My philosophy on time?

Question:the human mind can't understand a begining. people get one period of time and focus on that and call the begining of that period the begining of time but it's impossible for anyone to completely understand time. you can't fathom the begining of time. because time is infinite. like the begining of man, if it just happened because of a god than what started the god. and then what started the thing that started the god. something will have had to have been there. and it's just a reoccuring lapse of things that started another and before you know it you're spinning in a circle. time is infinte and impossible to completely understand. and with that being said what's the point of worrying so much about petty materials such as h.w. and school. what's the point of doing good in school. your'e gonna get a job regardless and you'll have money regradless so it's better to have enjoyed yourself in life than stress over small things because its' just not worth it. do people take life too seriously?

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: the human mind can't understand a begining. people get one period of time and focus on that and call the begining of that period the begining of time but it's impossible for anyone to completely understand time. you can't fathom the begining of time. because time is infinite. like the begining of man, if it just happened because of a god than what started the god. and then what started the thing that started the god. something will have had to have been there. and it's just a reoccuring lapse of things that started another and before you know it you're spinning in a circle. time is infinte and impossible to completely understand. and with that being said what's the point of worrying so much about petty materials such as h.w. and school. what's the point of doing good in school. your'e gonna get a job regardless and you'll have money regradless so it's better to have enjoyed yourself in life than stress over small things because its' just not worth it. do people take life too seriously?

You are Kantian and therefore Platonic.
If you do not know what that means, it means you believe your sensory perceptions are not about reality, but about the limitations of human sense perception.

In other words, you don't believe your eyes.

What it presupposes is that you do not know your mind works. You think it could have a flaw. Kant told us our minds had a flaw, namely that our minds could not know all there is, because our 5 senses cannot know all there is: there exists "noumena," he says: the absence of phenomena, yet where the "essence" of the object remains--unknown by our sensory perceptions.

Do you remember how Plato said essences were in the heavens and all we saw on earth was a mirror image of the gods, but only the image they wanted us to see; so we didn't really see them at all.
Aristotle said they were "in the things themselves," not out in heaven.
Kant left them in the things, but said our senses were not good enough to know all there was to know and what we could not know he called "noumena."

That is not true; Kant was wrong. There is nothing wrong with our sensory perceptions. They work. And there is nothing we cannot know. Ignorance is the not knowing. It is not the not-being-able-to-know.

We cannot know everything, that is true; that would make us omniscient. Lacking omniscience does not make us flawed; it makes us work for what we want. And guess what? We pretty much learn anything we want to learn.

There is nothing wrong with our minds; they work.
But there is something Kant forgets; Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification. If logic does not work in knowing our universe--because our universe is basically "noumenal", i.e., made of the things we cannot have sensory percpepts of,

THEN:
logic CANNOT be the art of non-contradictory identification.

It's your choice: accept the denotation of the word "logic," or go ahead and believe logic does not work;
that "man can't understand a beginning"; that "it's impossible for anyone to...."; that "you're spinning in a circle of time"; and that "time is infinite and impossible to completely understand"................................

SO WHAT? I mean, you are wrong, but so what if you're right? What an ignorant thing to say.

And yet, I want you to know that you do have a philosophical mind. At least it thinks! It proposes! It looks at things the way Curtis Edward Clark desribed looking at the universe: as a snowglobe in your hand, and you can look into any part of it and comprehend it.

Your theory is ignorant of everything that all the philosophers have said long before you; but they said it better, more originally, and with references, back ups, literature, the teachings of other teachers, and a purpose to reason.

"Your" philosophy of time has been hashed a million times, in language that gave people something to talk about.

All you have to do is understand that you are looking inward. Start looking outward.

Look out to the edges of the universe and examine what you see. Compare it. Show it to others. Learn what the masters have said first before you repeat it like a beginner.

