Go to first unread
Back
to top
Does time exist?
Watch
Announcements
Is time, in your opinion real or simply a social construct to make our lives simpler?
0
reply
Report
#2
I think times real because it’s controlled by the sun (days), moon (months) and seasons (years)
Last edited by heldbygrace; 1 month ago
0
reply
Report
#3
social constructs are technically real. currency is technically worthless but by deciding that it has worth we give it worth. Time is technically fake, but by deciding that it matters, we make it real. If we all collectively decided that we didn't like time for some reason it would stop being real. (Aging and movement and things that change would keep existing, but linear time would stop existing)
1
reply
(Original post by 64Lightbulbs)
social constructs are technically real. currency is technically worthless but by deciding that it has worth we give it worth. Time is technically fake, but by deciding that it matters, we make it real. If we all collectively decided that we didn't like time for some reason it would stop being real. (Aging and movement and things that change would keep existing, but linear time would stop existing)
social constructs are technically real. currency is technically worthless but by deciding that it has worth we give it worth. Time is technically fake, but by deciding that it matters, we make it real. If we all collectively decided that we didn't like time for some reason it would stop being real. (Aging and movement and things that change would keep existing, but linear time would stop existing)
1
reply
Report
#5
(Original post by kikib02)
time is linear. society makes it circular when it's not.
time is linear. society makes it circular when it's not.
Spoiler:
Show
i swear if that's not a joke about clocks, i'll lose my ****. I am genuinely not sure if you're trying to make a joke or make a point.
0
reply
Report
#6
In a basic sense time probably exists (subject to Cartesian doubt - it's possible all that exists is the present moment). Events can apparently be separated not just by distance but also by time. For example, a clock can beep once, then beep again, and these two beeps are separated by a thing that we call time. But it's important to point out that our experience of the separation is a subjective one - the true nature of the separation might not be observable to us.
The common-sense view of time - that it proceeds linearly from the past into the future - isn't really backed by anything except subjective experience. We can't say that time has a direction (that it goes "forwards") or that the future really hasn't happened yet, and so on. In physics there's also no concept of "now", and we can't say things like "X happened at the same time as Y".
Given that our subjective experience of time is a product of evolution and social conditioning, we have no particular reason to trust it beyond what we can prove scientifically.
The common-sense view of time - that it proceeds linearly from the past into the future - isn't really backed by anything except subjective experience. We can't say that time has a direction (that it goes "forwards") or that the future really hasn't happened yet, and so on. In physics there's also no concept of "now", and we can't say things like "X happened at the same time as Y".
Given that our subjective experience of time is a product of evolution and social conditioning, we have no particular reason to trust it beyond what we can prove scientifically.
1
reply
(Original post by 64Lightbulbs)
Spoiler:
Show
i swear if that's not a joke about clocks, i'll lose my ****. I am genuinely not sure if you're trying to make a joke or make a point.
0
reply
(Original post by miser)
In a basic sense time probably exists (subject to Cartesian doubt - it's possible all that exists is the present moment). Events can apparently be separated not just by distance but also by time. For example, a clock can beep once, then beep again, and these two beeps are separated by a thing that we call time. But it's important to point out that our experience of the separation is a subjective one - the true nature of the separation might not be observable to us.
The common-sense view of time - that it proceeds linearly from the past into the future - isn't really backed by anything except subjective experience. We can't say that time has a direction (that it goes "forwards") or that the future really hasn't happened yet, and so on. In physics there's also no concept of "now", and we can't say things like "X happened at the same time as Y".
Given that our subjective experience of time is a product of evolution and social conditioning, we have no particular reason to trust it beyond what we can prove scientifically.
In a basic sense time probably exists (subject to Cartesian doubt - it's possible all that exists is the present moment). Events can apparently be separated not just by distance but also by time. For example, a clock can beep once, then beep again, and these two beeps are separated by a thing that we call time. But it's important to point out that our experience of the separation is a subjective one - the true nature of the separation might not be observable to us.
The common-sense view of time - that it proceeds linearly from the past into the future - isn't really backed by anything except subjective experience. We can't say that time has a direction (that it goes "forwards") or that the future really hasn't happened yet, and so on. In physics there's also no concept of "now", and we can't say things like "X happened at the same time as Y".
Given that our subjective experience of time is a product of evolution and social conditioning, we have no particular reason to trust it beyond what we can prove scientifically.
I suppose it's a question of does time (in terms of evolution/time passing days/months/years) is real but the NAMES and physical things we associate with time e.g. clocks/timers aren't.
0
reply
Report
#9
(Original post by miser)
and we can't say things like "X happened at the same time as Y".
and we can't say things like "X happened at the same time as Y".
