Jump to content

geordief

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    1949
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

geordief last won the day on August 31 2018

geordief had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

105 Excellent

1 Follower

About geordief

  • Rank
    Primate

Recent Profile Visitors

11295 profile views
  1. My "point " in the OP was actually couched as a question. Thank you for your answer. It was not trivially obvious to me -which is why I asked. I am glad to have received some corroboration for the inclination of my thought even if I may have come across as the dullard I am (not sure if that was your subtext or whether I should just put on the cap that fits) btw on reflection ,perhaps there are quite likely those who would disagree with us both and attribute absolute subjective values to phenomena. As I have little philosophical education ,that is a bit of a guess,.
  2. My idea is that our idea of "subjective" time is founded in objective time, That our idea of time is occasioned by the mechanical (or physical) workings of the body and brain. hold on still typing (sometimes the post goes through when you press the return key before you are finished the post...) I don't see a disconnect between the "time is what clocks measure" definition and my hypothetical description "subjective time is what the body measures" The two are linked so far as I can see,
  3. Don't understand your post ,but I can live with that.
  4. No ,subjectively time would be unchanged ;one would be looking at a recording of a series of events in their own "frame of reference" . If the viewer of the movie looked at his fellow viewers (or any ongoing events in his or her surroundings) he would notice they were also going on at "one second per second". If he reset his attention to the movie he would again be looking at a series of events transpiring at "one second per second". There is no need to compare the slow motion movie to the events it recorded initially (I was not doing that ,anyway. It is not what I was getting at)
  5. Suppose we make a slow motion video recording of a series of events and play them back,... We will see a representation of those events (faithful in its own "frame of reference") Now suppose some of those data points are lost through the inevitable march of time where everything changes in due course. Now ,if we replay the movie it will appear to be sped up. Is this analogous to the way you say "only a moment has passed"? In your example ,might it be that the "data points" are simply missing and that ,if we were aware (as perhaps part of our body/mind is) of the ongoing sequence of events within its remit then more than a moment would appear to have passed and perhaps even a longer time than might appear to the wakener as he observed his or her surroundings and compared their apparent evolution with what he had experienced subjectively? It seems to me that ,even in a deep coma ,the person is likely aware at some level of events gong on in his or her body only to forget them once they are awake.
  6. Is subjective time closely related to objective time ? Suppose a sentient being is to analyse his or her faculty of measuring or understanding time as it applies to his perception of it ,how would this analysis proceed? Would one be obliged to make reference to the scientific definition of time to better understand their subjective experience ? Does a sentient being require the appreciation of a regular repetition of events to make sense of the subjective passage of time?
  7. Simple badness and to shore up his base? Not that he couldn't have had the hope of a "Trump majority" in the Supreme Court as well. All about number one,after all. The Repellent Appellant.
  8. That would make them even more distant time travellers. (and who would take them seriously?)
  9. They are time travellers? The Spanish Inquisition was set up in the 15th century,wasn't it? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inquisition
  10. No chance of recounting 2016 when he is gone ? (it might allow him to run again two more times😉 )
  11. We have a term for those in the UK who have problems with their national identity when their days of empire and influence has run its course. We call them "Little Englanders" .They throw their toys out of the pram if they cannot stop the changes in their own terms. I am seeing something similar in the US.If they can't keep things in the same privileged framework they have ,as a country had it so far then damn the lot of us . They are damn well going to put their heads under the blanket. Little Americaners.
  12. To be in one's own frame implies the existence of another frame ,doesn't it? An isolated frame is an idealization (?) This is all about relationships between frames ,isn't it?
  13. One doesn't need to be a prisoner of one's past. I began the OP with a serious question that I lightened with a bit of humour at the end but I want to keep the focus on the serious question.
  14. No , I don't have that anxiety. I know those who do ,though. I don't feel anxious at all personally ,but it does seem awkward and ,as I think I suggested in the OP I am more aware of the "micro facial expressions" I make even when they are invisible (I have ongoing thoughts and notice these accompanying facial expressions that would normally be on view to the public but now are not) The question to which you replied "Maybe..." was "I am not at risk of turning into anything like the last president of the USA , am I?" But I don't want to turn this thread into a series of quips
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.