Waffle.

For remote tribes they do not have a concept of time (well not like us). We have learnt, been nurtured to, segment time and parcel up our day into neat little measured packages. This is not really the same as our subjective experience of time though yet we have been conditioned to view our measurement of time as the origin of our subjective experiences … where in fact if is the other way around.

Given that we have advanced our civilisation due to segmenting time and measuring it it is clear there is a benefit to stretching our temporal appreciation.

[reply Time is indispensable for civilization.

transcendental ideas.

If anyone wants to better understand this post, read my post in metaphysics and epistemology on the origin of the universe.

In philosophical discussions definitions are useful, so what is time? — val p miranda

Time is a psychological product such as feelings, awareness or perception. It doesn't exist out in the world.

Measurements of time result in a number, so in this sense time is mathematical. — val p miranda

Measurement of time is a measurement, but not time itself. Mathematic is a mapping tool for time.

That’s certainly an improvement over metaphysical idea.

Space meets the Kantian requirements as a transcendental because it is absolute, necessary and universal. — val p miranda

Ok, so we have...space meets the Kantian requirement of a transcendental idea, because space is absolute, necessary and universal?

“....If (something) carries with it strict and absolute universality and necessity, that is, admits of no possible exception, it is not derived from experience, but is valid absolutely à priori....”

This shows that space is a valid something purely a priori, which is admitted already, but does not show space is a transcendental idea.

First you deny that time exists in reality because it is not material:

Since time is not material, it does not exist in reality ... — val p miranda

but then in the case of space you say:

it is just an immaterial existent — val p miranda

In that case either materiality is not a requirement for existence or if it is then space does not exist in reality.

Materiality is not a requirement for immaterial space; materiality requires space

Perhaps.

Maybe not. Kant thought that space was a product of the mind--had no existence without mentality. Call the idea of space what is correct. The trouble with Berkely and Kant is that they wanted to eliminate space to get rid of materialism to save religion. Space has been a problem for Berkeley, Kant, Leibnitz, Newton, Mach and Einstein. They all got it wrong, but Newton was closest to being correct. Immaterial space is a perfect solution for existence. My post on origin of the universe explains why I think space is immaterial.

This is what you said:

Since time is not material, it does not exist in reality — val p miranda

and

it [space] is just an immaterial existent — val p miranda

Do you even understand what you wrote?

If X does not exist because it is not material then if Y is not material then Y does not exist.
If X = time and Y = space then
If time does not exist because it is not material then if space is not material then space does not exist.

As the Mad Hatter told Alice:

Either say what you mean or mean what you say.

Time, however, is a concept and it can be defined as what clocks measure, but time is not limited to this definition. — val p miranda

As a concept, time is the measurement of motion. — val p miranda

See the difference between these two concepts of "time" val? The one says that time is what is measured. The other says that time is a measurement. Clearly these are not the same concept. The clock measures something, time in sense 1. And, we also produce a measurement, time in sense 2. It is impossible that the thing measured, and the measurement itself, are one and the same thing. Therefore we have two principal senses of "time".

My post on origin of the universe explains why I think space is immaterial. — val p miranda

I think space is immaterial and I don’t give a damn for the origin of the universe.

Carry on.

Time, however, is a concept and it can be defined as what clocks measure, but time is not limited to this definition. — val p miranda

As a concept, time is the measurement of motion. — val p miranda

See the difference between these two concepts of "time" val? — Metaphysician Undercover

In math, time = t. So simple.

The trouble with Berkely and Kant is that they wanted to eliminate space to get rid of materialism to save religion. — val p miranda

Nonsense.

I am starting to agree. I thought he was talking about our experience of time not some garbled rubbish that is neither physics nor philosophy.

yes. Dreadful nonsense.

No space is an exception; it is, in my view, the only immaterial existent.

No, space exists in reality. In my view, it is the only real immateria existent.

space is both philosophy and science.

Well, I thought my "origin" post would be interesting to persons who were interested in a non-religious origin of the universe.

I think space is both an empirical concept and a non-empirical concept. Not all concepts are real but I think immaterial space created the universe---a wild and bizarre opinion, perhaps.

Aren't waffles for breakfast?--no, pancakes.

Time

1. There was a flower, now in its place a fruit, then the fruit ripens (it can be eaten). There's progression of states (the plant hasn't moved) i.e. it's not a space thing; we need another dimension, let's call it time.

2. A and B both went from their settlement to the neighboring village. A got there before B; an order (1^st & 2^nd) but they both travelled the same distance; the sequence must be in a nonspatial dimension, time

time is a concept (opinion) that has no reality existence. Space is a concept (opinion) that has reality existence as an immaterial existent. If I muddled that I want to apologize to the readers.

Space is a concept (opinion) that has reality existence as an immaterial existent. — val p miranda

It seems like you are just playing with words. Suppose your idea is accepted. What difference does it make besides a brief discussion in a faculty lounge? Is it really worth the effort?

Good point, but this is not the post I favor. My post on Metaphysics and Epistemology on the origin of universe shows how the universe began.

Yes

Space is the place. It is simple. The existence of space makes everything possible and it is the place.