• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

What is "now"

^this is about the concept of time, not your favorite snowballed opinion on the subject.

number theory, or theosophy, seems not be an interest of yours either, but that doesnt mean it should not be to anyone else.
 
this is about the concept of time, not your favorite snowballed opinion on the subject.
Click to expand...

...I'm sorry, what? What, in your assessment, PiP, is the purpose of a discussion board if not to provide an open forum in which people can share their opinions re. the topic of interest?

I swear to christ, you are, without a doubt, the most incongruous person I have yet encountered on the internet (and that includes 4chan and 420chan, if that makes matters any clearer).

number theory, or theosophy, seems not be an interest of yours either, but that doesnt mean it should not be to anyone else.
Click to expand...

1) I am quite interested in number theory, and have read quite a bit about it. Care to share any of your crucial insights on the subject? Or do you have any idea what you're talking about?

2) What does theosophy have to do with this thread, or anything that I have posted within it?
 
P A said:
...I'm sorry, what? What, in your assessment, PiP, is the purpose of a discussion board if not to provide an open forum in which people can share their opinions re. the topic of interest?

I swear to christ, you are, without a doubt, the most incongruous person I have yet encountered on the internet (and that includes 4chan and 420chan, if that makes matters any clearer).
Click to expand...

my assessment is that, your reaction to others questions and opinions is hardly welcoming to open discussion.

i am unclear as to what "4chan and 420chan" is, or is supposed to imply...
 
Well, you know, PiP, that's an interesting piece of commentary coming from someone with ~7 past infractions and, until very recently, the words 'Temporary Ban' plastered under his username.

Oh, and what's more, for all of your 17,059 posts, I have yet to see a single one that directly engages a single, coherent topic with the logical and grammatical consistency that one would reasonably expect of an 11-year old.
 
P A said:
Well, you know, PiP, that's an interesting piece of commentary coming from someone with ~7 past infractions and, until very recently, the words 'Temporary Ban' plastered under his username.

Oh, and what's more, for all of your 17,059 posts, I have yet to see a single one that directly engages a single, coherent topic with the logical and grammatical consistency that one would reasonably expect of an 11-year old.
Click to expand...

why are you telling me this?
 
Wow...I honestly cannot tell whether I should be amused, bemused, or irritated by you and your insipid little persona on these boards.

At any rate, you have been successfully relegated to my ignore list. Good riddance.
 
Lol, I ain't mad at it, but P A has got a point about actually addressing the topic PiP..
Everytime you respond to anything, it's so far off base and usually pretty irrelevant and derailing.
I've addressed this in like four different P&S threads today bro..
 
P A said:
1) I am quite interested in number theory, and have read quite a bit about it. Care to share any of your crucial insights on the subject? Or do you have any idea what you're talking about?

2) What does theosophy have to do with this thread, or anything that I have posted within it?
Click to expand...

1.) based on your judgmental attitude, it doesnt seem you have the maturity to do so.
Edit: remain objective

2.) is inherent with the above.
 
Last edited:
You're being judgemental. Then you go and tell him he's not welcoming open discussion, when you're obstructing it more than him. I don't know if you think being as (nicely put by PA) incongruous and almost conforming to the notion of not conforming is a 'free' act and that a free act would help free discussion, but I don't think it does. All I think you do is display how open discussion is, how your dialogue can be more out of place than an autistic persons would be.
P A even went as far as to say your persona, because that's where the world person comes from. There is no you to know, 'you' are just the origin of all your personas, and the 'you' that you define yourself as is just a less consciously controlled persona. He knows how you act on BL. With over 17k posts, it's pretty fucking easy to gauge some sort of notion of 'who you are', or at least, how you act on BL.
With this in mind, I don't really care. You can do what you want and I'll do what I want and PA can do what he wants and everyone can do anything because fuck everything.
 
332w577.jpg


When I saw this painting, I started to ponder about this thing. I debated with a friend, and I am of the opinion that "now" is never the present, but always the past. If I utter the word "now", I have already said it. It belongs to the past. Whatever we see or experience as "now" has already happened. Granted, it has happened maybe only a split second ago. The best way to illustrate what I mean is indeed to just say "now". When you realize you've said it, you have in fact said it. That's why I believe we never perceive the present fully, because we only realize, ponder and react to things that have already happened (or the future, but that is definitely not "now" either). We may perceive things as happening right in front of us, but our reaction is always geared towards something that has already taken place. If you put your hand in a hot oven and burn yourself you may feel like you burn yourself "now", but you've already burned yourself when you react to it. I could make thousands of examples.

