This can be related to the basic principles of empiricism

Data reside in computers. Not in your brain. Your knowledge is a simulation of the world.

Sorry, I am disagree. Data is clearly in our brains too. It is an important fact that help us to face the life according to our experience

It is the concept of time and its paradoxes which I am most interested on metaphysics. I enjoy reading all your opinions and theories related to this topic. One of the phrases that makes me thinking about the "violation" of Ockham's razor:
Every instance of time travel generating an infinite number of alternative universes might be thought to violate Ockham's Razor, especially since the idea that an alternative universe could be generated in the first place has disturbing consequences for the metaphysics of identity.

Interesting, doesn't it?

Where does this go wrong? — Hillary

I think it doesn't goes wrong. It is just another example of time paradox. You used an interesting one according to Pascal triangle and I liked it. But my guess is that we end up in the same place: time doesn't exist "outside" our existence. It is an empirical term. We cannot put different concepts of time (present, future, past, conditions, etc...) because they are all dependent on us.

"I know that I know nothing"

- Socrates

:death: :flower:

Perhaps we can jump and not "travel" — Agent Smith

Interesting view. But if we "jump" through the time, what would happen? Do you think we would observe a metaphysical change in our world or just a loop of ourselves jumping infinite times?

Harakiri/Seppuku (Samurai code) — Agent Smith

While Harakari/Seppuku tend to be poetic and aesthetic. I see "memetic suicide" as unreasonable without any context, like it seems to appear when we are debating and suddenly we accidentally commit a self-refutation

idea of a "viewing" rather than "traveling" to the past, particularly as imagined by Arthur C. Clarke in this co-authored novel ... — 180 Proof

Thanks for sharing it. Another interesting perspective indeed. As I see, time has always been an important topic to both philosophers and scientists to discuss about.
We can see and debate a lot of views over the same topic!

Another really good book, dealing with paradoxes piled on paradoxes, is "One Day All This Will Be Yours" by Adrian Tchaikovsky. I also find this one very convincing in describing just how far time-travel paradoxes could go. — T Clark

Thanks for the book recommendation! :up:

The existence of time travel is not a metaphysical question, it's a question of fact, no matter what "disturbing consequences" it may or may not have. — T Clark

My guess is that when the article refers to “consequences” is related to multiuniversal scenarios. Because if it could be possible to manipulate how time “works”, then, it would be possible to manipulate our universe too. This would create different worlds with different (or similar…) T Clarks and Javis… well this is just my guess trying to see it as metaphysical but it is true that the opinion of Kant is more rigid:[Time] does not exist independently among things in themselves.

It would be still a paradox because according to Einstein there is not present neither future. Time is just relative or cyclical

I guess it was compared to day/night rhythm for practical reasons. They did most of the actions during morning and afternoon, then they working day ended up at night. For Ancient Egypt it was so important the role of the Sun to all the characteristics. They even blessed it as a God.
[...] the birth of the sun god Rê, , which is going to be a New Year event.

Isn't a clock moving? Isn't a pendulum going to and fro periodically? Can't you move the pendulum? Doesn't the pendulum have double motion even?

These objects which "represent" time are related to the move of sun, not to the motion of time. This is why the first clock ever created was in Ancient Egypt and this specific clock was connected to the variation from the sunlight
The "heliacal rising" of Sirius means the morning (and the Egyptian day began at dawn) on which the star Sirius can first be seen in the eastern sky right before sunrise. This was to the Egyptians the astronomical beginning of the year, though the actual heliacal rising moved through the Egyptian calendar, since the Egyptian calendar year was 365 days long with no leap day.

Well, not me. I don't know that time is unidirectional. That is, I don't know that time is moving in one direction.

:up: :100:

Sometimes linguistic philosophers or people in linguistics like the idea that languages where verbs have no temporal inflection are used by people who have no awareness of time.
[...] Greek philosophers themselves did not notice the aspect system in their own language but began the tradition of thinking exclusively in terms of past, present, and future. Yet in the subjunctive and imperative moods, Greek verbs are only inflected for aspect. Thus, Aristotle's analysis of "future contingency" in On Interpretation would have been stronger and made better sense as "imperfect contingency."
If you are interested, I recommend you this essay: Past, Present, and Future, A Philosophical Essay.

Thanks for sharing it. I will give it look later on whenever I would finish my study tasks!

Good answer :100:

I gave it a try in a humanistic point of view because the OP (I suppose :lol: ) is referring to soul, personality, realism, etc… and all of these topics are already debated by empiricists and rationalists.
But I want to aggregate a brief to your example because I really enjoyed it when I have read it.
“Landlord” and “occupant” are terms that are already defined by a law (unless you are from an Anglo-Saxon law country) so the parts shall not have doubts in the agreement. This is called in my country as arrendamiento. The landlord has the right of being paid every first week of each month and the occupant has to pay him. If he doesn’t do so, the landlord has the will of kick him out of the land/flat through a trial process.
What I wanted to share here is that sometimes is necessary to be specific in terms of “who we are or who are they”. If there is a doubt do not worry we shall go to a civil court :lol:

You maybe good, but you think you're bad — Agent Smith

Taoism, puts a great deal of emphasis on this (lateral) inversion: People who behave humbly are actually arrogant and vice versa; fools are sages and sages are fools; so on and so forth! — Agent Smith

I think I am making good arguments in this forum… but who knows what is the thought of the other members about me and my reflection in this site?
This thread is interesting and I am deeply saddened that I am tend to be pretty pessimistic in this issue.
I personally think that most of the people need subterfuges or imagination because they do not like reality or as you have said: Self-reflection.
In Buddhism, without a substantial self, the self is a collection of things, the "aggregates" (skandhas,): 1) the body, or "form," 2) feelings, 3) ideas, 4) impressions, & 5) momentary consciousness.

Form is Emptiness, Emptiness is Form.
-The Heart Sutra