Wanker. You ought to heed this yourslef.Obvious Leo wrote:Hobbes' Choice wrote:I have spoken my last.
"Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent".....Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Choke on a sprout!
Wanker. You ought to heed this yourslef.Obvious Leo wrote:Hobbes' Choice wrote:I have spoken my last.
"Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent".....Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Why ask me. Can't you google it yourself and learn in the process? And what does it really matter what ANYONE says since you're the kind who will ONLY acknowledge their 'opinion' and no other!Hobbes' Choice wrote:Care to cite that?Dubious wrote: Not ONE article I ever read says what you said. The opposite is true. Cannibalism is extremely rare among crows.
Obvoiusly, Leo, birds do not have a printed calendar that tells them it is time to build their nests nor do they require a timepiece to tell/remind them of time. These activities are not referred to as "time" but rather their "instinct" on the collective level, i.e. all the same species of birds act as a collective unit which has been passed on far longer than our own "time" activities. When breeding time arrives, often in spring time, (Nature's variable clock dependent on the weather/seasonal variations), then that collective moves accordingly to that species needs.Obvious Leo wrote:How do birds know what time of year to build their nests if they have no sense of time? Do they learn that from humans too?
It is without doubt hu'mans are the sole species who speaks about time relative to how we measure it, talk about it and run our lives by the very measurement we ourselves have devised. Is there any proof any other life we share this planet with shows a concern with time as hu'mans do?Obvious Leo wrote:Why do you make a distinction between changes in the physical world and the passage of time?
Obvious Leo wrote:Specifically clocks measure the speed at which changes in a physical system take place and in my view to equate the rate of change in a physical system with the speed at which time passes is a perfectly natural and intuitive thing to do, which is why all species do it. How we measure such a rate of change is not germane to the point, but the truly insightful truth which Einstein gave to the world is that time does not pass at a constant speed and this is a truth which runs counter to our intuition. In General Relativity Einstein showed us that the speed at which time passes is determined by gravity.
If this is Truth and not merely a Fact based upon observational testings, then does this not reaffirm what I have been attempting to convey to you throughout these posts? If Albert's observations do conclude that time does not pass the same for everybody, why wouldn't that same proposition not include every other form of life? Each and every life has their own measurement of life according to it's necessity. That necessity has never included a device created by any other life form other than our ability to make timepieces that we have come to rely on down that demonstrates our life/ability down to a fractional second.Obvious Leo wrote:We tend to automatically assume that time must pass at the same speed for everybody but in fact this intuitive assumption is false and has many times been empirically demonstrated to be false.
Grateful you say? Why the insistence and reliance in our time keeping devices? If "time passes more quickly at our heads than it does at our feet", who is to say what time is?Obvious Leo wrote:We have good reason to be grateful for the fact that this assumption is false because it is the fact that time passes more quickly at our heads than it does at our feet which holds us to the surface of the earth.
This is a completely useless statement because the human ability to measure time in the way we now do is a very recent development in human history. Prior to the invention of clocks we measured time in exactly the same way as any other animal does, namely by observing the natural changes in our external environment.mtmynd1 wrote: It is without doubt hu'mans are the sole species who speaks about time relative to how we measure it, talk about it and run our lives by the very measurement we ourselves have devised.
Truth is not relevant to the philosophical discourse since inductive reasoning from observational data is all that a human mind is capable of doing.mtmynd1 wrote:If this is Truth and not merely a Fact based upon observational testings,
It does.mtmynd1 wrote:If Albert's observations do conclude that time does not pass the same for everybody, why wouldn't that same proposition not include every other form of life?
It's also the only possible way to live since the past no longer exists and the future is yet to exist. The nature of mind is such that data from past events can be recalled and used to make probabilistic predictions about future events. Therefore the evolution of mind was a mandated outcome of the evolutionary process because such an ability inevitably confers survival value on the host organism. This also means that minds must have an evolutionary trajectory of their own and must invariably evolve from the simple to the complex. This is not rocket science, and it's something which any biology student would be expected to understand, but it is nevertheless of interest to philosophers because it effectively means that our physical bodies are little more than vessels which have evolved to house our minds.mtmynd1 wrote: Living in the Now is the most natural way to live.
Physics is clearly not your gig. What Einstein showed in General Relativity is that time and gravity are two different ways of expressing the same physical phenomenon, namely the rate of change in physical processes. This is not a trivial unification of concepts.mtmynd1 wrote: If "time passes more quickly at our heads than it does at our feet", who is to say what time is?