S
STT
Guest
Great. What I am saying is that the agent cannot cause anything if there is no time. Why, because we are dealing with two events in here, before cause and after cause, and for that to be allowed you need time.
Umm… that’s one event. There’s a ‘before’ and an ‘after’, but there’s one event. (Aristotle deals with this in detail.)we are dealing with two events in here, before cause and after cause, and for that to be allowed you need time.
What do you mean? In the absence of external stimuli, I still have inward states that go from S to S’. I perceive and reflect on those changes. If I do not, I do not experience time.Just close your eyes and ears. You don’t receive anything yet you could experience time.
Could you please elaborate?We only perceive it by the displacement or change of physical objects.
If time is an objective thing, we only observe it via derivatives.
Then he was wrong.Umm… that’s one event . There’s a ‘before’ and an ‘after’, but there’s one event. (Aristotle deals with this in detail.)
Ok, how could inward states lead to experience of time?What do you mean? In the absence of external stimuli, I still have inward states that go from S to S’. I perceive and reflect on those changes. If I do not, I do not experience time.
Again: Aristotle on one hand; you on the other. If one of you is wrong, take a guess who I’m going to go with…Then he was wrong.
You have stuff/the-first-event before then act of causation and stuff/the-second-event after the act of causation.Again: Aristotle on one hand; you on the other. If one of you is wrong, take a guess who I’m going to go with…
The Church posits that God created ‘ex nihilo’ (that is, “from nothing”), and therefore, there was no ‘stuff’ prior to the ‘first event’ / ‘act of causation’.You have stuff/the-first-event before then act of causation
Yes. And, of course, this only identifies one change (or, if you prefer, two states). There is no ‘middle state’, per se, required for creation.and stuff/the-second-event after the act of causation.
The Church posits that God created ‘ex nihilo’ (that is, “from nothing”), and therefore, there was no ‘stuff’ prior to the ‘first event’ / ‘act of causation’.
I am talking about ourselves.and stuff/the-second-event after the act of causation.
If I understand you correctly, you’re talking about your ‘coming-into-being’?I am talking about ourselves.
No, I am talking about ourselves acting in time.I am talking about ourselves.
Ok, then. Please give an example that attempts to demonstrate the assertion you’re making. (Your “f(x)->f’(x)” assertion isn’t an example, by the way.)No, I am talking about ourselves acting in time.
The psychological perception of time can also be different if someone has ADHD, especially in the middle of what is often called “hyperfocus.” One source online defines hyperfocus this way:Yes indeed. There is the psychological perception of time depending on several factors, including, among others, what you say (how much fun–or misery, boredom, etc.–we’re having), as well as our age: for older people time seems to pass faster (unless they are lonely), while for the young, time passes slowly.
When I become hyperfocused on something I’m interested in, I might think I’ve only been doing it for half an hour when in fact, it’s been three or four hours.Hyperfocus is the tendency for children and adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD or ADD) to focus very intently on things that interest them. At times, the focus is so strong that they become oblivious to the world around them.
Some experts think that individuals with ADHD perceive time not as a sequence but as a diffuse collection of events that are viscerally connected to the people, activities, and emotions involved in them. That often means they’re always late.
Children and adults with ADHD don’t see events; they “feel” them.
Several problem behaviors result from our novel perception of time:
Research suggests that those with ADHD are deficient in temporal processing abilities, which affect executive functioning. This interferes with our ability to perceive time accurately when tasks require our attention or present an opportunity for impulsive responses.
- procrastination
- missing deadlines
- doing things in the wrong order
- underestimating the time it takes to do tasks
We have three things, the situation before act, act and the situation after act.Ok, then. Please give an example that attempts to demonstrate the assertion you’re making. (Your “f(x)->f’(x)” assertion isn’t an example, by the way.)
Yes.So you’ve got the first event…before the act of causation. Then you’ve got the second event…after the act of causation.
Between two events.When is the act of causation?
You could call it second event.Technically, wouldn’t that be the second event?
If reality is discrete which seems so then the person was nowhere.This reminds me of the riddle…where was the man when he jumped off the building? Before he jumped he was on the building, and after he jumped he was in the air. So where was the man when he jumped off the building?
So, three points in time. Fair enough.We have three things, the situation before act, act and the situation after act.