Guest guest Posted June 22, 2000 Report Share Posted June 22, 2000 On Thu, 22 Jun 2000 13:00:33 Dan Berkow, PhD wrote: >Time is like cheese. >It can be sliced very fine. >It can be sliced so fine > that it is seen like frames > in a movie, giving the appearance > of movement, but always "nownownow". >It can be sliced even thinner. >But then, the observer and observed disappear, > along with time. That's perfect, Dan ! Thanks for this comment, it lit up the inside of my head like a neon light. IIRC from my introductory classes in philosophy (and the only class I took in philosophy, b/c they were mandatory), some of the old Greek philosophers made the same thought experiment thousands of years ago. I wonder if it was Demokrit that made this thought experiment ? Anyway, the philosopher who did, arrived at the conclusion, like you do, that infinity was what you ended up with when slicing up time or distance the way you mention here. I may be completely mistaken, but I wonder whether it was this guy who found out causality was moot as well. Hmmm, hmmm, this is something I have been thinking about the last week myself, how our expectations that from event A follows event B, because we have observed that happening many times before and gotten used to the idea. Anyway, thanks for the comment and good thoughts. Love, Amanda (Hmmm.. there are naked men on tv right now...). Angelfire for your free web-based e-mail. http://www.angelfire.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2000 Report Share Posted June 22, 2000 Hi Amanda, You mention Democritus (460-370 BCE). One of the early Greek philosophers, he sliced up the world, but not as small as in non-dualism :-). Nondualism slices until there is no knife and no hand! Anyway, Democritus said everything was made up of small indivisible solid bodies called "atoms," and was indeed the first in the Western world to use this concept. Physical phenomena are made of collisions of these small bodies. So he didn't get rid of causality; instead he sought to explain it. The mootness of causality (by implication) was found in the West as early as Thales (c. 585 BCE). He said "All is water." If everything is truly any *one* thing, then there can't be the separation required for true cause and effect. Between you and me, as far as Western philosophers go, no one did a more effective and more famous job of showing the mootness of causality than Hume. Almost all Western philosohers, though, by showing the mootness of one thing, rely even more heavily on somthing else. Like Hume relied on sensory impressions in his argument against causality. So he left some rungs on the ladder. The Western philosopher who I think might come the closest to paring it *all* away is Wittgenstein. One of my great (nondualist) friends did his doctoral dissertation on W, and I've been asking him to write a W essay for my page on Western philosophers. I've tried to threaten him: if he doesn't do the excellent job I'm sure he'll do, then I'll have to do a mediocre job -- and I don't know very much about W at all! Yours in neon light and now-ness, --Greg At 05:29 PM 6/22/00, mumble cat wrote: > >On Thu, 22 Jun 2000 13:00:33 Dan Berkow, PhD wrote: > >>Time is like cheese. >>It can be sliced very fine. >>It can be sliced so fine >> that it is seen like frames >> in a movie, giving the appearance >> of movement, but always "nownownow". >>It can be sliced even thinner. >>But then, the observer and observed disappear, >> along with time. > >That's perfect, Dan ! > >Thanks for this comment, it lit up the inside of my >head like a neon light. > >IIRC from my introductory classes in philosophy (and >the only class I took in philosophy, b/c they were >mandatory), some of the old Greek philosophers >made the same thought experiment thousands of years ago. > >I wonder if it was Demokrit that made this >thought experiment ? Anyway, the philosopher who did, arrived at the conclusion, like you do, that infinity was what you ended up with when slicing up time or distance the way you mention here. > >I may be completely mistaken, but I wonder whether >it was this guy who found out causality was moot >as well. Hmmm, hmmm, this is something I have been >thinking about the last week myself, how our >expectations that from event A follows >event B, because we have observed that happening many times before and gotten used to the idea. > > >Anyway, thanks for the comment and good thoughts. > >Love, > >Amanda (Hmmm.. there are naked men on tv right now...). > > > > > >Angelfire for your free web-based e-mail. http://www.angelfire.com > >------ >**BELIEFNET SHOPPING** Save $20 at the Beliefnet store! Thousands of >religious and spiritual gifts and products. Now- get $20 off purchases >of $50 or more through July 10. >http://click./1/5591/9/_/520931/_/961694970/ >------ > >// > >All paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, sights, perceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and exist in and subside back into the Space of Awareness. Like waves rising are not different than the ocean, all things arising from Awareness are of the nature of Awareness. Awareness does not come and go but is always Present. It is Home. Home is where the Heart Is. Jnanis know the Heart to be the Finality of Eternal Being. A true devotee relishes in the Truth of Self-Knowledge, spontaneously arising from within into It Self. Welcome all to a. > >To from this list, go to the ONElist web site, at > www., and select the User Center link from the menu bar > on the left. This menu will also let you change your subscription > between digest and normal mode. