I wrote the below on my phone (in my notes) I think it’s one of my only philosophical writings in it which I was musing some time back…just thought I’d share and get more perspectives here. I did this because member 180proof shared a quote by Ludwig Wittgenstein echoing a similar outlook in another thread.


Here’s the start of my writing:

Does the future exist?

The present exists this is undeniable. The past whether that existed is open to doubt.

The future does not exist but is simply the eternal present which we cannot escape from.

So then time is the comparison of linear events from the non-linear present.

A future event which has not occurred but which can occur then exists as a possibility of the current eternal present.

If all that can be experienced is the present, for the past and future cannot, then the future can be said to exist in the same way as the past.

Think of this. 5 seconds ago the previous paragraph was written in the present which is now the past and this paragraph was written in the future.

So then what is going on with past and future but a differential present.

So then imagine looking at a square board with 3 marbles equidistant locations in any arrangement. Label each, past present future.

It becomes an example of how these three events can be viewed simultaneously (given that the board allows vision to perceive them as such by having the right scale, otherwise perception of the 3 occurs linearly as per the movement of attention and vision)

Then the whole can be seen indistinguishably and non-linearly.

Then as these 3 marbles each represent time then linearity ceases to be in terms of past present future.

What can be seen is the separation of the 3 marbles through space (or distance). This is undeniable otherwise there would only be one marble which could be perceived if the space or distance could not.

Further, allow this marble to move in the square in circular or any random motion.

Is the motion happening in time or space? Have yourself a camera to snap this motion in say regular intervals. You will see different arrangements. With circular motion it repeats so that those intervals would have the same picture at some point. The same for random motion two or more snaps can be said to be identical given enough time such that within this finite square board.

In either scenario if the snap of the arrangement was not given a time stamp then temporal linearity cannot be determined to distinguish which snap was grabbed first or second to an observer.

However imagine the output of such snaps gets deposited say via a medium such as a printout. This printout is on a wall which can be seen all at once. With each snap against a wall in a4 paper almost.

These frames then when viewed cannot give away time from any reference point if all states of it are captured simultaneously (or of sufficient speed to elude vision).

Thus all states of motion exist simultaneously.

The marble moving as it does within the square board in circular motion gives the illusion or appearance of a circle.

The illusion disappears upon seeing the marble move in a circular motion via a snapshot which gives away the location at any given space within the circle but not time as explained above.

The other thing that cannot be determined here is the direction of motion I.e. clockwise or anti-clockwise. All we can see is the circle and via snapshots, location.

Consider then as you read this. Are you in the present or the past ? You can’t be in the past as that’s gone. And you certainly can’t be in the future either as that’s not happened yet. And it will never happen.

Therefore you’re in the present. Always.

The future never happens and the past is always gone.

Conceptually the future is the past and the past is always the future. It was wasn’t it.

If the past and future are so interchangeable in this way then they are relations of present thought. And if the future does not exist then neither does the past.

Yet all this writing has a beginning. Where is that then ? was it in the present? Yes it was.

Was it in the past ? Yes it was.

Was it in the future? It always was. And also it was not.

The future was and the past is, was and will be. Not just linguistically.

When the future arrives we call it the past. We can’t call it the present for only the present can preserve its place.

If you say this is the future. Now! You’re describing the present.

If you say in 2 seconds we will be in the future. That statement is true. However the current future becomes the present. We cannot say this is the future as we are describing the present.

Yet. The future does occur but it only occurs in the present.

So what are we referring to when we say the future or future event. Is it not simply the unactualised present?

Does the future arrive at all. Is it better to refer to it as future present but not present future ?

Our words here simply bewitch us.

Think this in your head as you read this. In 2 seconds I will be in the future. In 2 seconds you are actually in the present.

Ok fine in 2 seconds you will experience the future. What have you experienced? The present still. An actual present that lasted two seconds.

Fine.

The future is 2 seconds from now. This is very close to the truth. If not the TRUTH!

Yet all we did was make a statement. Statements can be true or false. And the one above is undeniably so.

The question then remains. Does the future exist.

The answer is yes and no. Conceptually it cannot be experienced. EVER! We can however PROVE that though it cannot conceptually be experienced it does exist.

In fact two seconds from now it will exist. But only as the present. Not as the future.

If the present then always exists then it is simultaneously the future but also the past.

This is inescapable. And I can only confer that it has always existed, infinitely up to this point. And this point and this point.

What then happens when I fall asleep or die. Does the present stop? Inextricably it is linked with awareness. Remove awareness and the past, present goes.

Yet, I am unbothered. As I’m not aware that I’m not aware. Nor am i aware that I am not aware but only after the fact.


So where do we go when we go to sleep?

Good question

We wake up in the morning time has certainly passed though we weren’t aware of it but only after the fact when we see the sunrise and daylight. The assumption is that time of course did pass the earth revolved in such a way that it is now facing the sun at such an angle that it’s now daylight not night when we went to sleep and gave up our awareness.

This is deduction and a reliable that tells us time passed.

Death then, where awareness post the fact does not occur means what exactly. The inability to perceive the present. The inability to perceive anything at all. Eternally.

(We are then blips of awareness in eternity or … if we want to be correct we are eternity in blips of awareness)

….

So we came from the past allegedly, developed the ability to perceive the present during our short life and lost it in the future. This very same ability.

So it’s like birth akin to waking up and death to sleep.

Gone, no more of this thought of this ever present thought.

So then where does the present go when we are gone? Does it go with us ?

Not really. As the future does not really occur in the present and is only a concept we rarely die or sleep for that matter.

Yet post fact we do when we wake up we know we slept and that time passed.

But did it really or did the hands of the clock just move and the planet revolve round the sun?

We know it did and this can be confirmed if we’re still alive. At least deductively.

If we are unable to confirm it then when we die we’re just stuck in the present but don’t know it. Till someone says hey buddy you’re dead. To which you reply no I ain’t though I really can’t remember the past. Who am I ? What am I ? Did I live a good life?

That doesn’t really matter right now let me show you something really cool…

If I stop thinking how will I know?

Or how can I be aware that I’m not aware. I can’t when I’m not.

Then who is aware ? You ? Me? In fact what is it that is aware ?

——-

I ramble on a bit more after that but I’ve decided to leave it out for now.