That's why I believe we're always a little "late", we're unable to absolutely and fully experience the present. We're not far from it, but far enough to never experience "now".
 
Last edited:
That's actually what I was thinking about this morning! How there is a delay for the processing of stimuli, which technically leaves us perpetually experiencing the past, even if it is only fractions of seconds.
Pretty interesting to ponder when you're finishing an acid trip lol.
 
re: ' time exists because physics says so".

No. Physics says time exists because physicists have observed empirically that phenomenon which corresponds to the concept which word "time" refers to exists.

Physics,like all other sciences, observes the world and formalizes what they observe. We do not declare things to exist out of nowhere, we record what we observed does exist.
 
Sorry I havn't read the rest of the thread yet but really liked the question. Sorry if someone has already answered the OP in the same way.

The Now is such a refuge to me. Its such a relief to ( using a buddhist term) bring the mind back home to the here and now when its been stressing out on overdrive about stuff from the past it cant change and the things of a future that isn't even real.

So for me 'The Now' is a refuge and a sanctuary and actually sanity I reckon.
 
P A said:
Many different answers have been offered in response to the inquiry, "Why/how does time exist (if it exists at all), and how could its existence possibly be proven?" One of my favorite responses was that of Immanuel Kant, who, being the philosophical juggernaut that he was, elegantly sidestepped the question by suggesting that the human capacity for experiencing events bounded by such elementary perceptual conditions as 'time,' 'space,' and 'causation' actually constituted the necessary (but not sufficient) precondition for all meaningful thought and coherent (i.e., non-delirious) observation. Presto! The issue of whether such things as 'causation' and 'time' exist, was, according to Kant, simply not up for coherent metaphysical discussion, as such things lay outside our purview as sentient, rational beings capable only of discerning certain patterns inherent in the phenomena (an emotion, a keyboard, the temperature of a liquid) that we can directly perceive/experience, as opposed to the noumena (e.g., infinity) that we cannot.
Click to expand...

So just because we perceive time, space and causation they have to exist? I think i just broke this down a couple of pages ago. For time to exist, every moment or now would have to be stacked upon one another, 1 second here, 1 second there and so on adding up to a lifetime looking at each second or moment as a tablet and you just keep stacking them on top of one another, this means that the past would have to actually exist in another realm/dimension. However if you look at it in another way, that all that exists is now(your perception of this moment) and now is just like a a ball of plato that continues expanding, contracting and morphing throughout 1 lifetime. Like you just said, time is just another pattern. A pattern that we broke down into numbers. We essentially took something that is and by adding our science to it, it became a tool and that's all it is.

Anywho now is all that is - the past is what now was, the future is the form that now will take later on - predicting what form the future now will take is near impossible though, all that matters is the shape that the now is in right now.

!!4iV4HF9R34g said:
That's actually what I was thinking about this morning! How there is a delay for the processing of stimuli, which technically leaves us perpetually experiencing the past, even if it is only fractions of seconds.
Pretty interesting to ponder when you're finishing an acid trip lol.
Click to expand...

And this delay doesn't matter. I'm looking at it from a subjective point of view - that my perception of "now" is all that matters.
 
Okay, well I'm NOT looking at it from a subjective point of view. I'm looking at it didacticly.. (Is that a word? It is now! Lol.)
Perspective is just that dude. Whether or not you like it, your view isn't the end all. You can believe it is, and I encourage that actually. Don't let reality get in the way of living your life. Not even being sarcastic here. But the fact is that at the end of the day, your view is subjective still.
 
So just because we perceive time, space and causation they have to exist?
Click to expand...

No. :| According to Kant, our capacity to perceive the world in terms of space, time, causation, etc. are absolute prerequisites for our having conversations like these in the first place. Ergo, all metaphysical talk about such things (e.g., the 'existence' of time, whatever that means) can be safely relegated to the domain of the perennially unknowable noumenon, as though by default.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top