Surely time is just a record of motion, but it gets puzzling when you read about relativity and Einstein calculating that the flow of time changes when in motion relative to another frame of reference. Clearly things are a bit more complicated than normal human experience tells us.
0
reply
Report
#10
(Original post by kikib02)
Is time, in your opinion real or simply a social construct to make our lives simpler?
Is time, in your opinion real or simply a social construct to make our lives simpler?
1
reply
Report
#11
(Original post by MiriamL)
I think times real because it’s controlled by the sun (days), moon (months) and seasons (years)
I think times real because it’s controlled by the sun (days), moon (months) and seasons (years)
BTW, it is the earth that determines a day, not the sun.
Seasons are dependent on geographical location. Some places don't have seasons.
3
reply
Report
#12
(Original post by QE2)
Time is just a term used to describe an idea. It isn't something that exists independently of our ability to imagine it.
Time is just a term used to describe an idea. It isn't something that exists independently of our ability to imagine it.
0
reply
Report
#13
(Original post by Fullofsurprises)
Surely a lot of things are like that in the universe, yet they do manifestly exist independently of us. Gravity is something we conceive of (presumably it operates at higher levels of reality we can't easily grasp, as curves in spacetime, at least according to relativity) yet it also exists, as shown by the gravity wave experiments. We conceive of awareness and there isn't proof, yet it appears to be a real thing.
Surely a lot of things are like that in the universe, yet they do manifestly exist independently of us. Gravity is something we conceive of (presumably it operates at higher levels of reality we can't easily grasp, as curves in spacetime, at least according to relativity) yet it also exists, as shown by the gravity wave experiments. We conceive of awareness and there isn't proof, yet it appears to be a real thing.
0
reply
(Original post by QE2)
If there were no humans to perceive these concepts, would they have any meaning?
BTW, it is the earth that determines a day, not the sun.
Seasons are dependent on geographical location. Some places don't have seasons.
If there were no humans to perceive these concepts, would they have any meaning?
BTW, it is the earth that determines a day, not the sun.
Seasons are dependent on geographical location. Some places don't have seasons.
0
reply
Report
#16
(Original post by QE2)
Gravity is a term used to describe an observable effect. Not sure that "time" is quite the same.
Gravity is a term used to describe an observable effect. Not sure that "time" is quite the same.
0
reply
Report
#17
(Original post by kikib02)
it was not a joke about clocks. I'm saying that society made time circular (which is reflected in things like clocks). The government know what they're doing. If you live your life like time is linear (because it is) you will have a much happier. e.g. instead of saying "oh I'll just wait until NEXT year/NEXT week/NEXT month when i get paid" it's depressing because thats making it seem as if time is a cycle when it's not. Just go do it now because there'll never be a right time
it was not a joke about clocks. I'm saying that society made time circular (which is reflected in things like clocks). The government know what they're doing. If you live your life like time is linear (because it is) you will have a much happier. e.g. instead of saying "oh I'll just wait until NEXT year/NEXT week/NEXT month when i get paid" it's depressing because thats making it seem as if time is a cycle when it's not. Just go do it now because there'll never be a right time
0
reply
Report
#18
The arguments about observability have a lot of hidden assumptions. We might think our external reality is very concrete but actually it is very malleable and fragile. Wrt time - though there seems to be an underlying "objective measure" of time, our perception of time is extremely variable. (independent of relativity/time dilation wackiness) An hour one day might feel twice as long as an hour on another, to state the obvious.
The only "proof" we have to ourselves that our perception of so-called external reality is "accurate" is that we (believe we) encounter other beings that resemble us and say they say/feel comparable things to ourselves.
It's an unpassable hurdle and really needs to be taken as an axiom. For the sake of one's sanity you kind of just have to assume things are real, trust these objective measures rather than our subjective ones, and you are not alone here.
The only "proof" we have to ourselves that our perception of so-called external reality is "accurate" is that we (believe we) encounter other beings that resemble us and say they say/feel comparable things to ourselves.
It's an unpassable hurdle and really needs to be taken as an axiom. For the sake of one's sanity you kind of just have to assume things are real, trust these objective measures rather than our subjective ones, and you are not alone here.
Last edited by _gcx; 1 month ago
0
reply
(Original post by 64Lightbulbs)
that ain't the government hun, that's just capitalism.
that ain't the government hun, that's just capitalism.
right wingers arguing with me
1
reply
Report
#20
(Original post by 64Lightbulbs)
that ain't the government hun, that's just capitalism.
that ain't the government hun, that's just capitalism.
0
reply
X
Quick Reply