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2000 Report Share Posted June 22, 2000 GDAY, BRUCE! thotcha might like some AUSTRALIAN music to go with your beer... Hey Amanda, were those naked men philosophers? BRUCES' PHILSOPHERS SONG Sung by the Pythons >From `Monty Python's' album Immanuel Kant was a real piss-ant who was very rarely stable Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar who could think you under the table David Hume could out-consume Schopenhauer and Hegel And Wittgenstein was a beery swine who was just as sloshed as Schlegel There's nothing Nietzsche couldn't teach ya 'bout the raising of the wrist Socrates, himself, was permanently pissed John Stuart Mill, of his own free will after 'alf a pint of shandy was particularly ill Plato, they say, could stick it away 'alf a crate of whiskey every day Aristotle, Aristotle was a bugger for the bottle Hobbes was fond of his dram And Rene Descartes was a drunken fart: "I drink, therefore I am." Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's pissed sorry, Mark Gregory Goode wrote: > Hi Amanda, > > You mention Democritus (460-370 BCE). One of the early Greek > philosophers, > he sliced up the world, but not as small as in non-dualism :-). > Nondualism > slices until there is no knife and no hand! Anyway, Democritus said > everything was made up of small indivisible solid bodies called > "atoms," > and was indeed the first in the Western world to use this concept. > Physical phenomena are made of collisions of these small bodies. So > he > didn't get rid of causality; instead he sought to explain it. > > The mootness of causality (by implication) was found in the West as > early > as Thales (c. 585 BCE). He said "All is water." If everything is > truly > any *one* thing, then there can't be the separation required for true > cause > and effect. > > Between you and me, as far as Western philosophers go, no one did a > more > effective and more famous job of showing the mootness of causality > than > Hume. Almost all Western philosohers, though, by showing the mootness > of > one thing, rely even more heavily on somthing else. Like Hume relied > on > sensory impressions in his argument against causality. So he left > some > rungs on the ladder. > > The Western philosopher who I think might come the closest to paring > it > *all* away is Wittgenstein. One of my great (nondualist) friends did > his > doctoral dissertation on W, and I've been asking him to write a W > essay for > my page on Western philosophers. I've tried to threaten him: if he > doesn't > do the excellent job I'm sure he'll do, then I'll have to do a > mediocre job > -- and I don't know very much about W at all! > > Yours in neon light and now-ness, > > --Greg > > > > At 05:29 PM 6/22/00, mumble cat wrote: > > > >On Thu, 22 Jun 2000 13:00:33 Dan Berkow, PhD wrote: > > > >>Time is like cheese. > >>It can be sliced very fine. > >>It can be sliced so fine > >> that it is seen like frames > >> in a movie, giving the appearance > >> of movement, but always "nownownow". > >>It can be sliced even thinner. > >>But then, the observer and observed disappear, > >> along with time. > > > >That's perfect, Dan ! > > > >Thanks for this comment, it lit up the inside of my > >head like a neon light. > > > >IIRC from my introductory classes in philosophy (and > >the only class I took in philosophy, b/c they were > >mandatory), some of the old Greek philosophers > >made the same thought experiment thousands of years ago. > > > >I wonder if it was Demokrit that made this > >thought experiment ? Anyway, the philosopher who did, arrived at the > > conclusion, like you do, that infinity was what you ended up with when > > slicing up time or distance the way you mention here. > > > >I may be completely mistaken, but I wonder whether > >it was this guy who found out causality was moot > >as well. Hmmm, hmmm, this is something I have been > >thinking about the last week myself, how our > >expectations that from event A follows > >event B, because we have observed that happening many times before > and > gotten used to the idea. > > > > > >Anyway, thanks for the comment and good thoughts. > > > >Love, > > > >Amanda (Hmmm.. there are naked men on tv right now...). > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.