Home > Archive > Cobol > January 2006 > Re: religion
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
|
|
| Alistair 2006-01-12, 6:55 pm |
|
docdwarf@panix.com wrote:
> In article <1136988756.015434.172030@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> Alistair <alistair@ld50macca.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> Not 'false', likewise impossible. Memory, by definition, is concerned
> with that which 'has been'; if all that exists is 'now' then 'has been'
> cannot exist and memory would seem to be impossible and likewise with
> prediction ('will be', by definition, does not exist because all that
> exists is 'now').
Just because a past no longer exists it does not mean that your
memories of past events would be wiped. Consider, if time exists and we
are unable to move backwards through time, does that mean that the past
existed? To Hawking, considering what came before the point of time at
which the current universe came into being is pointless. If we can not
go back in time then it would also be pointless to consider that the
past exists (it doesn't, it did once but not now).
>
>
> 'Flatland' (Abbott, 1884) covers this, I believe.
>
> [snip]
>
>
> I am not sure I agree or disagree with you here; I would need to know what
> you are using as criteria for the condition you postulate as 'existence'.
>
> DD
I did have my tongue in ch .
| |
|
| In article <1137101437.003563.306290@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Alistair <alistair@ld50macca.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>docdwarf@panix.com wrote:
>
>Just because a past no longer exists it does not mean that your
>memories of past events would be wiped.
*No*, Mr Maclean... not 'no longer exists, if only 'now' exists then a
past *cannot* exist.
What can I do to make this more clear?
DD
| |
| Pete Dashwood 2006-01-13, 7:55 am |
|
<docdwarf@panix.com> wrote in message news:dq6i5s$q92$1@reader2.panix.com...
> In article <1137101437.003563.306290@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> Alistair <alistair@ld50macca.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> *No*, Mr Maclean... not 'no longer exists, if only 'now' exists then a
> past *cannot* exist.
>
> What can I do to make this more clear?
>
It was crystal. Then the moment passed and it was lost... :-)
Pete.
| |
|
| In article <42pf8cF1k59o7U1@individual.net>,
Pete Dashwood <dashwood@enternet.co.nz> wrote:
>
><docdwarf@panix.com> wrote in message news:dq6i5s$q92$1@reader2.panix.com...
>It was crystal. Then the moment passed and it was lost... :-)
Such things happen when not only 'now' exists, I guess.
DD
|
|
|
|
|