Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Charles Cosimano on July 3, 2009 at 6:18pm

Does this mean I'll stop getting old?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Richard Silliker on October 21, 2009 at 9:04pm

Define old?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Daniel W. Newell on July 8, 2009 at 5:41am

Very well done-

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mikhayl Von Riebon on October 20, 2009 at 2:00am

He seems to only describe half the problem. if there is no awareness of time, then there is no awareness of change and thus no awareness of space or division for that matter. (infact awareness of anything seems to be somewhat integral altogether) so why Barbour claims that there are 'separate' platonia or 'instances' is beyond me. this separation seems to require another explanation. really this seems to just be a rekindling of leibniz' Monad. i would also question whether or not these really are view shared by nagarjuna. from what i recall nagarjuna attempted to make no propositions at all, and that was the basis for his arguments against those that had.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Richard Silliker on October 21, 2009 at 8:44pm

I watched the video twice so that I could get a better "feel" for the subject. He is right about time it is indeed a concept. Though I am uncertain to his definition of motion, motion certainly exists. Motion is context. We, humans and other rational paradigms, lack the capacity to sense movement. It is the change of context that we "see" and it is the binding of sensory flow that allows for abstraction. All experience is polymorphic, however our inability to "see" both change in context (motion) and bind the flow (movement) of information concurrently into an abstraction leads us to believe that experience is linear. We miss things because "we sacrifice the whole truth of any given experience for the value to which we are constrained". Countless others possibilities do exist it just that they are inexpressed. Inexpression is defined as those attributes of points that lie undisclosed within a given density As to snap shots of "now" having "structure", how about using "context" instead. The "now" is the event horizon.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mikhayl Von Riebon on October 29, 2009 at 1:04am

"Motion is context. We, humans and other rational paradigms,lack the capacity to sense movement. It is the change of context that we "see" and it is the binding of sensory flow that allows for abstraction." - in relation to this, i probably dont understand enough of what you mean.

however i would ask exactly how is 'movement' and 'a change of context' different? if we can't perceive the former then it is just a concept like 'time'. are you implying that there is some 'movement' outside of perception? id be delighted if you could perhaps go into more detail.

• ▶ Reply