Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
09-06-2002, 08:09 AM | #21 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,047
|
From "Contingency, causality, and the Big Bang" thread (philosophy section)
------T.V.------- "Well, something analagous to time would seem to be required for causality." ----------------- Oh dear... All of a sudden it's starting to dawn why I'm having such a hard time discussing the concept of time. Other's on that thread didn't seem to have trouble with comprehending that time is not a thing, but how we measure the amount of change. ---T.V.---- "...in the absence of any evidence for a "meta-time" or a "meta-universe"..." ----------- Absence of evidence for something 'metaphysical'? Oh dear... [ September 06, 2002: Message edited by: Infinity Lover ]</p> |
09-09-2002, 04:03 PM | #22 | ||||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 5,658
|
Infinity Lover:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
[ September 09, 2002: Message edited by: tronvillain ]</p> |
||||
09-09-2002, 04:30 PM | #23 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 2,832
|
I_L, the website you PM’d me didn’t work.
Maybe a third party reference can explain what you’re trying to get at. Some of your material appears to be shared by rejectors of the Big Bang Theory. |
09-10-2002, 11:20 AM | #24 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: sugar factory
Posts: 873
|
On the subject of temporal dimensions, infinity, I think that Tronvillain has asked you to make a model of reality. That is to say that it is possible you are confusing empirical data, impressions on the senses with apriori knowledge, such as time, which has no grounds in empiricism. Time allows us to 'make sense' of reality by way of our judgement.
There again, If I have underestimated you, perhaps it is we that are making apriori judgements and that your apriori model of reality does not need a time dimension in order for us to describe reality, independent of whether any of this hypothetical scenario is verifiable. do we have to follow the 'great' philosophers and are they that 'great' Tonight, TronVillain is Emmanuel Kant- come on down! de da da da, da dada da, da dada da, da dada da. Ignoring all such assumptions I can imagine 'reality' without any dimension made-up through imagination, which ultimately means that I am not subject to time in a hypothetical sense. If anyone -infinity or tronvillain- can offer me some material making head or tail of any of what has just been written, feel free. rules, shmools! pah! |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|