These are only 103 of the topics about which there is much written in just two small books, called The Syntopicon:

Angel; Animal; Aristocracy; Art; Astronomy; Beauty; Being; Cause; Chance; Change; Citizen; Constitution; Courage; Custom and Convention; Definition; Democracy; Desire; Dialectic; Duty; Education; Element; Emotion; Eternity; Evolution; Experience; Family; Fate; Form; God; Good and Evil; Government; Habit; Happiness; History; Honor; Hypothesis; Idea; Immortality; Induction; Infinity; Judgment; Justice; Knowledge; Labor; Language; Law; Liberty; Life and Death; Logic; Love; Man; Mathematics; Matter; Mechanics; Medicine; Memory and Imagination; Metaphysics; Mind; Monarchy; Nature; Necessity and Contingency; Oligarchy; One and Many; Opinion; Opposition; Philosophy; Physics; Pleasure and Pain; Poetry; Principle; Progress; Prophecy; Prudence; Punishment; Quality; Quantity; Reasoning; Relation; Religion; Revolution; Rhetoric; Same and Other; Science; Sense; Sign and Symbol; Sin; Slavery; Soul; Space; State; Temperance; Theology; Time; Truth; Tyranny; Universal and Particular; Virtue and Vice; War and Peace; Wealth; Will; Wisdom; World

Good luck. Just do a better job next time, ok?

That's not exactly a philosophy on time, it's a philosophy (or model) of perception.

I agree that human experience defines human understanding in most people. It is very difficult to understand what is beyond our experience. However, speaking as someone who has devoted a significant portion of my life to studying extremely old things (paleontology and geology) and extremely small things (quantum physics) it is possible to wrap your brain around something of a scope beyond your experience. I'm sure that there are people out there that have complete understanding of a beginning. Not me, I can only describe it, but not understand it.But I am sure that there are those that can understand as well as I can describe.

I don't know how much of a philosophy this is, especially on time itself. I could give you my theory, but that's not the point. Your theory is really more a set of old philosophical questions, like the idea of a beginning. Overall, I would say your theory is that some things are unknowable, ununderstandable, and thus we should not take time concerning ourselves with them, however, you are going against your own preachings, simply by thinking about this. As for worrying about petty things, if we should not concern ourselves with great or petty things, then what is left to think about? Your arguments here are contradictory, or perhaps nihilistic towards thought.

I believe you are basically saying to just go with the flow and smile, but with such a life, no questions such as yor own would exist, we as humans would have little purpose outside of mindless machines. Our ability o think, question and worry about great things is one of the key aspects to being a human.

It is logical to assume that everything couldn't have just one day "popped up" and the only seemingly logical explanation is that time must be infinite. Never beginning and never ending.

First, let's break the human time barrier by pointing out that the method with which we measure time on Earth isn't a "true" measurement. Time exists elsewhere in the universe. So, the way that time is realized is through change. Without watches, we measure time by changes in our surroundings.

Second, not to discard your philosophy at all, but just to give you an alternative. If you study metaphysics and quantum theory, you will read about how everything from gravity to charge has a particle related to it--Force particles. Particles that set the universe in motion and create change. One particle in particular has interested me over the years and this particle has been neutrinos.

Neutrinos have the ability to pass through virtually anything without even the slightest note of hindrance or change. It is believed that neutrinos pass through us billions upon billions of times a day without any notice. What if these particles were in fact not moving and we were merely moving through them on our careening solar tilt-a-whirl. What if these particles were in fact time force particles for which there can be a relative comparison for time. For change to exist, there must be non-change. What if neutrinos were non-change to balance out change and therefore non-time to balance out time.

I have gone through all of this to try and help you imagine time as something that can be quantified, compared, and even destroyed; just as it could have once been created. While this might not explain what was before its creation or what could come after, I can use this to imagine time as a layer thrown up on the many layers of dimensionality.
Lenght x width x depth x time.

For me it isn't what was there before or after, it is in which dimension. Perhaps there is a catalyst dimension from which all other dimensions were born and that came into existence only to balance out the non-existence. Strange.

"The Path of the Higher Self," Mark Prophet, discusses time.
http://www.johntitor.com of some interest.

"There are more things in heaven and earth, horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy"

I agree Time is a circle, and is infinite. Thus, we are eternal.